BSW Supplement #2

8/14/2019 BSW Supplement #2

1/48

Spartan Debate Institute Burk/Stone/Walters labSupplement V.2.0 (Number) 2008 - 2009

BSW Supplement #2 Oil DA Answers and such

*Oil DA Answers*

BSW Supplement #2 Oil DA Answers and such....................................................................................... ...... ...... .....12AC Oil DA general.....................................................................................................................................................2

2AC OPEC Flood DA (w/ Russia impacts).................................................................................................................3Extend the David 99 impact they read............................................................................................................................42AC OPEC Flood DA (w/ Saudi econ impacts)..........................................................................................................52AC OPEC Flood DA (w/ renewable impacts)...........................................................................................................72AC- Angola Oil DA .....................................................................................................................................................9AT: Angola Oil DA - XT #3 No Escalation ..............................................................................................................11AT Angola DA - Species Loss impacts.........................................................................................................................12

The greatest known loss of Earth life was the Permian extinction that occurred roughly 250 million years ago. Atthat time as many as 96 percent of the life-forms on Earth fell extinct. If you believe the current ordering of naturegloried and worthy of reverence, then you must believe the Permian extinction was a splendorous event. Without itthe species and ecological wonders we now seek to preserve would never have come into being. Some other set of

creatures and wonders would exist, to be sure. But there might be, say, no dolphins or whales: the Permianextinction was particularly hard on aquatic life. There might be no bear, no frogs, no otter, no songbirds, no

flowering plants, no old-growth forests, no taiga, no Madagascan lemur....................................................................132AC Russia Oil DA...................................................................................................................................................142AC - IPI Pipeline........................................................................................................................................................17AT: High Prices = IPI / XT #4 alt causes to failure...................................................................................................19AT: High Prices = IPI - no India/pak conflict........................................................................................................ ......202AC: Trans-Balkan Pipeline DA..................................................................................................................................212AC Gabon Deforestation..........................................................................................................................................23AT Gabon DA - Species Loss impacts..........................................................................................................................242AC Secessionism DA...............................................................................................................................................252AC Euro Switch DA................................................................................................................................................27Euro Switch DA / XT #4 OPEC will never switch....................................................................................................292AC Saudi Relations..................................................................................................................................................30Saudi Relations XT #2 Relations low now ...............................................................................................................32

Higher Oil Price = Wars Worldwide.............................................................................................................................34High Oil Prices = Economic decline XT......................................................................................................................35High oil prices hurts democracy XT.............................................................................................................................36A/T Oil Spills: Prices = Double Hulls....................................................................................................... ...... ......37A/T Oil Spills: Impact Empirically Denied .................................................................................................................38A/T Oil Spills: Alternative Causality............................................................................................................................39A/T Oil Spills: Bio-Remediation Solves Impacts.......................................................................................................40A/T Oil Spills: Bio-Remediation Solves.......................................................................................................................41AT: Flex Fuels Trade Deficit Add-On...........................................................................................................................43India Deal Good (Contain China Mod)........................................................................................................................45India Deal Good (relations impact)...............................................................................................................................46US-India Relations Good..............................................................................................................................................47AT: Capitalist epistemology args..................................................................................................................................48

1


2/48


2AC Oil DA general

1. High oil prices are inevitable and wont go down strong demand from China and India

Associated Press, July 6 2008 OPEC chief: Strong demand will keep oil prices up Sun Jul 6, 1:27 PM ET

OPEC chiefChakib Khelil says the world's surging oil prices are not likely to fall.He says strong market demand, especially from China and India, is one reason prices will stay as high as they are.But Khelil told a conference on energy in Algiers on Sunday that the steady increases of late "have nothing to do with supply anddemand." Khelil, who serves as Algeria's energy minister, blames the rise on the weak U.S. dollar, the currency that oil is sold in.

2. Oil producers will keep prices high regardlessincreased supply wont depress prices

Seeking Alpha 12-30-2007, (Jim Kingsdale), http://seekingalpha.com/article/58567-what-the-fundamentals-say-about-future-oil-pricesAll this looks right on paper and it may well happen, but I wouldnt bet on it. I would bet that if pri ces do fall sometime soon, maybe after the peak winter demand season, exporters will cut back fairly quickly to try tokeep theprice above $80 or so. Further, when prices eventually begin to rise again, perhaps in the Spring or Fall of 2008, exporters will then be slow to raise production, having just experienced lower prices. So I think a possible

reduction in the oil pri ce next year would be shallow and would likely be followed by a counter trend leg up that will probably bring the price well above $100. My thesis is based in part on thehoarding mindset that now dominates the oil market and is hardly ever discussed. Exporters (read OPEC,

particularly KSA, UAE, Kuwait, and Venezuela) are now addicted to high and rising oil prices. Their ever increasing cashflows from oil have led to their making huge future capital commitments; they are not willing to see falling oil prices endanger those commitments. They also know that due to tightglobal supplies relatively minor production cuts are sufficient to raise prices. Finally they now believe that o il in the out years will only get more expensive. Thus near term production cuts will also be rewarded because the oil

not sold now can be sold later for more money. In summary, exporters today have their hands on a hair-trigger for raising the oil price and they will nothesitate to pull it i f the price falls much below $85. I summarize this series of attitudes on the part of oil exporters as the hoarding mindset. Meanwhile global oil production is nowat an historically high level but still does not seem to be able to satisfy demand. The Saudis and the Iraqis have both managed to increaseproduction by roughly 500,000 b/d helping to cause the 85 mb/d global production plateau that has existed for nearly t wo years to be eclipsed during the past few months; production now seems to be running in excess of 87

mb/d as shown in this chart: Yet the price of oil refuses to sink. Each time oil goes into the high $80s it seems to bounce rightbackin the face of tight inventories. U.S. crude oil inventories keep sinking they are now the lowest in nearly three years. This is a chart that indicates the tightness of U.S. oil supplies measured in days of inventory:

3. Oil supplies wont keep pace with demand growth, ensuring oil prices rise towards $200

a barrelthis will break the back of the global economy

Sato and Okada 6/25/08 (Shigeru and Yuji, Columnists @ Bloomberg, "Oil at US$200 would trigger globalrecession, Deutsche Bank warns," Financial Post, http://www.financialpost.com/reports/oil-

watch/story.html?id=612878)

The global economy would collapse if oil hit US$200 a barrel, said the top energy analyst at Germany's largest bank."Two-hundred dollar oil would break the back of the global economy," Deutsche Bank AG's chief energy economistAdam Sieminski said in an interview on Wednesday in Tokyo. "Next step after US$200 would be global recessionand bad news for everybody." Mr. Sieminski's comments come after Goldman Sachs Group Inc. forecast oil mayrise to between US$150 and US$200 within two years as supply growth, especially from producers outside theOrganization of Petroleum Exporting Countries, fails to keep pace with demand. Deutsche Bank is due to release itsoil-price forecast on June 27.

4. Global economic decline causes global nuclear war

Mead 92[Walter Russel, fellow, Council on Foreign Relations, New perspectives quarterly, summer pp. 28]But what if it can't? What if the global economy stagnates - or even shrinks? In that case, we will face a new period ofinternational conflict: South against North, rich against poor. Russia, China, India - these countries with theirbillions of people and their nuclear weapons will pose a much greater danger to world order than Germany andJapan did in the '30s.

2


3/48


2AC OPEC Flood DA (w/ Russia impacts)

1. Global spare production capacity is tight AND such capacity is in largely unusable

heavy crudes

Melbourne Herald Sun 6/7/08 ("Global demand sees oil on fire,"http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/story/0,21985,23823430-664,00.html)

THE recent oil price jump is due to rising demand in developing countries and the lack of spare supply capacity.That means that even small disruptions to oil output drive prices higher.Given the slow growth in oil supply, in prospect, only a world recession that cuts demand will bring oil prices down sharply.Unfortunately, a world recession is looking increasingly likely.

The oil price is not just being driven by speculators. The underlying demand and supply balance is tight . There is very little sparecapacity, with only around two million barrels a day of spare capacity available, while demand is around 86 million barrels aday. Most of this spare capacity is heavy crudes and refiners want lighter crudes to produce diesel where demand isbooming.

2. OPEC can no longer influence pricesSodhi 2008(The Myth of OPEC, The center for independent studies http://www.cis.org.au/executive_highlights/EH2008/eh63608.html )

The massive reserves of Saudi Arabia have also historically been a tool to encourage quota compliance. The Saudis,with their massive oil reserves and high levels of spare production capacity, have in the past threatened to flood themarket with oil to engineer a collapse in price. With the worlds cheapest production costs and lots of spare capacity,it was a threat the Saudis could theoretically carry out. Not anymore.Saudi Arabia no longer has the buffer of excess production, and there is a lack of confidence in the sustainability ofits largest fields. The long standing threat to flood the market with cheap oil has now become a bluff, and the othermembers of OPEC know it.OPEC goes to great trouble to pretend that it can influence prices. It holds regular meetings where it ordains a newproduction target with much ceremony. But honestly, you would have to be a mug to believe that OPEC countriesare purposefully limiting production. When oil prices rise, so does the opportunity cost of sticking to the allocated

quota. So while its possible to maintain a cartel when prices are low, you can bet your life that each member ispumping out as much crude as it possibly can at $140 a barrel.

3. Oil price drop would have no effect on the Russian economy. Prices could get as low as

$55 a barrel and the effect would still be insignificant

Russia & CIS Banking & Finance WeeklyJune 20, 2008 headline: russia does not fear drop in oil prices - kudrin

Russia should be prepared for both further growth as well as a rapid drop in oil prices, he said. It is better forRussia when oil prices are

high, he said, but these prices must be utilized soundly and oil windfalls should not be wasted."If oil prices are higher and is spent

immediately, the ruble's exchange rate will strengthen," he said, stressing that the appreciation of the ruble would have a negative effect on

Russian industry. A decline in the price of oil will not have a significant impact on the Russian budget, Kudrin said."Russia is not afraid of a price drop," Kudrin said in an interview with Vesti 24 TV while in Osaka following the meeting of the G8finance chiefs.

"Our budget would not have a deficit at a price of $55 per barrel.The tax system for our oil companies is set up

so that as the price of oil declines, taxation declines. So no substantial changes will take place. It will have some effect onour GDP growth, but an insignificant one compared with the earlier period. I repeat, the effect will beinsignificant," he said.

3
http://www.cis.org.au/executive_highlights/EH2008/eh63608.htmlhttp://www.cis.org.au/executive_highlights/EH2008/eh63608.htmlhttp://www.cis.org.au/executive_highlights/EH2008/eh63608.html


4/48


4. High oil-revenue deters economic liberalization.

Christian Science Monitor, Fred Weir, Correspondent of The Christian Science Monitor, "Has Russian oil

output peaked?" May 28, 2008 lexis

Oil profits, on the other hand, are taxed at nearly 90 percent, which has filled the state's coffers as prices for crude oil have risen from $10 per

barrel a decade ago to more than $130 last week. Petrowealth was a key factor enabling Mr. Putin to concentrate political power in the Kremlin,which he used to take over huge slices of the formerly private oil and gas industry. The looming production crunch, therefore, suggests a need

for sweeping political reforms as well as economic adjustments, some experts say. "As long as energy prices keep going up and theeasy money keeps rolling in, there is no incentive to liberalize," says Yevgeny Gavrilenkov, chief economist at Troika Dialog, aMoscow investment bank. "If the golden goose stops laying eggs, then they'll start to recognize the need for change."

5. Forcing Russian liberalization now key to Russia's economy.


output peaked?" May 28, 2008 lexisA sharp debate is breaking out among economists, some of whom argue that the crisis is an opportunity for Russia to develop a long-termstrategy to husband its remaining energy resources and diversify its economy. They point to figures showing that gas and oil exports have risensince 2000 from under half to over 60 percent of Russia's gross domestic product and say that to continue trading nonrenewable resources forrapidly devaluing dollars is a big mistake. "Russia should not be a colonial country that provides raw materials to more developed countries,"says Nodari Simonia, director of the Center for World Energy Studies, an independent Moscow think tank. "We don't need to export more

crude, we have to invest resources in our manufacturing base." Russian oil profits, taxed by the state, have been accumulating in a special'stabilization fund' that now totals about $130 billion. Earlier this year the government put another $32 billion into a sovereign wealth fund that

is expected to begin investing in Russian infrastructure and social welfare schemes."Russia's economy so far can't absorb the oilcash that's coming in. That, not increasing oil output, is our biggest worry," says Sergei Glaziev, head of the NationalInstitute for Development, a Moscow think tank. "We urgently need to diversify our economy away from this dependence on naturalresources."

Extend the David 99 impact they read

4


5/48


2AC OPEC Flood DA (w/ Saudi econ impacts)

1. Global spare production capacity is tight AND such capacity is in largely unusable heavy

crudes




2. OPEC can no longer influence prices

Sodhi 2008(The Myth of OPEC, The center for independent studies http://www.cis.org.au/executive_highlights/EH2008/eh63608.html )

The massive reserves of Saudi Arabia have also historically been a tool to encourage quota compliance. The Saudis,with their massive oil reserves and high levels of spare production capacity, have in the past threatened to flood themarket with oil to engineer a collapse in price. With the worlds cheapest production costs and lots of spare capacity,it was a threat the Saudis could theoretically carry out. Not anymore.Saudi Arabia no longer has the buffer of excess production, and there is a lack of confidence in the sustainability ofits largest fields. The long standing threat to flood the market with cheap oil has now become a bluff, and the othermembers of OPEC know it.OPEC goes to great trouble to pretend that it can influence prices. It holds regular meetings where it ordains a newproduction target with much ceremony. But honestly, you would have to be a mug to believe that OPEC countriesare purposefully limiting production. When oil prices rise, so does the opportunity cost of sticking to the allocatedquota. So while its possible to maintain a cartel when prices are low, you can bet your life that each member is

pumping out as much crude as it possibly can at $140 a barrel.

3. Saudi Arabia has diversified their economy and can stay on a growth path even if oil

prices decline.

ArseneAkaGlobal Insight August 2, 2007HEADLINE: Fitch Raises Outlook for Saudi Arabia's Sovereign Foreign Currency

Significance:A sharp decrease in international oil prices remains the main risk facing the kingdom. However, during the current oil boom,Saudi Arabia has used part of its oil-revenue windfall to build up assets overseas, whichcould be drawn upon ifglobal energy prices falter in the future.With global oil demand expected to remain strong over the next two years, the sovereign'screditworthiness seems relatively secure. Meanwhile,Saudi Arabia has made good progress in promoting the non-oil sector.Despite a fall in oil production in 2006, the economy expanded robustly, on the back of strong growth in the non-oil sector.

5


6/48


4. Turn / High oil prices have allowed Saudi Arabia to reform its economy which is key to

their stability

Erlend Paasche Saudi Arabia's economic liberalizationWednesday, December 12, 2007http://www.speroforum.com/site/article.asp?id=12974

According to conventional wisdom, high oil prices would render economic reform in oil-rich countries a poorchance of success with increases in state income lessening the pressure for such change. In a time of sky-high oilprices, Saudi Arabia proves that conventional wisdom sometimes misses the mark.Saudi oil export revenues constituted a meager US$34.3 billion in 1998, but rose to US$46.8 billion in 1999 andUS$65.5 billion in 2002. SABB, one of the kingdom's largest banks, projects oil revenues of US$165 billion thisyear. Even though the Saudi state has thus gradually gained access to a greatly increased volume of external rent, ithas somewhat paradoxically loosened its tight grip on the economy, opened up its markets for privatization andforeign investment and actively strengthened its private sector.

6


7/48


2AC OPEC Flood DA (w/ renewable impacts)

1. Global spare production capacity is tight AND such capacity is in largely unusable

heavy crudes




2. OPEC can no longer influence prices

Sodhi 2008(The Myth of OPEC, The center for independent studies http://www.cis.org.au/executive_highlights/EH2008/eh63608.html )

The massive reserves of Saudi Arabia have also historically been a tool to encourage quota compliance. The Saudis,with their massive oil reserves and high levels of spare production capacity, have in the past threatened to flood themarket with oil to engineer a collapse in price. With the worlds cheapest production costs and lots of spare capacity,it was a threat the Saudis could theoretically carry out. Not anymore.Saudi Arabia no longer has the buffer of excess production, and there is a lack of confidence in the sustainability ofits largest fields. The long standing threat to flood the market with cheap oil has now become a bluff, and the othermembers of OPEC know it.OPEC goes to great trouble to pretend that it can influence prices. It holds regular meetings where it ordains a newproduction target with much ceremony. But honestly, you would have to be a mug to believe that OPEC countriesare purposefully limiting production. When oil prices rise, so does the opportunity cost of sticking to the allocatedquota. So while its possible to maintain a cartel when prices are low, you can bet your life that each member is

pumping out as much crude as it possibly can at $140 a barrel.

3. The disad doesnt turn the case. We dont argue an increase in renewables is good or

even a decrease in emissions is good Our advantage is hegemony and this disad doesnt

turn that advantage.

4. Renewable development is not dependent on high oil prices

Environment News Service, 6-21-07, http://www.ens-newswire.com/ens/jun2007/2007-06-21-04.aspWhile the report finds that high oil prices have driven investors into the renewable energy market, UNEPExecutive Director Achim Steiner says many investors are choosing renewables regardless of oil prices."One of the new and fundamental messages of this report is that renewable energies are no longer subject tothe vagaries of rising and falling oil prices - they are becoming generating systems of choice for increasing

numbers of power companies, communities and countries irrespective of the costs of fossil fuels, said UNEPExecutive Director Achim Steiner, introducing the report Wednesday.

.

7


8/48


5. Renewables wont catch on 4 reasons

Paul Roberts, energy expert and writer for Harpers,2004, The End of Oil, pg. 201-2Other problems become more apparent when we look more closely at cost. Although wind and solar aregetting cheaper, proponents often overlook the fact that their competitors are also getting cheaper and willcontinue to do so. Just as fuel cells must compete with a constantly improving internal-combustion engine,

wind and solar will have to battle with gas- and coal-fired technologies that will grow more efficient and lessexpensive and less polluting by the year. Renewables are also extremely vul nerable to energy price swings: ifgas prices were to come down, for example, wind and solar power would lose much of their cost advantage.Renew ables are politically vulnerable , as well: if wind or solar were to lose their government subsidies, thecurrent boom in new installations would come to a screeching halt: the mere threat of such a loss has manypotential inves tors looking elsewhere.

8


9/48


2AC- Angola Oil DA

1. No risk of great power conflict over Africa

Robert Barrett, PhD student Centre for Military and Strategic Studies, University of Calgary, June 1, 2005,http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/Delivery.cfm/SSRN_ID726162_code327511.pdf?abstractid=726162&mirid=1

Westerners eager to promote democracy must be wary of African politicians who promise democratic reform without sincerecommitment to the process. Offering money to corrupt leaders in exchange for their taking small steps away from autocracy may in fact

be a way of pushing countries into anocracy. As such, world financial lenders and interventionists who wield leverage and influencemust take responsibility in considering the ramifications of African nations who adopt democracy in order to maintain elite political

privileges. The obvious reason for this, aside from the potential costs in human life should conflict arise from hastily constructeddemocratic reforms, is the fact that Western donors, in the face of intrastate war would then be faced with channeling funds andresources away from democratization efforts and toward conflict intervention based on issues of human security. This is a problem, asWestern nations may be increasingly wary of intervening in Africa hotspots after experiencing firsthand the unpredictable and

unforgiving nature of societal warfare in both Somalia and Rwanda. On a costbenefit basis, the West continues to be somewhatreluctant to get to get involved in Africas dirty wars, evidenced by its political hesitation when discussing ongoingsanguinary grassroots conflicts in Africa. Even as the world apologizes for bearing witness to the Rwandan genocide without having

intervened, the United States, recently using the label genocide in the context of the Sudanese conflict (inSeptember of 2004), has only proclaimed sanctions against Sudan, while dismissing any suggestions at actualintervention (Giry, 2005). Part of the problem is that traditional military and diplomatic approaches at separatingcombatants and enforcing ceasefires have yielded little in Africa. No powerful nations want to get embroiled in

conflicts they cannot win especially those conflicts in which the intervening nation has very little interest.

2. Their nuclear escalation claim is empirically denied by dozens of African conflicts

Tim Docking, African Affairs Specialist with the United States Institute of Peace, 2007, Taking Sides ClashingViews on African Issues, p. 372

Nowhere was the scope and intensity of violence during the 1990s as great as in Africa. While the general trendof armed conflict in Europe, Asia, the Americas, and the Middle East fell during the 1989-99 period, the 1990s witnessed anincrease in the number of conflicts on the African continent. During this period, 16 UN peacekeeping missions were sentto Africa. (Three countries-Somalia, Sierra Leone, and Angola-were visited by multiple missions during this time.) Furthermore, this

period saw internal and interstate violence in a total of 30 sub-Saharan states. In 1999 alone, the continent was plagued by 16armed conflicts, seven of which were wars with more than 1,000 battle-related deaths (Journal of Peace Research, 37:5, 2000, p.638). In 2000, the situation continued to deteriorate: renewed heavy fighting between Eritrea and Ethiopia claimed tens of thousands oflives in the lead-up to a June ceasefire and ultimately the signing of a peace accord in December; continued violence in the Democratic

Republic of Congo (DRC), Sierra Leone, Burundi, Angola, Sudan, Uganda, and Nigeria as well as the outbreak of new violence betweenGuinea and Liberia, in Zimbabwe, and in the Ivory Coast have brought new hardship and bloodshed to the continent.

3. No great power intervention

Major Yushau A Salisu, April 18, 2002, NIGERIAS RISING HEGEMONY IS ESSENTIAL TO PEACE AND STABILITY INWEST-AFRICA, http://stinet.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?AD=ADA420533&Location=U2&doc=GetTRDoc.pdf, p. 2

The international community has of late shown lack of interest in intervening in conflicts within sub-SaharanAfrica in general and West Africa in particular as the Liberian, Sierra Leone and Burundi and Rwandan civil wars proved. For instancethe United Nations peacekeeping force in Africa which stood at about 40,000 in 1993 was just about 1600 as of June 19992. And

during the Liberian conflicts, the then United Nation (UN) Secretary General, Javier Perez de Cuellarcategorically statedthat the UN would not intervene. The United States (U.S) which had about 2000 Marines off the Liberian coast also refusedto intervene and separate the warring factions.

9


10/48


4. foreign oil dependence and resource competition is the root of African instability

Klare 8 (Micheal T. Klare, The Nations defense correspondent, is professor of peace and world security studies at HampshireCollege. The New Geopolitics of EnergyThe Nation. New York:May 19, 2008. Vol. 286, Iss. 19; pg. 18)

This risk is made all the greater because intensified production of oil, natural gas, uranium and minerals is itself a

source of instability, acting as a magnet for arms deliveries and outside intervention. The nations involved arelargely poor, so whoever controls the resources controls the one sure source of abundant wealth. This is an invitationfor the monopolization of power by greedy elites who use control over military and police to suppress rivals. Theresult, more often than not, is a wealthy strata of crony capitalists kept in power by brutal security forces andsurrounded by disaffected and impoverished masses, often belonging to a different ethnic group--a recipe for unrestand insurgency. This is the situation today in the Niger Delta region of Nigeria, in Darfur and southern Sudan, in theuranium-producing areas of Niger, in Zimbabwe, in the Cabinda province of Angola (where most of that country'soil lies) and in numerous other areas suffering from what's been called the "resource curse."

5. Turn / Oil revenues will cause civil war in Angola

DavidBlairDiplomatic EditorThe Daily Telegraph (London) July 18, 2008 HEADLINE: Analysis; Africa's oil boom shiftsbalance; of power

Angola emerged from more than three decades of civil war in 2002. President Jose Eduardodos Santosleads a notionallyMarxistgovernment busily engaged in stealing and squandering the oil revenues. Angola's cabinet, steeped incorruption,is filled withMarxist millionaires. Mr dos Santos himself is believed to rank among Africa's richest men. Experience suggests thatoil bonanzas inflict nothing but harm on African countries. A tiny elite seizes the chance to enrich itself - and virtually nothingtrickles down to the poor. Meanwhile, oil revenues distort the entire economy,discouraging genuineentrepreneurs and undermining every state institution.Civil war becomes more likely because the incentive totake over thecountry and steal its resources is all the greater.

10
http://proquest.umi.com/pqdweb?RQT=318&pmid=29240&TS=1214343341&clientId=42567&VInst=PROD&VName=PQD&VType=PQDhttp://proquest.umi.com/pqdweb?RQT=318&pmid=29240&TS=1214343341&clientId=42567&VInst=PROD&VName=PQD&VType=PQDhttp://proquest.umi.com/pqdweb?RQT=572&VType=PQD&VName=PQD&VInst=PROD&pmid=29240&pcid=39304061&SrchMode=3http://proquest.umi.com/pqdweb?RQT=572&VType=PQD&VName=PQD&VInst=PROD&pmid=29240&pcid=39304061&SrchMode=3http://proquest.umi.com/pqdweb?RQT=318&pmid=29240&TS=1214343341&clientId=42567&VInst=PROD&VName=PQD&VType=PQDhttp://proquest.umi.com/pqdweb?RQT=572&VType=PQD&VName=PQD&VInst=PROD&pmid=29240&pcid=39304061&SrchMode=3


11/48


AT: Angola Oil DA - XT #3 No Escalation

Outside powers wont intervene in African conflicts

Tim Docking, African Affairs Specialist with the United States Institute of Peace, 2007, Taking Sides ClashingViews on African Issues, p. 376

Since the tragedy in Somalia, the trend has been for Western nations to refuse to send troops into Africa's hot

spots. Jordan recently underscored this point when it expressed frustration with the West's failure to commit soldiers to the UNAMSILmission as a reason for the withdrawal of its troops from Sierra Leone. America's aversion to peacekeeping in Africa also reflects

broader U.S. foreign policy on the continent. Africa occupies a marginal role in American foreign policy in general (apoint highlighted by conference participants).

Great powers dont get involved in African conflicts

Richard Bogosian et al, Special Coordinator for USAID Greater Horn of Africa Initiative, 2-21-01, Peacekeeping in Africa,http://www.usip.org/pubs/specialreports/sr66.pdf

The Brahimi Report does not, however, addressthe most serious problem facing contemporary peacekeeping missions:lack of international political will. The 1990s witnessed both the changing nature of international conflict and the growing needfor peacekeeping operations. Between 1948 and 1988 the UN undertook just 15 peacekeeping operations around the world; between1989 and 1999, that number jumped to 31. In 1999 the African continent was gripped by 16 armed conflicts, 7 of which were wars withmore than 1,000 battle-related deaths. Currently, the United Nations has four peacekeeping missions in Africa: MINURSO in theWestern Sahara, UNAMSIL in Sierra Leone, UNMEE in Eritrea and Ethiopia, and MONUC in the Democratic Republic of the Congo.

Today, a distinct possibility exists that more civil wars, like those that gripped Sierra Leone and Liberia during the 90s, will occur onthe continent . Despite the growing discussion of African affairs in American foreign policy circles, the UnitedStates is largely disengaged from security issues on the continent. The United States (and the rest of theWestern nations) is loath to contribute peacekeepers to African peacekeeping missions. Conference participantsagreed on the continued importance of the democratization process in Africa . Conference participants also agreed that the agenda putforth by the Brahimi Report offers numerous points of entry for members of the international community to promote conflict preventionon the continent .

11


12/48


AT Angola DA - Species Loss impacts

1.) New Life

A.) New species fill the void.

Richard Kerr 10/7/1994 Science 28

In the immediate aftermath of an extinction, some taxa groups of animals such as species or genera flourish, then graduallyfade. Others that had apparently vanished can reappear, Lazarus-like. In the turmoil, new groups may gain ascendancy,filling ecological niches left empty by the extinction and displacing other survivors to create a new ecologicalorder (See box on p.29).

B.) Resiliency- recolonization species will recolonize damagead areas

Princeton University Press 2005 http://press.princeton.edu/titles/7130.htmlReice argues, in terms refreshingly nontechnical yet scientifically sound, that the traditional, equilibrium paradigm--accordingto which ''stability'' produces healthier ecosystems than does sudden, sweeping change--is fundamentally flawed.He describes a radically different model of how nature operates, one that many ecologists and population biologists have come to understand in

recent years: a concept founded on the premise that disturbances help create and maintain the biodiversity that benefits boththe ecosystem and ourselves. Reice demonstrates that ecosystems need disturbances to accomplish indispensabletasks such as the production of clean air and water. He recommends changes in environmental management to incorporate theessential role of natural disturbances.

2.) No spillover to other species.

Thomas Gale Moore 1998 Climate of fear, why we shouldnt worry about global warming 98-9Nevertheless , the loss of a class of living beings does not typically threaten other species. Most animals and plantscan derive their nutrients or receive the otherbenefits provided by a particular species from more than a single source. Ifit were true that the extinction of a single species would produce a cascade of losses, then the massive extinctionsof the past should have wiped out all life. Evolution forces various life forms to adjust to change. A few may not make the adaptation

but others will mutate to meet the new conditions. Although a particular chain of DNA may be eliminated through the loss of species, other

animals or plants adapting to the same environment often produce similar genetic solutions with like proteins. It is almost impossible toimagine a single species that, if eliminated, would threaten us humans. Perhaps if the E. coli that are necessary for digestion

became extinct, we could no longer exist. But those bacteria live in a symbiotic relationship with man and, as long as humans survive, so willthey. Thus any animal that hosts a symbiotic species need not fear the loss of its partner. As long as the host remains, so will parasites andsymbiotic species.

3.) Their impact is non-falsifiable and politically motivated.

John Charles Kunich )Judge Advocate specializing in environmental law, United States Air Force, Colorado

Springs, Co) Spring, 1994 SPECIES & HABITAT CONSERVATION: THE FALLACY OF DEATHBEDCONSERVATION UNDER THE ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT 24 Envtl. L. 501

It is undisputed that, as one expert puts it , "Our ignorance of the natural world is enormous," and that, as we struggle with ourresponse to the plight of our fellow organisms on this planet, "if we do not even know who the players are, our understandingof how well they are playing is far more deficient." 43 It has been estimated that the ratio of unknown to known species may be ashigh as 21 to 1, with 30 million undescribed species versus 1.4 [*517] million that have been identified and taxonomically categorized by man.

44 The skeptics argue that the apocalyptic vision of a gigantic extinction spasm is based more on ideology than onscience. In this view, although estimates of total species range as high as 100 million, anything in excess of the 1.4 million actually identifiedis mere guesswork. If no one knows how many species exist, how can anyone know how many are going extinct? 45 If traces of the allegedextinction victims are never discovered, no one will be able to determine whether they became extinct or never existed at all. According to

Patrick Kangas of the University of Maryland,the "whole business is unfalsifiable

, and everyone in science knows what a mess

unfalsifiable theories are." 46

12


13/48


4. Permian extinction disproves their impact.

Greg Easterbrook 1995 A Moment on the Earth 101-2The greatest known loss of Earth life was the Permian extinctionthat occurred roughly 250 million years ago. At that

time as many as96 percent of the life-forms on Earth fell extinct. If you believe the current ordering of nature gloried andworthy of reverence, then you must believe the Permian extinction was a splendorous event. Without it the species and ecological

wonders we now seek to preserve would never have come into being. Some other set of creatures and wonders would exist, to be sure. But

there might be, say, no dolphins or whales:the Permian extinction was particularly hard on aquatic life. There might beno bear, no frogs, no otter, no songbirds, no flowering plants, no old-growth forests, no taiga, no Madagascan lemur.

13


14/48


2AC Russia Oil DA

1. Oil price drop would have no effect on the Russian economy. Prices could get as low as

$55 a barrel and the effect would still be insignificant

Russia & CIS Banking & Finance WeeklyJune 20, 2008 headline: russia does not fear drop in oil prices - kudrin

Russia should be prepared for both further growth as well as a rapid drop in oil prices, he said. It is better forRussia when oil prices are

high, he said, but these prices must be utilized soundly and oil windfalls should not be wasted."If oil prices are higher and is spent

immediately, the ruble's exchange rate will strengthen," he said, stressing that the appreciation of the ruble would have a negative effect on

Russian industry. A decline in the price of oil will not have a significant impact on the Russian budget, Kudrin said."Russia is not afraid of a price drop," Kudrin said in an interview with Vesti 24 TV while in Osaka following the meeting of the G8finance chiefs."Our budget would not have a deficit at a price of $55 per barrel.The tax system for our oil companies is set upso that as the price of oil declines, taxation declines. So no substantial changes will take place. It will have some effect onour GDP growth, but an insignificant one compared with the earlier period. I repeat, the effect will beinsignificant," he said.

2. High oil-revenue deters economic liberalization.


output peaked?" May 28, 2008 lexis

Oil profits, on the other hand, are taxed at nearly 90 percent, which has filled the state's coffers as prices for crude oil have risen from $10 perbarrel a decade ago to more than $130 last week. Petrowealth was a key factor enabling Mr. Putin to concentrate political power in the Kremlin,which he used to take over huge slices of the formerly private oil and gas industry. The looming production crunch, therefore, suggests a need

for sweeping political reforms as well as economic adjustments, some experts say. "As long as energy prices keep going up and theeasy money keeps rolling in, there is no incentive to liberalize," says Yevgeny Gavrilenkov, chief economist at Troika Dialog, aMoscow investment bank. "If the golden goose stops laying eggs, then they'll start to recognize the need for change."

3. Forcing Russian liberalization now key to Russia's economy.


output peaked?" May 28, 2008 lexisA sharp debate is breaking out among economists, some of whom argue that the crisis is an opportunity for Russia to develop a long-termstrategy to husband its remaining energy resources and diversify its economy. They point to figures showing that gas and oil exports have risensince 2000 from under half to over 60 percent of Russia's gross domestic product and say that to continue trading nonrenewable resources forrapidly devaluing dollars is a big mistake. "Russia should not be a colonial country that provides raw materials to more developed countries,"says Nodari Simonia, director of the Center for World Energy Studies, an independent Moscow think tank. "We don't need to export morecrude, we have to invest resources in our manufacturing base." Russian oil profits, taxed by the state, have been accumulating in a special'stabilization fund' that now totals about $130 billion. Earlier this year the government put another $32 billion into a sovereign wealth fund that

is expected to begin investing in Russian infrastructure and social welfare schemes."Russia's economy so far can't absorb the oilcash that's coming in. That, not increasing oil output, is our biggest worry," says Sergei Glaziev, head of the NationalInstitute for Development, a Moscow think tank. "We urgently need to diversify our economy away from this dependence on naturalresources."

14


15/48


4. Russian economy is resilient.

Bruce Stokes. "Don't Ignore the Russian Bear." Council on Foreign Relations. 2008.http://www.cfr.org/publication/3225/dont_ignore_the_russian_bear.html

A little less than a year ago, August 17 to be precise , thepost-Cold WarRussian economic experiment imploded. The rublecollapsed and debt payments to foreigners were frozen. Wall Street lost billions of dollars. Long Term Capital Management, one of the world's

biggest hedge funds, had to be taken over by its bankers. Once burned, international investors yanked their capital out of all emerging markets

from Latin America to East Asia causing world interest rates to spike. The global economy teetered on the edge ofdepression. But, much to the surprise of most economic pundits, international markets quickly rightedthemselves. The Russian economy proved far more resilient than anticipated. And, in retrospect, the events of August,1998 were little more than a very large bump in the road. The lessons of this "crisis that wasn't" are now clear: Russia is nottoo big to fail (the volume of its debts do not dictate special treatment by its creditors); the financial world can cope with suchfailure; and the Russian economy can bounce back without much overt help from the West. But the impending $4.5

billion loan to Russia by the International Monetary Fund reflecting Washington's gratitude for Moscow's help in Kosovo, continued fear of

Russian nuclear proliferation and concern about Russia's internal political stability demonstrates that Russia still remains tooimportant for the world to ignore. This contradiction not too big to fail, but still too big to flounder highlights the frictioninherent when economic policy is used to further geo-political goals. Up until a year ago, the Clinton Administration argued that aid to Russiawas needed, in part, to avoid global economic collapse. August, 1998 exposed that rationale as a charade. Now American support for assistanceto Russia can only be justified for two reasons: to reinforce Russia's transition to a market economy or as ransom in Moscow's continuedstrategic blackmail of the West. Evidence to justify the former is dubious. Its time to own up to the latter. Last summer's fleeting economic

fright reflected Russia's staggering economic collapse. The ruble fell by more than 70 per cent in a couple of weeks. The

economy shrank by 4.3 per cent. Real wages fell 41 per cent. But the crisis was cathartic. "The shock accomplished whatreform was intended to achieve," said Anders Aslund, a senior associate at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace inWashington.The banking system now functions better. Barter is declining. Most important, there has been no reversion tocentral planning, government-directed lending, industrial subsidies or government reliance on simply printing money.

5. High oil prices are collapsing democracy and creating increased authoritarianism in

Russia

States News Service June 24,2008HEADLINE: AS OIL WEALTH RISES IN EURASIA, DEMOCRACY DECLINESSIGNIFICANTLY

To coincide with today's release of the Freedom House Nations in Transit 2008 report, three of the study's authors gathered at RFE/RL's

Washington, DC headquarters to discuss one of its key findings - that, as oil and natural gas revenues surge in Russia and

Central Asia, democratic institutions in these countries are eroding significantly. [Read more about the Nations in Transit2008 Report] "The resource curse is taking root," Freedom House Director of Studies Christopher Walker told the group. "Thegrowing authoritarianism in oil and natural gas-richcountries such as Russia,Kazakhstan and Azerbaijanis severelyrestricting the ability of democratic institutions to operate." According to the report, the regression in Azerbaijan, Kazakhstanand Russia has occurred systematically and across sectors, including in the areas of electoral process, civil society, independent media and

judicial independence."Russia's decline in all of the report's categoriesover the past eight years is dramatic," said RobertOrttung, the author of the section on Russia and a Senior Fellow at the Jefferson Institute. "For years, Vladimir Putin has been

using oil and natural gas revenues to build up his police forces and consolidate power in such a way that there is no space fordemocracy to grow."

15
http://www.cfr.org/publication/3225/dont_ignore_the_russian_bear.htmlhttp://www.cfr.org/publication/3225/dont_ignore_the_russian_bear.html


16/48


6. Failure of democracy in Russia will cause global nuclear war

Muravchik 2001 (Joshua- Resident Scholar at the AEI, Democracy and Nuclear Peace July 14,http://www.npec-web.org/Syllabus/Muravchik.pdf, Date Accessed 7/29/2006)

That this momentum has slackened somewhat since its pinnacle in 1989, destined to be remembered as one of the most revolutionary years in allhistory, was inevitable. So many peoples were swept up in the democratic tide that there was certain to be some backsliding. Most countries'

democratic evolution has included some fits and starts rather than a smooth progression. So it must be for the world as a whole. Nonetheless , theoverall trend remains powerful and clear. Despite the backsliding, the number and proportion of democracies stands highertoday than ever before. This progress offers a source of hope for enduring nuclear peace. The danger of nuclear war wasradically reduced almost overnight when Russia abandoned Communism and turned to democracy. For otherominous corners of the world, we may be in a kind of race between the emergence or growth of nuclear arsenals andthe advent of democratization. If this is so, the greatest cause for worry may rest with the Moslem Middle East where nuclear arsenals donot yet exist but where the prospects for democracy may be still more remote.

16
http://www.npec-web.org/Syllabus/Muravchik.pdfhttp://www.npec-web.org/Syllabus/Muravchik.pdf


17/48


2AC - IPI Pipeline

1. IPI doesnt solve for India-Pakistan conflict

S. Pandian, Birmingham Business School, University of Birmingham, March 2005, The political economy oftrans-Pakistan gas pipeline project: assessing the political and economic risks for India, Energy Policy

It is suggested that the on-shore Indo-Iran gas pipeline would act as a confident building measure betweenIndia and Pakistan. However, India does not seem to interpret the Indo-Iran pipeline project as an instrumentof confidence building measure in the subcontinent. This is clearly witnessed by India's eagerness to excludePakistan from the proposed project. India's economic interests in the Indo-Iran pipeline project are in conflictwith Pakistan's geo-strategic interests. As India views that Pakistan's geo-strategic interests are aimed atdisrupting Indian economic interests, the Indo-Iran pipeline project could hardly be conducive to sustainconfidence between India and Pakistan. In this regard, it is unlikely that India would entertain Pakistan's rolein Indo-Iran pipeline project. Only upon mutual co-existence with India, Pakistan could benefit from its geo-strategic location.

2. IPI doesnt solve India-Pakistan military rivalry

Neha Kumar, Research Officer Institute of Peace & Conflict Studies, 9-14-2007,http://www.ipcs.org/newKashmirLevel2.jsp?action=showView&kValue=2386&subCatID=null&mod=null

India-Pakistan relations have been tense due to the conflict over Kashmir since Independence. Today theirrelations are marked by the efforts of both sides to settle differences and move beyond the Kashmir problem.It is important, however, to analyze whether the various steps taken by their governments are bearing fruit orboth countries are still suspicious of each other's military moves. It is noteworthy that both countries aregetting into a missile race despite having promoted various Confidence Building Measures (CBMs). Bothcountries have agreed to provide prior notification of missile tests, which includes only ballistic missile tests,and not the tests of cruise missiles. In spite of the pre-notification agreement, missile tests by one country arealways followed by the other, almost in reply to each other. On 4 February 2007, India successfully tested aBrahmos cruise missile, which has a range of 200 km and can be launched from ships, submarines andaircrafts. In response, Pakistan tested its Hatf IV missile on 23 February, which has a range of 2,000 km andalso the short-range Hatf II ballistic missile with a range of 200 km on 4 March. This was followed by Indiatesting its Dhanush missile on 31 March which has a range of 250 km and the capacity to carry a singlewarhead of up to 750 kg with the declared purpose of studying the control and guidance system of themissile. On 12 April, India successfully tested its Agni III ballistic missile which has a range of 3,500 km.

Pakistan believes that Agni III is more capable than any ballistic missiles with Pakistan and said it wouldtherefore upgrade its Shaheen II missile. Another important point is that testing missiles having greater rangeand capability than those in the other's arsenal will remain an important goal for both countries. Therefore,despite trade agreements, confidence building measures and efforts to have a common gas pipeline, bothcountries will continue to build up their weapon systems.

3. No risk of India-Pakistan conflictdeterrence is stable

Stratfor, 6-21-07,http://www.stratfor.com/products/premium/read_article.php?id=290807&selected=Country%20Profiles&showCountry=1&countryId=56&showMore=1

Ultimately, India is fairly geographically secure. Oceans and mountains constitute the bulk of New Delhi'sborder. The Himalayas provide a nearly impenetrable barrier to meaningful military confrontation with

China. Pakistan, which along with Afghanistan occupies the Hindu Kush to the northwest, is the only realpower within India's immediate geographic zone.The Indo-Pakistani rivalry has been well entrenched since1948 -- but Indian strategic missiles are well-suited to deal with that threat. Moreover, the nuclear balancebetween the two has matured to the point that it now injects an element of stability and restraint into therivalry. An ICBM has almost no relevance to a direct confrontation with Pakistan. The 3,000-kilometer(about 1,800 miles) distance from Bangalore in southern India to the Pakistani capital, Islamabad, in northernPakistan is probably approaching the minimum range of a true ICBM.

17


18/48


4. U.S. sanctions prevent Indian pipeline project with Iran

Business Recorder, 10-29-07The United States has asked India not to proceed with Iran, Pakistan, India gas pipeline project. The leadingEnglish Indian daily reported that US Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson is expected to ask India to keep away from the project duringhis visit to India starting from Sunday. "We are hoping that India won't move forward on [the pipeline]," a US treasury official said. Thedaily said US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice flew into New Delhi two years back to tell Prime Minister Manmohan Singh'sgovernment not to proceed with the India-Pakistan-Iran gas pipeline project. She left, promising to pave the way for a civil nuclear co-operation agreement. Henry Paulson is expected to do the same job during his visit. The paper also said the US Treasury Under-secretaryfor international affairs David McCormick told a press conference in Washington that Paulson will urge India not to move forward withthe India-Pakistan-Iran gas pipeline project. "We are hoping that India won't move forward on this," said McCormick. "We think at atime when the world should be imposing greater discipline on its interactions with [Iranian] companies and financial institutions and theIranian government more broadly, that this is not the right path forward. We have been very clear on that." McCormick went on tosuggest that the US had a "profound understanding" of India's energy needs and it was "one of the underlying pieces of logic" of thenuclear deal. "But," he added, "we do not see a pipeline with Iran providing India with any real energy security given the state of the

Iranian regime." The daily said India maintains that it is interested in purchasing the Iranian gas, but the fresh round of sanctionsby the US on Iran may have put the "peace pipeline" project in jeopardy.

5. IPI is dead because Iran wont sell

Daily Times, 8-21-07, BBC Monitoring South Asia

Earlier this month, the 7.5bn dollar Iran-India-Pakistan (IPI) gas pipeline was all but abandoned after Tehran fired theoil minister who had reportedly agreed to sell gas to Pakistan and India "at a discount". Although the dismissedminister Mr Kazem Vaziri-Hamaneh recently rejected claims that he had agreed to sell the IPI gas at a 30 per cent discount, and insisted

that "no agreement on price" had been reached, the hawkish elements opposed to selling the gas to Pakistan seem tohave won the day. This has come in the backdrop of Tehran rumours that America was active in Balochistan against Iran as a tit-for-tat for what Iran was allegedly doing in Iraq.

6. Pakistani instability derails the IPI pipeline

Gal Luft, Executive Director of the Institute for the Analysis of Global Security, 1-12-2005,http://www.iags.org/n0115042.htm

But this win-win proposition seems to be threatened by terrorists. A few days after Irans Oil Minister Bijan Namdar Zanganeh arrived inNew Delhi to discuss the future of the pipeline, terrorists in Pakistan blew up two gas pipelines sending a message to all parties involved

that the "pipeline of peace" might be anything but peaceful. The area of the Balochistan-Punjab border where the pipelineis supposed to run is one of Pakistan's poorest areas and its most restive province. In recent years it has been a

battleground of private militias belonging to Baloch tribes. Sporadic armed clashes resulted in attacks against water pipelines, powertransmission lines and gas installations. Yet, the region strategically important due to its large reserves of oil and gas. But these richesdid little for the Baloch tribesmen. Over the years Islamabad has failed to provide a fair share of the oil and gas wealth. Lack ofeconomic progress and a deep sense of disaffection has contributed to the distrust between the federal government and the Baloch

people. As a result, the tribes now oppose any energy projects in their area. In January 2003, sabotage of a gaspipeline from Sui cut off supply to the Punjab. Later, in June, a wave of attacks against gas installations caused thegovernment to send troops to protect the installations. For the rest of 2003 and the following year the confrontation was defused but theunderlying grievances of the local population were not addressed. To calm the area Islamabad recently added carrots to its policy ofsticks by increasing investment in regional development projects. However, it seems that violence has resurfaced and the region issliding into a near war situation. On the night of January 8 terrorists belonging to the Baloch Liberation Front (BLF) fired rockets at the

pipeline and exchanged gunfire with the security forces for several hours. During the fire exchange the pipeline caught fire, disruptingsupply to a power plant. Six people were killed. In a separate incident the BLF launched an attack on the pipeline close to Sui township,250 miles north of Karachi. This area alone produces about 45 percent of Pakistans total gas production. Some rockets also explodedclose to the main pipeline supplying gas to Sindh and Punjab provinces but did not cause any damage. On January 11 Baloch gunmenstormed facilities operated by state-run Pakistan Petroleum Ltd (PPL) in Sui. The gunmen overpowered the guards and damaged

pipelines and a purification plant. Gunmen also Kidnapped 10 employees of the Water and Power Development Authority (APDA),

Pakistans main water and power utility. The attacks disrupted gas and power production as well work in fertilizer and chemical plants.Many in the region believe that the recent attacks in Balochistan province are meant to sabotage the pipeline project as well as other

projects connecting Sui gas installations with the Turkmenistan gas fields. If true, these pipeline attacks are unsettling and willraise to the surface India's concerns about the reliability of the project. The possibility of sabotage of theproposed Iran-India pipeline by militant groups in Pakistan is becoming increasingly feasible as terrorists learnfrom their allies in Iraq about the strategic gain in conducting a sustained sabotage campaign against oil infrastructure.This is especially true after last months exhortation by Osama bin Ladin to his cohorts to target oil pipelines in the Persian Gulf. In thenext few weeks India will have to make a final determination if it wants to join the pipeline project. If Pakistan truly wants India to sharethe burden of the project it should demonstrate to Delhi that it can ensure security and stability along the pipeline route.

18


19/48


AT: High Prices = IPI / XT #4 alt causes to failure

IPI will fall through now

Abbas Maleki, director of the International Institute for Caspian Studies in Tehran, September 2007,http://www.belfercenter.org/publication/17518/iranpakistanindia_pipeline.html?breadcrumb=%2F

The Iran-Pakistan-India Pipeline (I PI) would run totally 2,670 km (1,660 miles), about 1,115 km (690 miles) in Iran, 705 km (440miles) in Pakistan and 850 km (530 miles) in India, and the total investment is estimated at $7 billion and may take four to five years tocomplete. Apart from the fact that the IPI pipeline makes good economic sense, particularly in promoting regional cooperation, it isimmensely important to the on-going peace process between India and Pakistan. A number of observers of the IndiaPakistan conflicthave termed this project as the mother of all confidence-building measures between India and Pakistan and named it the Peace Pipeline.

Theproject has been dealt a major jolt by the news that New Delhi and Islamabad have rejected the draft finalagreement circulated by Iran, which calls for a three-year review cycle on the gas price. Causing yet another delay inthe trilateral deal, the pricing dispute will either be resolved by a new round of negotiations or turn into an unbridgeable difference

putting the IPI's fate under question marks. Prior to his resignation in early August 2007, Iran's petroleum minister, Kazem VaziriHamaneh, had announced that the seventh round of negotiations for the IPI contract would be held in Tehran on July 29, 2007. It did not

happen and, what is more, a former Iranian deputy oil minister, Hadi Nejad Hosseinian, has questioned the deal on theground that it gives a huge discount to India and is some 30 percent below the value of gas sold to Turkey. AnotherIranian politician, Akbar Mohtashemipour, from Iran's reformist side, has publicly questioned the wisdom of exportingIran's gas at a time when the cold regions of Iran face gas shortages. The IPI issue has been moved to Iran's ForeignMinistry, and during the past year and a half, the Iranian negotiation team has changed three times.

19


20/48


AT: High Prices = IPI - no India/pak conflict

The risk of India Pakistan conflict is low

Republican Duncan Hunter, 10-10-07, US Fed News

"In addition to its counterterrorism efforts, Pakistan has made progress on its eastern border with India -tensions between the two nations have noticeably decreased due to confidence-building measures andPakistan and India are both committed to taking steps toward resolving the historical animosity that existsover Kashmir. I am interested in your thoughts regarding the United States' role in the Indo-Pakistanidialogue process.

20


21/48


2AC: Trans-Balkan Pipeline DA

1. There is no risk that major powers will get drawn into Balkan regional wars.

Roland Dannreuther. European Union Foreign and Security Policy: Towards a neighbourhood Strategy. New

York, Routledge. 2004 p. 195-6

The global setting is thus primed for a continuance of the transatlantic partnership, but with ongoing and sometimesfractious policy bargaining that is frequently stoked by status dissonance. What are the implications for policy cooperation inthe EU's neighbourhood? It is important to stress that the unipolar structure paradoxically increases the salience of regionalinternational politics across the globe for two reasons. First is the declining pole-to-state ratio. The nineteenth-centuryinternational system was composed of six or eight polar states out of a total of roughly 30 significant powers. In the early Cold War there were

two poles, but the number of states had doubled to just over 70 . Today there is one pole in a system whose population hastrebled to nearly 200 states. As a simple matter of numbers, there is bound to be more going on in regional inter-national relations in today's system. Not only are the numbers of lesser powers growing, so are their aggregate capabilities. By onemeasure, the conventionally defined Great Powers comprised over 80 per cent of global capabilities in the mid-nineteenth century, 65 per cent

in the early Cold War, but only around 55 per cent today.15 Second, many regional dynamics are measurably less constrained byGreat Power politics than they were in the Cold War for purely structural reasons. The current internationalstructure is looser than Cold War bipolarity, even though it is more unequal. The gap between the most powerfulstate and the rest is much larger now than under bipolarity, but the system is less constraining on many importantregions. This comparative looseness does not mean that the system is not unipolar. On the contrary, it is a result of the

fact that unipolarity limits the very intense Great Power contradictions that tend to force lesser powers to choosesides. The contemporary international system, in short, is characterized by unprecedented US hegemony within theGreat Power club, and a novel proliferation of lesser states outside that club. The likelihood that regional dynamicswill fall outside the limits of a polar state's national interest or capability is thus greater than in preceding systems.Because there are now far more, and more capable, states relative to poles than in prior eras, and because theabeyance of intense security rivalries among Great Powers increases the latitude for regional interstate dynamics,there is a heightened demand for inter-state cooperation at the regional level. Notwithstanding US primacy, today'sinternational system puts a premium on the ability of the United States and the EU to coordinate policy in the regions.

2. Instability in the Balkans nowKosovo

Fridl 7/11/08 (Daniella, "The Balkan Saga Continues," recipient of a six-month fellowship from IREX(International Research & Exchanges Board), http://www.nationalinterest.org/Article.aspx?id=19374)

With U.S.-Russia relations continuing to deteriorate in the wake of the G8 summit and Americas continuing efforts to build a missile-defense

system in Eastern Europe, we now have another nail to add to the coffin. In the United States and the European Union , there is a widelyheld belief that Kosovos independence was the last missing piece in achieving stability in the Balkans. Having justreturned from Kosovo, I would have to disagree. My observations lead me to conclude that there remains seriouspotential for instability in Kosovowith broad implications for U.S.-Russia relations and beyond.Serbia paid a high price for the mistakes that were made during Slobodan Milsovics regime. Former Finnish President and the key mediator inthe Kosovo negotiations, Martti Ahtisaari, explained to me that the Serbs lost Kosovo in 1999. This is not to say that Belgrade did not have achance to negotiate a more favorable agreement between 2005 and 2007. However, it was almost impossible for any constructive Serbian policyto develop, given the fragile structure of the governing coalition and the intense rivalries between nationalist Prime Minister Vojislav Kostunicaand pro-European President Boris Tadic.Hence, it was politically more expedient and safe to exploit the nationalist sentiment in the country and settle on the lowest commondenominator: claiming that historically Kosovo was and remains part of Serbia. Instead of sitting back in denial, hoping for a miraculous turn ofevents, Belgrade could have been more effective in using Russias support and UN Security Council Resolution 1244, which protects theterritorial integrity of Serbia, as leverage in securing some level of sovereignty for the Serbs living in Kosovo. Opportunities were there, but the

political will, wisdom and effectiveness that were required to achieve this outcome were lacking.Although Kosovo is making slow progress toward obtaining international recognition, this new European state has manyother far-more-pressing challenges. They include a still-lagging economy, high levels of organized crime andcorruption, an unemployment rate close to 50 percent, a population of about two millionhalf under the age of twenty-five, andmost importantly the unresolved question of Kosovo Serbs. Some of these issues will improve, especially considering the resources and fundingthat the European Union and the United States are putting in Kosovo. At the upcoming donors conference, the international community isexpected to raise over one billion dollars to help boost Kosovos economy. Regrettably, the northern part of the country remains completelyisolated and is not likely to reap any benefits from this aid. Mitrovica is an ethnically divided city, with the majority of Serbs living on thenorthern side of the Ibar River and Albanians on the southern side. Ironically, the white bridge over the river symbolizes the division between thetwo ethnic groups, which is evident in the UN checkpoints and barbed-wire barricades set up on both sides. Crossing into the opposite side of the

bridge at nighttime is not advisable for security reasons.

21


22/48


3. The pipeline is inevitable construction has already started, the agreement is signed and

operation will begin in 2011

Hydrocarbons technology.com 2008, http://www.hydrocarbons-technology.com/projects/trans-balkan-pipelin/index.html

In March 2007 Russia, Bulgaria and Greece signed an intergovernmental agreement to build and operate the Burgas-Alexandropoulos oil pipeline between Bulgaria and Greece. The construction will begin in 2008 and operations aredue to begin in 2011.Advisors to the governments include Allen & Overy and Paul Hastings with stake holders including: Rosneft (17%) (Russian), UniversalTerminal Burgas (12.25%) (Bulgarian), Transneft (17%) (Russian), Hellenic Petroleum (8.1%) (Greek), Gazprom (17%) (Russian), Thraki (8.1%)(Greek), Bulgargaz (12.25%) (Bulgarian), Government of Greece (8.1%). Russia will have overall control of 51% of the line and Greece andBulgaria will control 49%.

4. Pipeline will lead to an oil spill in the Aegean because of the concentration of oil tankers

Hydrocarbons technology.com 2008, http://www.hydrocarbons-technology.com/projects/trans-balkan-pipelin/index.html

The pipeline will have three oil refilling stations along the route; two of these are intended to be in Bulgaria (the first one is

planned at Neftochim quite close to the Burgas terminal) and also one at the Alexandroupolis terminus of the line. The cost of the project willinclude the reconstruction and refurbishment (capacity enhancement) of both the Burgas and Alexandroupolis terminals, which will include oiltanks with a capacity of over 600,000t in Burgas, and 1,200,000t in Alexandroupolis.

There have been environmental concerns raised about the possibility of an oil spill in the Aegean where there willsoon be a concentration of crude oil tankers.

5. Oil spills threaten marine life and ecosystems

Parent 06 (Jason, associate with the Law Offices of Beauregard, Burke & Franco in New Bedford, Massachusets,Fall, 14 Buff. Envt'l. L.J. 117, lexis)

Pollution is an on-going and increasing problem in our oceans. 94 Oil spills can have deadly impacts on marine life,as evidenced by the Exxon Valdez incident. 95 That incident was particularly detrimental because on the coast ofAlaska and in other colder areas, oil takes longer to breakdown and can get trapped in the ice, making clean up moredifficult. 96 Additionally, toxic contaminants, such as mirex and PCBs, often from unknown sources, can impact marine mammals much in thesame manner that contaminants in our drinking water can affect us. 97 Impacts on mammals can be severe because "they bio-accumulate many of the toxic chemicals in their bodies, resulting in the release of more concentrated doses furtheralong the food chain when they are preyed or scavenged upon." 98 Finally, ocean dumping continues to [*136] take the lives of manymarine animals." 99 According to the House Merchant Marine and Fisheries Committee, "the most pervasive 'threat to marinemammals is the degradation of the environment upon which they depend.'" 100 A wide variety of materials are intentionally ornegligently dumped into the oceans. 101 Much of the debris can have detrimental impacts on marine life, causing asphyxiation, strangulation,entanglement, contamination, and a host of other potential hazards. 102

6. That causes extinction

Paul Warner, American University, Dept of International Politics and Foreign Policy, August, Politics and Life

Sciences, 1994, p 177Massive extinction of species is dangerous, then, because one cannot predict which species are expendable to the

system as a whole. As Philip Hoose remarks, "Plants and animals cannot tell us what they mean to each other."One can never be sure which species holds up fundamental biological relationships in the planetary ecosystem.And, because removing species is an irreversible act, it may be too late to save the system after the extinction ofkey plants or animals. According to the U.S. National Research Council, "The ramifications of an ecologicalchange of this magnitude [vast extinction of species] are so far reaching that no one on earth will escape them."Trifling with the "lives" of species is like playing Russian roulette, with our collective future as the stakes.

22
http://www.hydrocarbons-technology.com/projects/trans-balkan-pipelin/index.htmlhttp://www.hydrocarbons-technology.com/projects/trans-balkan-pipelin/index.htmlhttp://www.hydrocarbons-technology.com/projects/trans-balkan-pipelin/index.htmlhttp://www.hydrocarbons-technology.com/projects/trans-balkan-pipelin/index.html


23/48


2AC Gabon Deforestation

1. Gabons economy has diversified. Loss of oil revenue wouldnt destroy it or forests.

Canadian Corporate NewswireFebruary 20, 2008HEADLINE: SearchGold Defines a 3km by 5km Anomalous Gold Sector on Ekarlong Target in Gabon

Gabon is one of the most politically stable countries in Africa and the country's petroleum industry has insured prosperity. Gabon isnowstarting todiversify its economy and intends on maximizing the overlooked potential ofits mining sector which offers upside from various commodities. SearchGold and its partner Managem are developingGabon's most advanced gold project, the Bakoudou-Magnima Project. The Booue-Mimongo Project complements the Bakoudou-MagnimaProject by strengthening SearchGold's position in Gabon with access to 10,000 km2 of under-explored greenstone belts.

2. No impact - Congo deforestation being solved now. New Congo Basin Forest fund will

solve deforestation

Africa NewsJune 23, 2008 HEADLINE: Central Africa; New Fund Launched for Congo Basin BYLINE: Inter Press Service

The prime ministers of Norway and Britain have launched a 200 million dollar fund to tackle deforestation in the

Congo Basin, the world's second largest tropical forest.Launched in London last week, the Congo Basin Forest Fund will support initiatives fromgovernments, civilsocietyand the private sector that aim to reduce logging.

The fund will sponsor livelihood projects that seek to make it more profitable for local communities to preserve the forest than to cut it down,as well as the development of new and innovative approaches. This includes a new satellite system that will monitor the forest -- which is twicethe size of France and covers an area of more than a million square kilometres.

3. Non-unique. Deforestation of the Congo is rampant now and oil prices are high.

Law & Health WeeklyDecember 22, 2007HEADLINE: BURNESS COMMUNICATIONS;Report finds deforestation offers very little money compared to potential financial benefits

Developing new incentives for reducing carbon emissions stemming from deforestation is high on the agenda in Bali. Deforestation isrampant in places like Indonesia, the Amazon and the Congo. Currently, confusion over how to value and monitor the large

amounts of carbon stored in tropical forests has prevented the inclusion of forests in the carbon offset market that is mainlydominated by reductions achieved in the industrial sector, even though deforestation is responsible for some 20 percent of the world 's carbonemissions.

23


24/48


AT Gabon DA - Species Loss impacts

1.) New Life

A.) New species fill the void.

Richard Kerr 10/7/1994 Science 28

In the immediate aftermath of an extinction, some taxa groups of animals such as species or genera flourish, then graduallyfade. Others that had apparently vanished can reappear, Lazarus-like. In the turmoil, new groups may gain ascendancy,filling ecological niches left empty by the extinction and displacing other survivors to create a new ecologicalorder (See box on p.29).

B.) Resiliency- recolonization species will recolonize damagead areas

Princeton University Press 2005 http://press.princeton.edu/titles/7130.htmlReice argues, in terms refreshingly nontechnical yet scientifically sound, that the traditional, equilibrium paradigm--accordingto which ''stability'' produces healthier ecosystems than does sudden, sweeping change--is fundamentally flawed.He describes a radically different model of how nature operates, one that many ecologists and population biologists have come to understand in

recent years: a concept founded on the premise that disturbances help create and maintain the biodiversity that benefits boththe ecosystem and ourselves. Reice demonstrates that ecosystems need disturbances to accomplish indispensabletasks such as the production of clean air and water. He recommends changes in environmental management to incorporate theessential role of natural disturbances.

2.) No spillover to other species.

Thomas Gale Moore 1998 Climate of fear, why we shouldnt worry about global warming 98-9Nevertheless , the loss of a class of living beings does not typically threaten other species. Most animals and plantscan derive their nutrients or receive the otherbenefits provided by a particular species from more than a single source. Ifit were true that the extinction of a single species would produce a cascade of losses, then the massive extinctionsof the past should have wiped out all life. Evolution forces various life forms to adjust to change. A few may not make the adaptation

but others will mutate to meet the new conditions. Although a particular chain of DNA may be eliminated through the loss of species, other

animals or plants adapting to the same environment often produce similar genetic solutions with like proteins. It is almost impossible toimagine a single species that, if eliminated, would threaten us humans. Perhaps if the E. coli that are necessary for digestion

became extinct, we could no longer exist. But those bacteria live in a symbiotic relationship with man and, as long as humans survive, so willthey. Thus any animal that hosts a symbiotic species need not fear the loss of its partner. As long as the host remains, so will parasites andsymbiotic species.

3.) Their impact is non-falsifiable and politically motivated.

John Charles Kunich )Judge Advocate specializing in environmental law, United States Air Force, Colorado

Springs, Co) Spring, 1994 SPECIES & HABITAT CONSERVATION: THE FALLACY OF DEATHBEDCONSERVATION UNDER THE ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT 24 Envtl. L. 501

It is undisputed that, as one expert puts it , "Our ignorance of the natural world is enormous," and that, as we struggle with ourresponse to the plight of our fellow organisms on this planet, "if we do not even know who the players are, our understandingof how well they are playing is far more deficient." 43 It has been estimated that the ratio of unknown to known species may be ashigh as 21 to 1, with 30 million undescribed species versus 1.4 [*517] million that have been identified and taxonomically categorized by man.

44 The skeptics argue that the apocalyptic vision of a gigantic extinction spasm is based more on ideology than onscience. In this view, although estimates of total species range as high as 100 million, anything in excess of the 1.4 million actually identifiedis mere guesswork. If no one knows how many species exist, how can anyone know how many are going extinct? 45 If traces of the allegedextinction victims are never discovered, no one will be able to determine whether they became extinct or never existed at all. According to

Patrick Kangas of the University of Maryland,the "whole business is unfalsifiable

, and everyone in science knows what a mess

unfalsifiable theories are." 46

24


25/48


2AC Secessionism DA

1. Impact is not specific and empirically denied. They provide no explanation of which

states might all of a sudden engage in secessionist conflicts, which of these states might have

access to weapons of mass destruction, and what the time frame would be for the conflicts.No recent secessionist conflict have gone nuclear. Prefer our case advantage.

2. U.S. hegemony holds everything together-solves secessionist wars.

Robert Kagan, Commentary, July, 1995The term "isolationist" has never fairly described any American foreign policy at any time, and it is of no greater value today. A party thatdemands the immediate expansion of NATO eastward; that stands for international free trade and rigorous efforts to enforce global nuclear non-

proliferation; and that speaks constantly of the need for American leadership in the world is not an isolationist party. Nor does history simply

repeat itself. But without conjuring up alarmist visions of a new Nazi Germany or Imperial Japa

BSW Supplement #2

Documents