Aid Tradeoff Disadvantage

Aid Trade-off DA Daniel/Michael/Dr.
1 Samford Debate Institute 2013
Egyptian Aid Trade-off Shell .................................................................................................................. 2 UQ: Egypt has sufficient aid now ......................................................................................................... 4 Link Magnifier ....................................................................................................................................... 5 Links: Aid to Mexico ............................................................................................................................. 6 Links: Aid to Cuba ................................................................................................................................. 7 Links: Aid to Venezuela ........................................................................................................................ 8 Internal Links: Egyptian Aid Will Be Cut ............................................................................................... 9 Internal Links: Budgets Trade-off ....................................................................................................... 11 Internal Links: Foreign Aid Will Be Traded Off With .......................................................................... 12 Impacts: Cutting Aid To Egypt = Instability ........................................................................................ 14 Impacts: Aid to Egypt Key to Egypts Economy .................................................................................. 19 Impact Module: Democracy Promotion............................................................................................. 21 Impacts: Now Key Time for Egypt ...................................................................................................... 22 Impacts: Worsened Crisis = War ........................................................................................................ 26 Food Aid Trade-off Impact Module ........................................................................................................ 28 Food Aid Module Internals ................................................................................................................. 29 Food Aid Solves Hunger ...................................................................................................................... 30 Food Aid Impact Module Extensions: Food Aid Solves Poverty ......................................................... 31 Food Aid Module: Food Aid Solves Poverty ....................................................................................... 32 Food Aid Impact Module: Terrorism Impacts .................................................................................... 33 Food Aid Solves Hunger ...................................................................................................................... 35 Food Aid ModuleUS supplies most food aid ................................................................................... 37 Defense Cuts Module.............................................................................................................................. 38 Impacts: Budget Cuts Hurt Readiness ................................................................................................ 40 Defense Aid Necessary ........................................................................................................................ 44 Economy Module .................................................................................................................................... 45 Economy Module Extensions .............................................................................................................. 47 Economy Module: Foreign Aid Bolsters the Economy ....................................................................... 48
Aid Trade-off DA Daniel/Michael/Dr. G
Egyptian Aid Trade-off Shell

A. UNIQUENESS: EGYPT RECEIVES ADEQUATE FOREIGN AID NOW. Michael Gordon, (staff writer), Mar. 3, 2013, NEW YORK TIMES, Retrieved May 30, 2013 from
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/04/world/middleeast/kerry-announces-millions-in-us-aidfor-egypt.html?_r=0 Secretary of State John Kerry announced Sunday that the United States would provide $250 million in assistance to Egypt after Egypts president promised to move ahead with negotiations with the International Monetary Fund over
economic reforms. Secretary of State John Kerry departed Cairo after meeting with President Mohamed Morsi of Egypt and announcing $250 million in aid from the U.S. In a statement issued after his two-hour meeting with President Mohamed Morsi, Mr. Kerry said the aid decision reflected Egypts extreme needs and Mr. Morsis assurance that Egypt would reach an agreement with the I.M.F. after more than a year of talks over a $4.8 billion loan package. The statement issued by Mr. Kerry noted that he and Mr. Morsi had discussed the need to ensure the fairness of Egypts coming elections, but it did not mention any specific political commitments the Egyptian president had made to receive the aid. Parliamentary elections are scheduled for April. Some opposition groups have said they will boycott the vote because of what they see as
American officials say that Mr. Kerry asserted that moving ahead with difficult economic changes in Egypt would require a degree of political consensus and was implicitly a promise of some political change. The aid announced Sunday consists of two parts. One is a $190 million infusion for Egypts budget intended to address what Mr. Kerry said was the countrys extreme needs . That assistance has already been approved by Congress. Mr. Kerry also pledged $60 million for the creation of a fund to support small businesses, which will provide direct support to key engines of democratic change in Egypt, including Egypts entrepreneurs and its young people.
an effort by Mr. Morsi and his Muslim Brotherhood movement to dominate Egyptian politics. As an incentive for Mr. Morsi to conclude an agreement with the I.M.F., Mr. Kerry said that he would work with Congress to get additional funds approved for Egypt once a deal was reached. In May 2011, President Obama pledged $1 billion to support Egypts democratic revolution. The $190 million in aid announced on Sunday is the first disbursement of that pledge.
B.
LINK: BUDGET PRESSURES WILL REQUIRE CUTS IN EGYPTIAN AID.
1. Budget pressures force trade-offs in foreign aid. Warren P. Strobel, (McClatchy Newspapers), Mar. 4, 2011, Retrieved May 30, 2013 from
http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2011/03/04/v-print/109865/like-new-middle-east-obamadoctrine.html
Now the Obama team is being tested with dramatic developments almost by the hour, and with huge stakes. Will Libya, as Clinton asked recently, turn into a democracy, or a North African Somalia, a haven for terrorists? Will
reform in Egypt provide a model for
smaller Arab nations, or go off track?
National Security Adviser Thomas Donilon briefs Obama multiple times each day on the crisis, and deputy Denis McDonough leads meetings virtually daily of the inter-agency Deputies Committee. Obama, Shapiro said, has ordered officials and diplomats to open channels of communications wherever they can find them, not just with counterparts in Arab governments, but with members of civil society and opposition groups. He called it "a very Obama approach" drawn from the president's days as a community organizer in Chicago. "You go out and talk to everybody," he said, and it has helped U.S. officials get a richer understanding of what is happening in Egypt and elsewhere. There have been some tensions, particularly over the decision to break with Mubarak, between those at the White House and State Department who favor strongly supporting pro-democracy movements and those who favor stability, current and former U.S. officials say. There's also the threat of data overload. "You have a serious bandwith problem," said one Middle East expert who consults with the White House and who requested anonymity to not jeopardize those ties. "How do you even process the information?" If the collapse of European communism beginning in 1989 is even a rough guide, the Middle East revolutions and their aftermath will go on for years, requiring diplomatic attention long after the headlines have faded. The Berlin Wall collapsed in 1989, but the Soviet Union lived on until the end of 1991. East and West Germany reunified in 1990, but it took more than a decade for differences between the two sides to be smoothed over. And the end of the Cold War helped spark costly conflicts in the Balkans, from 1992-1999, and in places such as Georgia on Russia's southern border. What challenges lie ahead in the Middle East can only be imagined. It will take years, at best, for Egypt to become a functioning democracy. Gadhafi's personality has so dominated Libya for 40 years that if he goes, new institutions will have to be built from the ground up. Bahrain, with its Shiite Muslim majority dominated by a Sunni minority, could become the center of a proxy war between Shiite Iran and Sunni Saudi Arabia. The
U.S. spent billions of dollars helping shepherd eastern Europe toward democracy and free-market economies, and even gave aid to a destitute Russia, once its mortal enemy. But now, the U.S. government doesn't have the deep pockets it once did, and the White House hasn't announced large
new democracy assistance programs for the Middle East. That will be "harder to sustain in an era when budgets are tight," the senior official said.
2. Aid to Egypt will be cutCongress is constantly trying to cut aid to Egypt. Lindsey Graham, (Senator), Apr. 18, 2013, CQ TRANSCRIPTIONS, Retrieved May 29, 2013, from
Lexis/Nexis There's a constant effort in the Congress here to cut aid to Egypt . And I can understand why people in America would be frustrated with the Morsi government and the level of progress, but could you just very
briefly describe to this committee and those who watching why it's important to stay in the game with Egypt, what would happen if we just severed our ties?
C.
IMPACT: CUTTING AID TO EGYPT RISKS A DISASTROUS MIDDLE EAST WAR.
1. Cutting ties to Egypt causes an Egyptian-Israeli war and rampant extremism in Egypt. John Kerry, (Secretary of State), Apr. 18, 2013, CQ TRANSCRIPTIONS, Retrieved May 29, 2013, from
Lexis/Nexis KERRY: Well, if we just severed our ties, I think our great ally, Israel, our friend, would be in jeopardy immediately. Egypt is enforcing the peace in the Sinai . Egypt is working intel mil-to-mil, military-tomilitary, intel-to-intel, with Israel. Israel will tell you that that cooperation is day-to-day and critical to them. Egypt helped to broker the Gaza peace agreement and has kept it enforced . Israel -- Egypt has helped to shut tunnels for smuggling that are going in. There are still too many tunnels, but they've begun that process. Egypt's military is an essential bulwark against extremism and -- and a pro-cooperative effort.
2. War in the Middle East will escalate and result in nuclear war. Syarif Hidayat, (Indonesian Journalist), May 11, 2013, Retrieved May 30, 2013 from
http://hshidayat.wordpress.com/2013/05/11/israeli-weapons-of-mass-destruction-threaten-worldpeace-and-stability/ Meanwhile, the existence of an arsenal of mass destruction in such an unstable region in turn has serious implications for future arms control and disarmament negotiations, and even the threat of nuclear war. Seymour Hersh warns, Should war break out in the Middle East again, or should any Arab nation fire missiles against Israel, as the Iraqis did, a nuclear escalation, once unthinkable except as a last resort, would now be a strong probability. and Ezar Weissman said The nuclear issue is gaining momentum (and the) next war will not be conventional.
UQ: Egypt has sufficient aid now

Aid to Egypt is adequate nowdespite pressures to cut it. Senator Robert Menendez, (Chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee), May 15, 2013,
CONGRESSIONAL DOCUMENTS AND PUBLICATIONS, Retrieved May 29, 2013, from Lexis/Nexis Frankly, the American Congress is having trouble in that regard. We are locked in a political battle between the internationalists on one side, and the new-isolationists on the other. Thankfully, just last month, proposals to cut the International Affairs Budget by $15 billion - a full 33 percent - were defeated, as were attempts to reduce aid to Egypt - and prohibit funds for the United Nations. These votes sent a clear message to the new
isolationists in the Senate that America will accept its international leadership role in meeting the new challenges we face, but - clearly -- the lines are drawn, especially when it comes to treaties.
Aid to Egypt is barely being protected in the present system. SOUTH ASIAN MEDIA NETWORK, Mar. 2, 2013, Retrieved May 29, 2013, from Lexis/Nexis
Egypt's military has worried that political instability might be used as an excuse by other countries to cut aid; some members of the U.S. Congress had tried to block a deal, agreed when Mubarak was in power, to give Egypt F-16 fighters. But U.S. and Egyptian officials announced this month that the U.S. had gone ahead with delivery of four F-16 fighter jets as part of their continuing co-operation
Link Magnifier
CURRENT FOREIGN AID IS SUFFICIENT, BUT SEQUESTRATION HAS ELIMINATED ANY ROOM FOR ERROR Tatiana Vorozhko, (staff writer), VOICE OF AMERICA NEWS, Apr. 3, 2013, Retrieved Apr. 25, 2013,
from Lexis/Nexis The mandatory U.S. federal budget cuts that recently went into effect -- known as "sequestration" -are affecting more than the government's domestic programs. The $85 billion across-the-board cuts are also taking their bite out of international aid and development efforts. Despite the challenges and the rhetoric, many
feel the future of international aid is still optimistic.
Links: Aid to Mexico

AID TO MEXICO WILL BE CLOSELY SCRUTINIZED CONGRESSIONAL QUARTERLY HOMELAND SECURITY, Apr. 1, 2013, Retrieved Apr. 24, 2013 from
Lexis/Nexis However, lawmakers will likely question whether to spend that money if they don't see significant commitment from the Mexican government, CRS found. The report said the issue could come up with members as soon as the onset of the fiscal 2014 appropriations season. "As foreign aid budgets tighten, congressional scrutiny of U.S. programs in Mexico may intensify ," the report said.
Links: Aid to Cuba

AID TO CUBA WILL BE SCRUTINIZED - CONGRESS IS STILL NOT READY TO STRENGTHEN RELATIONS WITH CUBA EIU VIEWSWIRE SELECT, Apr. 15, 2013, Retrieved Apr. 27, 2013 from Lexis/Nexis
With the Republican Party retaining its majority in the US House of Representatives (at least until 2014, when congressional elections are due) and Congress facing a busy legislative agenda, the prospect of an improvement in US-Cuban relations in the short term is dim. Cuba's rejection of US conditions for the removal of sanctions will hinder any softening of US policy, as will an influential (albeit weakening) US-based anti-Castro lobby.
Links: Aid to Venezuela

AID TO VENEZUELA WILL BE SCRUTINIZED - CONGRESS DOES NOT WANT TO INCREASE RELATIONS EVEN AFTER CHAVEZ Jim Lobe, (staff writer), IPS - INTER PRESS SERVICE, Mar. 7, 2013, Retrieved Apr. 27, 2013 from
Lexis/Nexis
At the same time, however, Shifter warned that the
White House itself will likely move very slowly, so as not to provoke right-wingers in Congress who greeted Chvez's long-awaited demise with undiluted enthusiasm. They called, among
other things, for the administration to retaliate for the two expulsions, a step which State Department officials said they were reviewing Wednesday. "Hugo Chvez was a tyrant who forced the people of Venezuela to live in fear," said Rep. Ed Royce, who has just succeeded the fiercely anti-Chvez and anti-Castro Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen as chair of the House Foreign Affairs Committee. "His death dents the alliance of anti-U.S. leftist leaders in South America. Good riddance to this dictator." "The
problem on the U.S. side of the bilateral relationship is going to be some members of Congress who will be very critical of any sign of rapprochement between the administration and Maduro," Shifter said. "And they're not going to want to fight with members of Congress over Venezuela. So they're going to try to explore these openings but will be quite cautious and careful about doing so."
Internal Links: Egyptian Aid Will Be Cut

Congress is eager to cut Egyptian aidits on the chopping block. Emily Cadei, 6/5/2013 (staff writer, Egypt Aid Faces Growing Opposition on Capitol Hill,
http://www.rollcall.com/news/egypt_aid_faces_growing_opposition_on_capitol_hill-2253391.html, Accessed 6/26/2013, rwg)
An Egyptian courts conviction of more than 40 civil society workers Tuesday prompted sharp criticism from Capitol Hill, even from lawmakers who have urged patience with Cairo in the past. With
Congress in the midst of drafting its fiscal 2014 spending bills, the latest news from the troubled country will make it that much tougher for the Obama administration to maintain funding levels for Egyptian aid this year, as requested in its budget.The case of the civil
society workers has been a major thorn in the side of U.S.-Egypt relations since Egyptian authorities raided the offices of a handful of American and other foreign organizations and arrested employees in late December 2011. Sixteen Americans were among those jailed, creating a major diplomatic crisis that only dissipated when the Americans were allowed to leave the country in March 2012. They were among the workers convicted, in absentia, on Tuesday. Sen. Patrick J. Leahy, D-Vt., who
chairs the Appropriations subcommittee that doles out foreign aid dollars, warned in a release that if Egypt continues on this repressive path, it will be increasingly difficult for the United States to support President Morsis government.
US aid to Egypt is at stake now. Emily Cadei, 6/5/2013 (staff writer, Egypt Aid Faces Growing Opposition on Capitol Hill,
http://www.rollcall.com/news/egypt_aid_faces_growing_opposition_on_capitol_hill-2253391.html, Accessed 6/26/2013, rwg) Shortly after news of the courts decision broke Tuesday, a bipartisan pair of congressmen began circulating a letter to colleagues addressed to Morsi, and obtained by CQ Roll Call, lambasting the convictions and issuing a not-so-veiled warning that the United States considerable aid program to Egypt is at stake.
Congress is increasingly grumbling about aid to Egypt. Emily Cadei, 6/5/2013 (staff writer, Egypt Aid Faces Growing Opposition on Capitol Hill,
http://www.rollcall.com/news/egypt_aid_faces_growing_opposition_on_capitol_hill-2253391.html, Accessed 6/26/2013, rwg) Several leading Republican senators, meanwhile, quickly called for a comprehensive review by Congress of Egypts foreign aid package . The grumbling from Congress has been building in recent months, as Washington has watched Egyptian President Mohammed Morsi, a member of the Muslim Brotherhoods Islamist party, crack
down on critics and political opponents and stall economic changes necessary for a loan from the International Monetary Fund. That, in turn, has held up the brunt of the $1 billion in economic assistance and loan forgiveness that President Barack Obama promised Egyptian leaders in 2011.
Aid to Egypt is the most unpopular item in the budget. Charles Krauthammer, (American Pulitzer Prize-winning syndicated columnist), Mar. 19, 2013, THE
PERU TRIBUNE (INDIANA), Retrieved May 29, 2013, from Lexis/Nexis WASHINGTON Sequestration is not the best time to be doling out foreign aid, surely the most unpopular item in the federal budget. Especially when the recipient is President Mohamed Morsi of Egypt. Morsi is intent on getting the release of Omar Abdel-Rahman (the Blind Sheik), serving a life sentence for masterminding the 1993 World Trade Center attack that killed six and wounded more than a thousand. Morsi's Muslim Brotherhood is openly antiChristian, anti-Semitic and otherwise prolifically intolerant. Just three years ago, Morsi called on Egyptians to nurse
their children and grandchildren on hatred for Jews, whom he has called "the descendants of apes and pigs." Not exactly Albert Schweitzer. Or even Anwar Sadat. Which left a bad taste when Secretary of State John Kerry, traveling to Cairo, handed Morsi a cool $250 million. (A tenth of which would cover about 25 years of White House tours, no longer affordable under sequestration. Says the administration.)
Egyptian aid will be targeted for cuts. Matthew Clark, (ACLJ), Jan. 5, 2013, THE MORAL LIBERAL, Retrieved May 29, 2013, from Lexis/Nexis
We should not be giving this radical Muslim Brotherhood-led government and its president who calls for armed resistance against our ally Israel our best weapons. Congress has taken notice, and a bill has been introduced to cut off all aid for Egypt. Join over 170,000 Americans in demanding that the Obama Administration stop arming and funding the
radical Muslim Brotherhood government of Egypt. Sign the petition today.[6]
Support for cutting aid to Egypt is increasing now. Emily Cadei, 6/5/2013 (staff writer, Egypt Aid Faces Growing Opposition on Capitol Hill,
http://www.rollcall.com/news/egypt_aid_faces_growing_opposition_on_capitol_hill-2253391.html, Accessed 6/26/2013, rwg) Secretary of State John Kerry announced the transfer of nearly $200 million in cash assistance during a visit to Cairo in March, but otherwise the delivery of aid has been constrained, with House Republicans particularly resistant to delivering more money. That stance appears to now be gaining broader favor.
Egyptian aid is unpopular now. Charles Krauthammer, 3/8/2013 (staff writer, Aid for Egypt, but no money for White House
tours, http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2013/03/08/charles-krauthammer-aid-for-egyptbut-no-money-for-white-house-tours/, Accessed 6/26/2013, rwg) Sequestration is not the best time to be doling out foreign aid, surely the most unpopular item in the federal budget. Especially when the recipient is President Mohamed Morsi of Egypt. Morsi is intent on getting the
release of Omar Abdel-Rahman (the Blind Sheik), serving a life sentence for masterminding the 1993 World Trade Center attack that killed six and wounded more than a thousand. Morsis Muslim Brotherhood is openly anti-Christian, anti-Semitic and otherwise prolifically intolerant. Just three years ago, Morsi called on Egyptians to nurse their children and grandchildren on hatred for Jews, whom he has called the descendants of apes and pigs.
Aid to Egypt in trouble now. John Lyman, 2/15/2011 (staff writer, Foreign Aid on the Budget Chopping Block,
http://www.internationalpolicydigest.org/2011/02/15/foreign-aid-on-the-budget-choppingblock/, Accessed 6/26/2013, rwg) Capitol Hills most ardent budget hawk, and critic of contemporary U.S. foreign policy, Rep. Ron Paul (R-TX), made the claim during his speech at CPAC in Washington We need to do a lot less, a lot sooner, not only in Egypt but around the world. Policymakers in Washington will have to deal with the countrys massive budget deficit and make difficult choices . Foreign aid along and other programs are being considered before non-discretionary spending.
Internal Links: Budgets Trade-off

History proves that budget pressures require trade-offs within foreign aid. James Kunder, 7/7/2011 (Senior Resident Fellow at the German Marshall Fund of the United States
(GMF) and a Principal of the Modernizing Foreign Assistance Network (MFAN)), July 7, 2011, Retrieved May 30, 2013 from http://dailycaller.com/2011/07/07/foreign-aid-keeps-america-safe/#ixzz1S05YXECT Weve been here before. In the 1990s, when no one foresaw the global threat posed by extremists operating out of failed and fragile states, Congress cut USAID to the bone, forcing the agency to purge its cadre of technical specialists. This
short-sighted course became evident in the wake of the 2003 Iraq intervention. Having downsized scores of democracy experts, agronomists, engineers and public health professionals from USAID, civilians with little international experience were sent to Baghdad to advise the postSaddam Iraqi government, with disastrous results. Both
the Bush and Obama administrations tried to correct course by launching initiatives to rebuild technical capacity at the State Department and USAID. Now, budget pressures might force this rebuilding effort to grind to a halt.
Foreign aid is perennially on the chopping block. Hannah Allam, 2/20/2013 (writer for McClatchy Newspapers), MCCLATCHY WASHINGTON BUREAU,
Feb. 20, 2013, Retrieved May 29, 2013, from Lexis/Nexis Kerry was particularly protective of foreign aid, which is often among the first items on the chopping block in tough times. The State Department projects roughly $1.7 billion in cuts to foreign aid under the mandatory budget cuts. Kerry lauded the fact that 11 of the top 15 U.S. trade partners were former recipients of U.S. assistance and said the money must continue to flow, as an investment, in order to grow a new crop of beneficiaries-turned-economic allies.
Internal Links: Foreign Aid Will Be Traded Off With

Foreign aid will be traded off with: Sam Loewenberg, 2013 (Global Health Correspondent), GLOBALPOST: BEATS (NORTH AMERICA),
Apr. 24, 2013, Retrieved Apr. 25, 2013, from Lexis/Nexis "Given our debt crisis, the bar for justifying foreign aid is higher than ever. Wasteful spending on ineffective and unsustainable programs will not be tolerated," said House Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman Ed Royce (R-Calif.), in an opening salvo on the committee's website in anticipation of Thursday's testimony by Shah.
Foreign aid is a political punching bag. Tatiana Vorozhko, 2013 (staff writer), VOICE OF AMERICA NEWS, Apr. 3, 2013, Retrieved Apr. 25,
2013, from Lexis/Nexis And while foreign aid is a popular punching bag in political debates, it actually accounts for no more than 1 percent of the entire US budget.
Foreign aid will be targeted for cuts by Republican budget cutters. Seema Mehta and Kathleen Hennessey, 2012 (staff writers), LOS ANGELES TIMES, Sept. 26, 2012,
Retrieved Apr. 26, 2013, from Lexis/Nexis
Clinton, who created the initiative in 2005 to help address global problems, introduced both candidates. But he is campaigning forcefully for Obama, and his endorsement at the Democratic National Convention in Charlotte, N.C., was credited with helping the president gain in the polls. "If there's one thing we've learned this election season, it's that a few words from Bill Clinton can do a man a lot of good," Romney said. "All I got to do now is wait a couple days for that bounce to happen." Clinton's convention speech was also noted for its detailed analysis and expansive length. When he introduced Obama, he joked that he wanted to make one comment. "I
want to finish that speech I started in Charlotte," Clinton said. Foreign aid -- often a target of Republican budget-cutters -- tends to be unpopular with voters who believe the U.S. has been wasting billions without receiving sufficient appreciation in countries such as Pakistan, Afghanistan and Iraq.
Americans oppose foreign aid. Stacy Washington, 2012 (FreedomWorks), STATES NEWS SERVICE, Oct. 1, 2012, Retrieved Apr. 26,
2013, from Lexis/Nexis Where do Americans stand? When polled, American's overwhelmingly oppose foreign aid, instead polling 59% in favor of cutting aid. Foreign aid is intended to buy American influence and shape the behavior of receiving countries.
Foreign aid is the least popular program.

1114. THE HUFFINGTON POST, Mar. 18, 2013, Retrieved Apr. 25, 2013, from Lexis/Nexis So, spurred by Bernstein's musing, the
HuffPost/YouGov poll asked Americans to explain in their own words what they mean by the phrase "wasteful government spending." The survey accepted up to two responses per person. Respondents offered a broad mix of
answers, from budget line-item programs they want to cut (like foreign aid or military spending), to infamous examples of government spending that appear foolish (like robotic squirrels and $100 hammers), to more general references to corruption, fraud and earmarks. According to 26 percent of respondents, "wasteful government spending" means salaries and perks for government employees, especially Congress members and the president. The
single most mentioned program was foreign aid, which was listed by 10 percent of respondents but makes up only about 1 percent of the federal budget.
Public will support cuts in foreign aid.

Steven Kull, 2011 (Dir. Prog. International Policy Attitudes), 2011, Retrieved Apr. 27, 2013 from http://www.brookings.edu/~/media/Research/Files/Reports/2011/9/global%20development/2011_blum_foreign_aid_kull.PDF At the same time, Americans do have
reservations and misperceptions about various aspects of the U.S. aid program and do harbor some doubts about the logic of giving aid. Thus Americans can be responsive to certain arguments critical of aid when they are put forward in a systematic and determined fashion. Efforts to attack aid spending will likely focus on these vulnerabilities. The effectiveness of these attacks will, to a substantial
extent, be a function of how much policymakers perceive the public as responding to them. Policy discourse, especially in Congress, develops in the context of arguments made to the public. Poll results can play a signi cant role in this process, but narratives can emerge based purely on hunches or what the media portrays. When congressional leaders make arguments and believe they are striking a chord with the public, this is reinforcing and emboldening. When their opponents perceive this, they may be more likely to accommodate. Members of Congress only occasionally take their arguments to the larger public, but there is constant jockeying to create a sense of who would prevail if these arguments were to be taken to the public. The outcome of this interchange ultimately inuences legislative behavior.
Impacts: Cutting Aid To Egypt = Instability

Cutting aid to Egypt would undermine the security of the entire region. John Kerry, 4/18/2013 (Secretary of State), Apr. 18, 2013, CQ TRANSCRIPTIONS, Retrieved May
29, 2013, f rom Lexis/Nexis
I think everybody needs to step back and say, look at what happened in Egypt. You had a bunch of young people, a generational revolution, not an Islamic revolution, not a religious-based or ideological revolution, a generational revolution that was based on the aspirations of, you know, millions of young kids who want a future that they see the rest of the world having, because they're all connected on the Internet and they see what's going on in the world. That was the cellphone, you know, text message revolution. And what happened is, obviously, they had an election, we should be grateful for and proud of, and -- and the people who were the most organized, as is often the way it is in elections, won. Now, we got questions about where they're going. Yes, we do. I'm not going to sit here and tell you that I'm sanguine about it. They've got to make major economic decisions. They've got to do a better job of reaching... GRAHAM: The IMF is involved in... KERRY: The IMF, all of that. But
the military kept the peace. The military actually kept a civil war from occurring. We have young officers in our military who work with theirs who are able to get on the phone and help to quell the violence and give them a sense of direction. And that military actually created the framework for the election and then turned over power to the elected officials of the people of Egypt. They supported democracy. To cut aid to them and to cut aid to Egypt now would be an insult to everything that we have tried to work for and that they have, quote, "embraced" and, frankly, a dangerous move with respect to the security of the region. Last -- last issue, a quarter
of the Arab world is in Egypt. Egypt has historically been the center of, really, the grounding of the Arab community, if you will. And in terms of its civil society, there's a strong civil society there. It needs to organize itself more effectively. The opposition needs to organize itself more effectively. But there's the capacity there for a vibrant political debate going forward. And we should not turn our back on that because somebody won the election who may put some of those choices at question today.
US military aid to Egypt is critical to peace in the region and supports the US economy. Aki Peritz, 4/2/2013 (The senior policy adviser for national security at Third Way), Apr. 2,
2013, Retrieved May 30, 2013 from http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/worldreport/2013/04/02/gutting-aid-to-egypt-would-be-a-mistake-for-the-us The U.S. also expanded military aid in part to maintain the Israel-Egypt peace. This money is mostly funneled back to U.S. defense businesses, as Egypt purchases M1A1 Abrams tanks, F-16 jets, Apache helicopters, and anti-aircraft missile batteries, among other equipment. It's a win-win for everyone: We help maintain (an admittedly cold) peace in a volatile region, and U.S. businesses make money. What's not to like?
Economic assistance to Egypt is key to stability in Egypt. Lindsey Graham, 4/18/2013 (Senator), Apr. 18, 2013, CQ TRANSCRIPTIONS, Retrieved May 29,
2013, from Lexis/Nexis aid we give to the Egyptian military, it's no small part of their budget. So I hope we understand that the Egyptian military is the glue that holds that place together right now. And our economic aid, the economy of Egypt's in decline, and we should do what we can to keep it from becoming chaotic, so I support what you're doing.
GRAHAM: Well, as to our aid -- the
Cutting aid to Egypt risks a radical dictatorship in Egypt. Charles Krauthammer, 3/19/2013 (American Pulitzer Prize-winning syndicated columnist),
Mar. 19, 2013, THE PERU TRIBUNE (INDIANA), Retrieved May 29, 2013, from Lexis/Nexis should not cut off aid to Egypt. It's not that we must blindly support unfriendly regimes. It is perfectly reasonable to cut off aid to governments that are intrinsically hostile and beyond our influence. Subsidizing enemies is merely stupid. But Egypt is not an enemy, certainly not yet. It may no longer be our strongest Arab ally, but it is still in play. The Brotherhood aims to establish an Islamist dictatorship . Yet it remains a considerable distance from
Nonetheless, we
having done so. Precisely why we should remain engaged. And engagement means using our economic leverage.
Egypts fate is in the balanceaid to Egypt is key to stability and reform. Charles Krauthammer, 3/19/2013 (American Pulitzer Prize-winning syndicated columnist),
Mar. 19, 2013, THE PERU TRIBUNE (INDIANA), Retrieved May 29, 2013, from Lexis/Nexis We give foreign aid for two reasons: (a) to support allies who share our values and our interests, and (b) to extract from less-than-friendly regimes concessions that either bring their policies more in line with ours or strengthen competing actors more favorably inclined toward American objectives. That's the point of foreign aid. It's particularly important in countries like Egypt whose fate is in the balance. But it will only work if we remain cleareyed about why we give all that money in the first place.
US support of Egypt is key to it being an anchor of stability and progress. The Center for American Progress, 3/2/2013 (think tank), Mar. 2, 2013, US OFFICIAL
NEWS, Retrieved May 29, 2013, from Lexis/Nexis U.S. support for the Egyptian peoples aspirations for a democratic Egyptone that protects the rights of all of its citizens and builds a diversified economy with a strong private sectorcan ensure that Egypt is an anchor for stability and progress in the Middle East for decades to come. By contrast, a government in Egypt that lacks popular legitimacy and does not support pluralism and universal valuesincluding respect for the basic rights of all Egyptians regardless of gender and faith and basic freedoms such as those of speech and assemblywill lead to sustained internal turmoil . This would ultimately hamper Egypts capacity to serve as a viable regional security partner.
The transition in Egypt has already taken several unexpected turns over the past two years, and uncertainty will likely remain for years to come. As a result, U.S. policymakers should take a long view of the events currently playing out in Egypt and make more active attempts to bend the long arc of revolution toward a
prosperous, pluralistic, and democratic Egyptone that can serve as an anchor of stability in the Middle East.
US commitment to improving Egypts economy is key to Egypts success. The Center for American Progress, 3/2/2013 (think tank), Mar. 2, 2013, US OFFICIAL
NEWS, Retrieved May 29, 2013, from Lexis/Nexis The United States should demonstrate a commitment to improving the Egyptian economy; it will be critical to restoring private-sector confidence. The United States can also expand opportunities for Egyptian businesses to
participate in existing Egyptian Qualified Industrial Zonesspecial free-trade manufacturing zones that can access U.S. markets without tariff or quota restrictions under certain conditions. The U.S. government can work with private investors in the regionsuch as Turkey and certain countries in the Gulfas well as U.S. businesses to support long-term investment in Egypt. Private-sector
investment will be particularly important in creating jobs in labor-intensive economic sectors to address the unemployment crisis.
Cutting off aid would backfire in this crucial transition time. The Center for American Progress, 3/2/2013 (think tank), Mar. 2, 2013, US OFFICIAL
NEWS, Retrieved May 29, 2013, from Lexis/Nexis
Despite calls from some in Congress to suspend annual U.S. military aid to Egypt over the current problems with the political transition, now
is not the time to cut off aid to Egypt. The overall aid package should be mutually negotiated with Egypt over timenot suddenly cut off in a moment of crisis. Cutting off aid is a dramatic gesture only to be used in the most extreme circumstances.
Egypt remains fragileUS engagement is crucial to stability in Egypt and throughout the Middle East. The Center for American Progress, 2/1/2013 (think tank), Feb. 1, 2013, US OFFICIAL
NEWS, Retrieved May 29, 2013, from Lexis/Nexis Violent clashes in Egypt during the past week underscored how fragile the overall situation remains in the Middle Easts largest country. The deterioration in Egypt couldnt come at a worse time of upheaval across the Middle East, as Syrias civil war rages, threats from Al Qaeda-affiliated groups stretch from the Persian Gulf region to North Africa, and Iran moves to undermine regional stability. The United States needs to remain engaged in efforts to influence the political and economic transition in Egypt, as well as bolster security there. Both actions will require continued support for a full range of U.S. policy toolssuch as the approximately $1.5 billion per year in security and economic assistanceand a more robust diplomatic engagement with the multiple centers of power that have
emerged in Egypt during the past two years. U.S. assistance and support for Egypt must be reformed in the long run to reflect new realities. As incoming Secretary of State John Kerry recently stressed, however, now is not the time to rashly cut off support to Clearly, Egypts people and leaders will determine its trajectory, but the United States can play a positive role in shaping outcomes.
Egypt.
Egypt is in a crucial transition periodUS engagement is critical to its future. The Center for American Progress, 2/1/2013 (think tank), Feb. 1, 2013, US OFFICIAL
NEWS, Retrieved May 29, 2013, from Lexis/Nexis
Egypt remains in the early stages of what will likely be a protracted period of change. With
so much uncertainty and change in the broader region, the United States must continue to invest in building a stronger foundation for an ongoing, mutually beneficial partnership with Egypt.
If the US cuts off assistance, Egypt will radicalize. INVESTIGATIVE PROJECT ON TERRORISM, 1/10/2013 Jan. 10, 2013, Retrieved May 29,
2013, from Lexis/Nexis
Relations between Iran and Egypt have steadily improved since Morsi, a longtime Muslim Brotherhood figure, was inaugurated in July. Morsi also met with Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad during his late August visit to Tehran for the Non-Aligned Movement summit. Syria will be high on the agenda during Salehi's visit, according to Iran's Fars News Agency[10]. Iran and Egypt have competing interests in Syria, with the Iranians backing the Assad regime and the Egyptians supporting their Muslim Brotherhood brethren in their rebellion. The
meetings between the Brotherhood and Iran send the message that Egypt will move closer to Iran if the United States and other Western nations cut off aid, an unnamed Egyptian official told the Times.
Egypt is at a crisis pointresisting pressure to cut aid is vital to avoid all-out catastrophe. Aki Peritz, 4/2/2013 (The senior policy adviser for national security at Third Way), Apr. 2,
2013, Retrieved May 30, 2013 from http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/worldreport/2013/04/02/gutting-aid-to-egypt-would-be-a-mistake-for-the-us Egypt's tenuous steps toward democratic governance are stumbling badly. The country is lurching toward financial ruin, brutal street protests are erupting between political factions, the president indulges in anti-Semitism, and the
Muslim Brotherhood continually cracks down on opposition forces and the media using tactics similar to those of the Mubarak government. Coptic Christians remain targets for discrimination and physical attack, and the number of women being publicly assaulted is exploding. More ominously, bread rations will be slashed this summer, portending new riots. And depressingly, secular political forces do not seem to be coherently organizing to challenge the Brotherhood at the ballot box, as liberal opposition leader Mohammed el-Baradei has called for a
Now, there is a steady drumbeat by certain members of Congress to reduce or withhold altogether $1.5 billion in aid to Egypt until Cairo gets its act together or until the Muslim Brotherhood relinquishes power. This would be a mistake for America. Why? Because what some in the House and Senate and others forget is that we don't really have a credible alternative for governance of the world's largest Arab country.
boycott of upcoming elections.
US support for Egypts military is crucial to stability. Aki Peritz, 4/2/2013 (The senior policy adviser for national security at Third Way), Apr. 2,
2013, Retrieved May 30, 2013 from http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/worldreport/2013/04/02/gutting-aid-to-egypt-would-be-a-mistake-for-the-us First, we provide Egypt almost exclusively with military aid about $1.3 billion annually (about $200 million goes to improving economic conditions in the country). While the military's reputation has suffered lately, it nonetheless remains one of the few secular institutions in a fragmented political landscape. While top
military officers are hardly "d" democrats, they did return to their barracks after the revolution exactly the action that America wanted.
Egypt's military needs the aid to keep its troops paid on time. Cutting this funding won't further stabilize the situation.
US military aid is crucial to stabilize the transition in Egypt. Aki Peritz, 4/2/2013 (The senior policy adviser for national security at Third Way), Apr. 2,
2013, Retrieved May 30, 2013 from http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/worldreport/2013/04/02/gutting-aid-to-egypt-would-be-a-mistake-for-the-us America also spends about $1 million annually on International Military Education and Training (IMET) programs, which bring Egyptian and other foreign officers to the U.S. for training. This infinitesimally small amount of yearly aid does wonders for our foreign policy, as it means America has access to top military men around the world. As CENTCOM Commander Gen. James Mattis recently informed Congress, "The value of American military-tomilitary relationships is evident when you compare the transition in Egypt with events in Libya and the ongoing brutality in Syria."
Cutting off aid to Egypt results in a failed Egyptian state. Aki Peritz, 4/2/2013 (The senior policy adviser for national security at Third Way), Apr. 2,
2013, Retrieved May 30, 2013 from http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/worldreport/2013/04/02/gutting-aid-to-egypt-would-be-a-mistake-for-the-us Few say Morsi and the Muslim Brotherhood are perfect or even particularly desirable partners. But they were more or less democratically elected, and wishful thinking will not transform them into a liberal government, nor will it erase Egypt's systemic problems. Punishing Morsi may feel satisfying, but it could weaken the state to the point of failure. Religious conservatives will not vanish from the Egyptian political landscape. In the absence of real alternatives to this government, gutting Cairo's foreign aid would be worse for the region, our allies, and our interests.
US aid is critical to stability in Egypt. Alexander Mette, 2013 (writes about domestic politics and democracy issues in the Middle
East and North Africa), 2013, Retrieved May 30, 2013, from http://www.policymic.com/articles/24863/egyptian-revolution-is-egypt-now-headed-for-civilwar
Meanwhile, Egypt has received the first of 20 F-16s scheduled to be delivered this year by the U.S. as part of the annual $1.2 billion in military aid. The
predicament faced by President Morsi, who finds himself unable to raise the price of bread that millions depend on, the looming political instability and economic stagnation represents a discrepancy of interests and actions on behalf of the U.S. If we want to support peace and stability in Egypt, that $1.2 billion would buy a lot of bread.
US cooperation with Egypt is critical to US power projection. Aki Peritz, 4/2/2013 (The senior policy adviser for national security at Third Way), Apr. 2,
2013, Retrieved May 30, 2013 from http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/worldreport/2013/04/02/gutting-aid-to-egypt-would-be-a-mistake-for-the-us And America has real security requirements with Egypt beyond keeping the peace with Israel. For example, U.S. Navy ships often transit through the Suez Canal; if it were closed, our vessels would have to sail around Africa to arrive at the Persian Gulf, crimping our capabilities in the event of, say, a conflict with Iran. Because of our aid, the U.S. military can also use Egyptian airspace.
Impacts: Aid to Egypt Key to Egypts Economy

US aid to Egypt bolsters its economy. ARAB FINANCE, Mar. 13, 2013, Retrieved May 29, 2013, from Lexis/Nexis
"Since it opened last year, the Tamayouz Center has helped almost 3,700 Alexandria businesses cut through bureaucratic red tape to open new small and medium size firms in record time," said Ambassador Patterson. "These smaller firms are the engine of economic growth-they create jobs that Egypt needs and new economic opportunities for the people of Alexandria. We are pleased that USAID supported the creation of this Center, and we are working with USAID, the Government of Egypt, and the Federation of Egyptian Chambers of Commerce to establish similar centers in key cities across Egypt." Ambassador Patterson and Federation of Chambers of Commerce President Ahmed Wakil toured the Tamayouz Center and met with businesses that had recently established themselves through Tamayouz, where 65% of clients reported they opened a new venture in less than an hour. "The
United States is committed to helping the people of Egypt reenergize their economy by creating jobs," said the Ambassador. "Secretary of State John Kerry during his visit to Egypt pledged $190 million to support Egypt's economy, and we delivered that aid this week . We also
are moving forward with $60 million of assistance for the Egyptian-American Enterprise Fund that is designed, like the Tamayouz Center, to
This work will also improve Egypt's rating in ease of doing business reports, which should attract more foreign direct investment." The
help small and medium sized enterprises grow and create jobs for the Egyptian people. Tamayouz model makes it easier for Egyptians to start and operate businesses by bringing registration, licensing, and other required government processes together under one roof. It allows business owners to obtain both the ministerial approvals for starting a business and the municipal approvals for operating a business.
Economic assistance is our primary mode of engagement with Egypt. The Center for American Progress, 2013 (think tank), Mar. 2, 2013, US OFFICIAL NEWS, Retrieved
May 29, 2013, from Lexis/Nexis The offer of economic assistance has become a principal means of engagement with Egypt. Current U.S.
policy is centered on the notion that the prospect of support for economic stabilization can build U.S. credibility with a range of Egyptians, which creates leverage to hold discussions with Egypts leaders on the next stages of political reform. The
rationale is that economic supportcombined with continued bilateral security cooperationcan help Egypt move forward on a stable path of democratic and economic reform and strengthen U.S.-Egyptian bilateral ties.
US aid to Egypt has shown success. The Center for American Progress, 2013 (think tank), Mar. 2, 2013, US OFFICIAL NEWS,
Retrieved May 29, 2013, from Lexis/Nexis Two years into the transition, however, it remains uncertain how much leverage the United States has managed to build for itself inside Egypt. The current policy approach, with its focus on the links between security and economics, has served some U.S. national security interests in the short term; the approach was, for example, instrumental in managing the dangerous security situation in the Gaza Strip in November 2012, when the barrage of rocket attacks from Palestinian terrorists into Israel nearly erupted into a wider conflict. Egypt played a pivotal role in helping de-escalate that conflict.
Assistance to Egypt is crucial to economic development. Senator Robert Menendez, 2013 (Chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee), May 15,
2013, CONGRESSIONAL DOCUMENTS AND PUBLICATIONS, Retrieved May 29, 2013, from Lexis/Nexis Third, we need to consider targeted economic assistance programs. Unemployment among youth is one of our biggest challenges and potential threats. The IFI community must continue to work with countries like Egypt to support economic development, harness available talent, and help translate it into long-term growth.
Impact Module: Democracy Promotion

A) Cuts will come for foreign aid: John Lyman, 2/15/2011 (staff writer, Foreign Aid on the Budget Chopping Block,
http://www.internationalpolicydigest.org/2011/02/15/foreign-aid-on-the-budget-choppingblock/, Accessed 6/26/2013, rwg) In the past month there have been revolutions in Tunisia and Egypt, unrest in Yemen, Bahrain and Iran and historic elections have been held in Sudan. Despite these seismic positive global shifts policymakers on Capitol Hill are calling into question the necessity of foreign aid. Contrary to conservative claims and popular perception foreign aid constitutes less than 1% of the federal budget. Yet policymakers argue that foreign aid and discretionary spending lie at the heart of the current and long-term fiscal health of the United States. It is because of this misperception that policymakers are able to argue for the termination of foreign assistance. Counter arguments are less persuasive
because when policymakers argue that if something is not done to fix the U.S. economy our streets will fill with Greek type protests.
B) Cuts to foreign aid threaten democracy promotion. John Lyman, 2/15/2011 (staff writer, Foreign Aid on the Budget Chopping Block,
http://www.internationalpolicydigest.org/2011/02/15/foreign-aid-on-the-budget-choppingblock/, Accessed 6/26/2013, rwg) Out of this speech the National Endowment of Democracy was created. Efforts like the NED are needed throughout the world to both promote democracy which creates stability in global regions and helps Americas strategic interests. Americas push for democracy promotion would be hampered if the foreign aid budget were viewed as the only way to get the American fiscal house in order.
C) Democracy promotion key to preventing inevitable extinction Diamond, 1995 senior research fellow at Hoover Institution, 95
(Larry, Promoting Democracy in the 1990s: Actors and Instruments, Issues and Imperatives, A Report to the Carnegie Commission on Preventing Deadly Conflict, December 1995, p. 6)
This hardly exhausts the lists of threats to our security and well-being in the coming years and decades. In the former Yugoslavia nationalist aggression tears at the stability of Europe and could easily spread. The flow of illegal drugs intensifies through increasingly powerful international crime syndicates that have made common cause with authoritarian regimes and have utterly corrupted the institutions of tenuous, democratic ones. Nuclear,
chemical, and biological weapons continue to proliferate. The very source of life on Earth, the global ecosystem, appears increasingly endangered. Most of these new and unconventional threats to security are associated with or aggravated by the weakness or absence of democracy, with its provisions for legality, accountability, popular sovereignty, and openness.
Impacts: Now Key Time for Egypt

Egypt is at a crucial juncture in its reforms. John Kerry, 2013 (Secretary of State), Apr. 18, 2013, CQ TRANSCRIPTIONS, Retrieved May 29, 2013,
from Lexis/Nexis
There -- and perhaps in Egypt -- Egypt
is more of a question mark right now. I mean, I'll just tell you, there are a lot of ifs about Egypt at this moment. And we've been working very, very hard with the Egyptian government to try to bring them to a point where they're prepared to embrace important reforms that are key to the IMF money, to be more inclusive with the opposition, to build out civil society, to live up to their promises regarding democracy, and it's a question mark whether they're going to make the right choices.
The current crisis in Egypt risks civil war. Zvi Mazellast, 2013 (a fellow of The Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs and former ambassador to
Romania, Egypt and Sweden), Apr. 2, 2013, Retrieved May 30, 2013 from http://www.jpost.com/Middle-East/Foundering-in-quicksand-Is-there-hope-for-Egypt-308374 For the Muslim Brotherhood, the long awaited dream come true is turning into a nightmare. Having
survived 80 years of persecution to achieve power democratically, they suddenly find themselves the focus of widespread popular hatred.
Never have Egyptians been in such dire economic traits. Egyptian President Mohamed Morsi, however, is not about to give up and make way for new presidential elections. The Brotherhood will spare no effort to stay in power. Such is the depth of the economic, social and political crisis that the threat of civil war appears all too real.
This is a critical time for EgyptUS aid is key to its stability. The Center for American Progress, 2013 (think tank), Mar. 2, 2013, US OFFICIAL NEWS,
Retrieved May 29, 2013, from Lexis/Nexis 2013 will be another pivotal year in Egypts transition, and the United States has a strong interest in seeing stability, prosperity, and pluralism in Egypt. Egypt also needs support from the United States to advance its strategic
and economic interests in the long run. In the past two years, the Obama administration has taken a pragmatic approach to managing the transition in Egypt. But
the looming political legitimacy crisis and the growing internal divisions require that the United States more clearly present its interests and values in support of true democratic and inclusive political reform in Egypt. The Obama administration needs to prepare a range of options if Egypts current trends toward
shutting down dissent and closing off open debate continue. This should include examining ways to introduce more flexibility in bilateral assistance so that more emphasis is placed on supporting inclusive democratic governance. It should also include considering options for completely renegotiating the basic terms of the bilateral relationship if the recent worrisome trends in Egypts political transition continue.
The revolution in Egypt is in crisis. Patrick Leahy, 2013 (Senator), Apr. 18, 2013, CQ TRANSCRIPTIONS, Retrieved May 29, 2013, from
Lexis/Nexis
We focus on the world today, on North Korea, nuclear power, young untested dictator, recklessly threatening his neighbors. In
the Middle East, we see Syria humanitarian catastrophe on a scale few would have imagined. The revolution in Egypt, which held such promise, now is at a troubling turn. The economy's on life sciences.
Egypt is on the brink of collapse. SOUTH ASIAN MEDIA NETWORK, Mar. 2, 2013, Retrieved May 29, 2013, from Lexis/Nexis
Sisi treated each of the politicians with friendliness and respect, said security sources, but made his point clear: chaos
in the Suez cities endangered the Canal and threatened the stability of the state. He told the political leaders they must compromise
over their differences. "The country was facing a political stalemate that had to be ended to prevent a downward spiral of events. Now is not
To ram the point home, Sisi went public with his message the next day, warning that political unrest was pushing the state to the brink of collapse.
the time to dissolve a newly elected state institution (the presidency)," said the security source with links to the military.
Egypt is in crisisthere is struggle for control now. The Center for American Progress, 2013 (think tank), Mar. 2, 2013, US OFFICIAL NEWS,
Retrieved May 29, 2013, from Lexis/Nexis As Egypt moves toward another round of parliamentary elections beginning in April, the country remains in a series of interlinked security, political, economic, and social crises. These crises are the result of an inconclusive struggle for power among competing political forces inside the country , as well
as a daunting set of policy challenges that Egypt has facedbut not effectively addressedfor decades. Over the past year, one groupthe Muslim Brotherhood, its affiliated Freedom and Justice Partyworked to dominate the political transition, moving forward with a new Egyptian Constitution in late 2012 in a manner that undermined the legitimacy and credibility of the countrys political transition and the resulting political order. A political legitimacy crisis looms in Egypt, driven by two main factors. First is the messy political transition, which suffers from a lack of inclusivity on the part of the Islamist parties that won a majority in the 2012 parliamentary and presidential elections. Since 2011 Egypt has seen four distinct phases in its political transition: The Tahrir Revolution: Popular protests that ended with President Hosni Mubaraks resignation Military rule: Political transition managed by the Supreme Council of the Armed Forces Contested and unclear transition: Delicate and often contentious power sharing between the Supreme Council of the Armed Forces and the Islamistdominated civilian government Reassertion of presidential dominance: Expansion of executive authority under President Mohamed Morsi and increasing conflict between the Muslim Brotherhood and the other key centers of political power The second factor contributing to the looming political legitimacy crisis is a disorganized political opposition and the lack of a coherent viable political alternative to the Islamists.
The oppositions lack of clear strategy to advance their own agendaexemplified by their recent call to boycott the next round of parliamentary electionsis likely to contribute to further undermining the trust in and support for Egypts political institutions.
Tens of millions of Egyptians are in economic crisis. The Center for American Progress, 2013 (think tank), Mar. 2, 2013, US OFFICIAL NEWS, Retrieved
May 29, 2013, from Lexis/Nexis This political legitimacy crisis has exacerbated the problems of governance by causing a stalemate on important national policy questions that the country facesparticularly questions about the economy and key legal reforms. The deadlock has worsened the daunting economic problems facing tens of millions of poor Egyptians, such as a growing national deficit and a 13 percent unemployment rate.
Restrictions on freedoms such as speech, expression, and assembly remain in place, and many Egyptians fear that the coming year will bring further restrictions on basic rights.
There is currently a security crisis within Egypt. The Center for American Progress, 2013 (think tank), Mar. 2, 2013, US OFFICIAL NEWS,
Retrieved May 29, 2013, from Lexis/Nexis All of this comes at a time when new security problems have emerged inside of Egypt, including ongoing threats within the Sinai Peninsula from terrorist organizations and growing problems of law and order and basic security. A recent example of this dynamic was seen in the deadly clashes earlier this year at demonstrations
commemorating the second anniversary of the early 2011 revolt against former Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak and protests over death sentences handed down to soccer fans involved in deadly riots at a match in Port Said last year.
A perfect storm of crises exists in Egypt now. The Center for American Progress, 2013 (think tank), Feb. 1, 2013, US OFFICIAL NEWS, Retrieved
May 29, 2013, from Lexis/Nexis Perfect storm brews in Egyptinterlinked security, political, and economic crises
than a year ago that left 74 people dead. The Clashes in the major Egyptian cities of Cairo, Alexandria, and Port Said were triggered by a combination of protests commemorating the second anniversary of the revolt that unseated then-President Hosni Mubarak and the sentencing of 21 soccer fans to death because of a riot after a soccer match more
challenge to the authority of Egypts ruling Muslim Brotherhood has become so severe that President Mohamed Morsi declared a state of emergency in Port Said and two other cities along the Suez Canal, while Army head Gen. Abdul-Fattah al-Sisi warned Egypts new Islamist leaders and their opponents that
their disagreement on running the affairs of the country may lead to the collapse of the state and threatens the future of the coming generations. Egypts rival political leaders came together to renounce the recent violence, giving hope that however dysfunctional the transition process remains, we are not likely to see a systemic breakdown in the country. These clashes are in great measure a response to the unresolved tensions within Egyptian politics and society that have built up in the two years since the overthrow of President Mubarak and the rise to power of the Muslim Brotherhood. The
confluence of eventsthe anniversary of the 2011 protests and the soccer riot sentencinghave acted like a lit match on the tinder box of Egyptian dissatisfaction with the current state of the country. The simmering political and societal conflicts that have plagued Egypt since Mubaraks overthrowincluding a contentious constitutional referendum and a continuation of some of the Mubarak regimes worst excessesare boiling over, and they will continue to create problems if they are not genuinely addressed by Egyptian leaders. Egypt is facing three interlinked crises: internal security, political distrust, and economic uncertainty.
Instability continues to plague Egypt. The Center for American Progress, 2013 (think tank), Feb. 1, 2013, US OFFICIAL NEWS, Retrieved
May 29, 2013, from Lexis/Nexis The current violence is just the latest episode in a broader trend of insecurity that has been plaguing Egypt since Mubaraks overthrow in 2011. Ordinary crime has skyrocketed while personal security has declined. Egypts Sinai Peninsula is growing increasingly vulnerable and has become a lawless breeding ground for arms smuggling, human trafficking, and violent Islamist extremism. Weapons from Libya and Sudan flow
through Egyptian territory, providing the violent Islamist extremists and jihadists operating in the Sinai with added firepower. Many terrorists released in the chaos that surrounded Mubaraks overthrow remain at large, plotting attacks against U.S. targets. One of those terrorists,
Mohamed al-Zawahiribrother of Al Qaeda central chief Ayman al-Zawahiri has threatened attacks against France and its partners over the intervention in Mali. He remains at large.
The current Egyptian government faces a legitimacy crisis. The Center for American Progress, 2013 (think tank), Feb. 1, 2013, US OFFICIAL NEWS, Retrieved
May 29, 2013, from Lexis/Nexis Political legitimacy crisis Egypts security crisis, however, is in many ways a product of the broader crisis of political legitimacy that the Muslim Brotherhood-led government and state now face. The quality of Egypts political transition from the Mubarak dictatorship progressively deteriorated over the course of 2012 through a complicated series of twists and turns that resulted in serious questions about the Muslim Brotherhoods true commitment to pluralism and democratic principles.
Impacts: Worsened Crisis = War

Worsened crisis in Egypt risks civil war. Hamza Hendawi, 2012 (writer for the AP), Nov. 28, 2012, Retrieved May 30, 2013, from
http://bigstory.ap.org/article/egypt-crisis-raises-fears-second-revolution With the country still reeling from the aftershocks of the 18-day uprising that toppled Mubarak's 29year regime, activists and analysts warn that any escalation carries the risk of a second, and possibly bloody, revolution pitting Islamists against non-Islamists, including liberals, women and minority Christians. Ominous signs abound. Anti-Morsi crowds have attacked at least a dozen offices belonging to the Brotherhood across the nation since last week. Clashes between the two sides have left at least two dead and hundreds wounded. The violence and polarization has led to warnings from some newspaper columnists and the public at large of the potential for "civil war."
Worsening crisis in Egypt risks civil war. DEMOCRACY DIGEST, 2012 Nov. 30, 2012, Retrieved May 30, 2013, from
http://www.demdigest.net/blog/2012/11/egypts-polarizing-crisis-fuelling-worries-of-descent-intoviolence/ At this point, things seem to be escalating in all ways, and there are no real attempts to contain them. It raises concern about the stability of the political system. The growing polarization of Islamists and secular Egyptians, exacerbated by Morsis self-empowering edict, could even escalate into civil war, analysts suggest.
Egypt at risk of a civil war in the present system. THE NATIONAL, 2012 Dec. 7, 2012, Retrieved May 30, 2013 from
http://www.thenational.ae/thenationalconversation/comment/civil-war-in-egypt
The Arabic language press has dedicated a great deal of its opinion sections to Egypt's constitutional predicament and the political conduct of the Muslim Brotherhood. Several articles pointed out that President Mohammed Morsi's
constitutional declaration sparked an unprecedented polarisation among Egyptians, running the risk of plunging the country into a civil war. The Brotherhood's message to all Egyptians, not just the opposition, came through loud and clear: "Either we accept their dictatorship or they would trigger civil war," wrote Nawara Negm in the Cairobased paper Al Tahrir.
Tensions in Egypt could result in a civil war. Charles McPhedran and Daria Solovieva, 2012 (Special to The Washington Times), Nov. 28, 2012,
Retrieved May 30, 2013 from http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/nov/28/power-struggle-inegypt-raises-fear-of-civil-war/?page=all CAIRO The power struggle between Egypts Islamic and secularist forc es intensified Wednesday, with some analysts warning of civil war and supporters of the Islamist government planning to march Saturday on a central square in Cairo where opponents have been holding a sit-in for more than a week. Fears of violent street clashes between supporters and opponents of President Mohammed Morsi grew a day after more than 200,000 demonstrators crowded into Tahrir Square, the iconic scene of last years Arab Spring protest, to
denounce the president for decrees he issued last week that put him above any oversight, including the judiciary.
Further instability would spread throughout the region. Bradley Hope, 2013 (staff writer), Mar. 4, 2013, THE NATIONAL, Retrieved May 29, 2013, from
Lexis/Nexis
The US secretary of state reinforced Washingtons position that Egypt urgently needs to restore security and bolster the economy nearly two years after a popular uprising brought down Hosni Mubaraks authoritarian government. The path to that future has clearly been difficult and much work remains, Mr Kerry said after two days of meetings with businessmen, officials and political groups. Egypt has historically been a strategic ally of the US but Washington is concerned that further unrest could have knock-on effects across the region.
Morsi is helping to stabilize Egypt. Aki Peritz, 2013 (The senior policy adviser for national security at Third Way), Apr. 2, 2013, Retrieved
May 30, 2013 from http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/world-report/2013/04/02/gutting-aid-toegypt-would-be-a-mistake-for-the-us As much as outside observers are apprehensive about the Muslim Brotherhood's actual long-term intentions vis--vis Israel, Morsi has not done much to change the situation. Since taking office in 2012, he has yet to violate or change the peace treaty between the two nations. Furthermore, he helped broker a ceasefire between Israel and Hamas in late 2012. Most interestingly, Cairo has been hard at work smashing the tunnels that run from the Sinai to the Gaza Strip, which were used to bring weapons into Egypt, but also to smuggle goods that nourish Hamas's mini-state. According to the Economist, "Gleeful Israeli soldiers say that their coordination with their Egyptian counterparts at the border is better than under Hosni Mubarak's old regime."
The alternatives to Morsi are worse and will result in total chaos.
Aki Peritz, 2013 (The senior policy adviser for national security at Third Way), Apr. 2, 2013, Retrieved May 30, 2013 from http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/world-report/2013/04/02/gutting-aid-toegypt-would-be-a-mistake-for-the-us And many of the alternatives to Morsi & Co. are certainly worse. A complete state breakdown is in no one's best interest, except for criminals, terrorists and those who profit from disorder. Despite political infighting, the ultraconservative Salafists whose alNour party controls a quarter of Egypt's parliament are well-organized and unsympathetic to Western interests. The fighting in Cairo and Port Said could spread to other areas, crippling any government. The prospect for total chaos is very real.
Food Aid Trade-off Impact Module

A) Foreign aid cuts will come from food aid
Sarah Stuteville, 5/30/13 (staff writer, http://seattletimes.com/html/localnews/2021091028_sarahstoryxml.html, accessed 6/24/13, DLM) Yates says U.S. farmers and maritime industries (that ship U.S.-grown food abroad) act as powerful constituents for food aid. Because they benefit from a commodities-based food-aid system, they fight hard to ensure its continued funding in a political culture where international aid is often on the chopping block.
B) US food aid solves hunger. Miami Herald 13 (MIAMI HERALD EDITORIAL Food aid that works June 18, 2013
http://www.miamiherald.com/2013/06/18/3458152/food-aid-that-works.html) Thanks to U.S. food aid, 3 billion people in 150 countries have been spared hunger and their lives saved since the program began in 1954. Its been one of the most successful foreign-policy programs to build good will across the globe. Now Congress is considering a new way to deliver the food that would translate into more
people getting fed at no extra cost to American taxpayers. More food for the buck is a win-win except for entrenched special interests that prefer the inefficient and expensive status quo. This week the U.S. House is taking up the farm bill, and theres a bipartisan effort afoot to end the inefficient system that has been produced over the decades thanks to lobbying by Big Agribusiness in farm states. President
Obama has proposed that almost half (45 percent) of the $1.5 billion requested in the 2014 federal budget for food aid could be spent buying food from local farmers in the countries most in need, which would result in feeding as many as 4 million more starving people.
C) Food shortages lead to World War III Calvin, 98 (William Calvin, theoretical neurophysiologist at the University of Washington, Atlantic
Monthly, January, The Great Climate Flip-Flop, Vol 281, No. 1, 1998, p. 47-64) The population-crash scenario is surely the most appalling. Plummeting crop yields would cause some powerful countries to try to take over their neighbors or distant lands -- if only because their armies, unpaid and lacking food, would go marauding, both at home and across the borders. The better-organized countries would attempt to use their armies, before they fell apart entirely, to take over countries with significant remaining resources, driving out or starving their inhabitants if not using modern weapons to accomplish the same end: eliminating competitors for the remaining food . This would be a worldwide problem -- and could lead to a Third World War
-- but Europe's vulnerability is particularly easy to analyze. The last abrupt cooling, the Younger Dryas, drastically altered Europe's climate as far east as Ukraine. Present-day Europe has more than 650 million people. It has excellent soils, and largely grows its own food. It could no longer do so if it lost the extra warming from the North Atlantic. .
Food Aid Module Internals

Food aid will be traded-off with.
Sarah Stuteville, 5/30/13 (staff writer, http://seattletimes.com/html/localnews/2021091028_sarahstoryxml.html, accessed 6/24/13, DLM) a cash-based food-aid system would be more vulnerable to budget cuts. Whenever there is a place to cut, food
East of the mountains, Scott Yates of the Spokane-based Washington Grain Commission says hes worried that
aid is cut,
says Yates whose organization proudly boasts that Washington wheat has been shipped to countries like Ethiopia,
Eritrea, Iraq and Afghanistan And
if you have a cash-based system theres going to be no one arguing for it.
Food Aid Solves Hunger

Food aid saves 50 million people each year Elliott and McKitterick 13 (Kimberly Ann Elliott and William McKitterick, Food Aid for the 21st
Century: Saving More Money, Time, and Lives Center for Global Development. June 2013 http://www.cgdev.org/sites/default/files/archive/doc/full_text/CGDBriefs/3120442/food-aid-for-the21st-century.html) American food aid helps around 50 million people every year, but it could reach millions more. Requiring it to be in
kind, purchased in the United States, and transported on US-flagged ships makes food aid less efficient and effective than it should be. President Obamas FY2014 budget would relax the in-kind and cargo preference requirements and by eliminate monetizationthe practice of donating food aid to private organizations that sell it in developing countries to fund their projects. The
US Agency for International Development estimates that such reforms would help food aid reach as many as 4 million more people for the same amount of money. We estimate the effect to be even greater: between 4 million and 10 million. The costs of food aid reform are few, but the benefits would be substantial. Now is the time to bring food aid into the 21st century.
Food Aid Impact Module Extensions: Food Aid Solves Poverty

A) Food aid solves poverty
Sarah Stuteville, 5/30/13 (staff writer, http://seattletimes.com/html/localnews/2021091028_sarahstoryxml.html, accessed 6/24/13, DLM) Ive seen U.S. food aid at work in many of the countries Ive visited around the world. From Ethiopia to Pakistan, those white sacks with red and blue USAID: From the American people stamped
across them have meant relief for people experiencing disaster, conflict or extreme poverty.
B) Poverty is the equivalent to a thermonuclear war between Russia and the US this systemic impact is bigger and more probable than any war James Gilligan, 2000 Department of Psychiatry at Harvard Medical School, 2000 edition, Violence:
Reflections on Our Deadliest Epidemic, p. 195-196 The 14 to 18 million deaths a year caused by structural violence compare with about 100,000 deaths per year from armed conflict. Comparing this frequency of deaths from structural violence to the frequency of those caused by major military and political violence, such as World War II (an estimated 49 million military and civilian deaths, including those caused by genocide--or about eight million per year, 1935-1945), the Indonesian massacre of 1965-1966 (perhaps 575,000 deaths), the Vietnam war (possibly two million, 1954-1973), and even a hypothetical nuclear exchange between the U.S. and the U.S.S.R (232 million), it was clear that even war cannot begin to compare with structural violence, which continues year after year. In other word, every fifteen years, on the average, as many people die because of relative poverty as would be killed in a nuclear war that caused 232 million deaths; and every single year, two to three times as many people die from poverty throughout the world as were killed by the Nazi genocide of the Jews over a six-year period. This is, in effect, the equivalent of an ongoing, unending, in fact accelerating, thermonuclear war, or genocide, perpetrated on the weak and poor every year of every decade, throughout the world.
Food Aid Module: Food Aid Solves Poverty

Food aid is becoming increasingly important to solve poverty
Claire
Carter 6/4/13 (staff writer, accessed from lexisnexus, accessed 6/25/13)
The number of people using food banks has more than tripled in the last year as changes to the benefit system and rising unemployment levels impact on people being able to afford to feed themselves and their families. A joint report by charities Oxfam and Church Action Poverty claims delays in benefits payments, rising unemployment levels, increased food prices and sickness benefit reassessments are some of the most common reasons Britons are turning to food banks. The charities, backed by food bank provider the Trussell Trust, are calling for an urgent Parliamentary Inquiry into the relationship between the welfare reform changes and the growth of food poverty. Mark Goldring, chief executive at Oxfam said: "The shocking reality is that hundreds of thousands of
people in the UK are turning to food aid. Cuts to social safety-nets have gone too far, leading to destitution, hardship and hunger on a large scale. "It is unacceptable that this is happening in the seventh wealthiest nation on the planet." The report, Walking the Breadline, warns half a million people could be going hungry because the problem is not being monitored properly and calls for the Government to record numbers of people in food poverty in the UK, as well as monitor the launch of
Universal Credit to ensure there is no unitentional impact on food poverty. It also calls for the Department for Work and Pensions to publish data on the number of households deprived of benefits because of delay, errors or sanctions and referrals by Jobcentre plus staff to food banks. The report also recommends tax dodging be made a priority at the next G8 meeting in Northern Ireland, to reduce the future impact on benefits. In the last financial year more than 350,000 people turned to food banks for help, according to the Trussell Trust - is more than triple the amount who received food aid the year before. Niall Cooper, chief executive at Church Action on Poverty said: "The safety net that was there to protect people is being eroded to such an extent that we are seeing a rise in hunger. Food banks are not designed to, and should not, replace the 'normal' safety net provided by the state in the form of welfare support."
Food Aid Impact Module: Terrorism Impacts

A) Food aid solves terrorism
Washington Times 5/1/13 (Richard G. Lugar and Thomas A. Daschle, staff writers,
accessed from LexisNexus, accessed 6/25/13)
Congress should put aside partisanship and turf protection as it considers bold changes to a decadesold and increasingly inefficient international food-aid program.
U.S. global food assistance provides vital humanitarian and emergency assistance to people facing famine, natural disasters or conflict. It is a central to U.S. leadership toward peace and security. This is why
modernization now is so critical. The Obama administration's 2014 budget proposed overhauling the Food for Peace program, building on a similar reform proposal from the George W. Bush administration to reduce high administrative costs and thereby reach more hungry people. The Obama proposal would allow greater flexibility in how food aid is procured, transported and delivered through the use of local and regional food procurement, cash assistance or our current system of moving U.S. commodities via U.S.-flagged ships. Such reforms would overcome inordinate costs and lengthy delays in the U.S. response to crises that the Government Accountability Office and numerous other studies have documented. The existing program was created in an era in which dealing with U.S. farm surpluses was as much a motivating factor as feeding hungry people. It was the perfect way to support U.S. farmers and to demonstrate American humanitarianism. Agricultural surpluses are no longer the norm, though, and experts predict continuing global food-price volatility with the direst consequences for the poor and vulnerable. Today, we are in a period of budget austerity, in which old ways of doing business must be re-examined. We must look for efficiencies to maximize results for every dollar spent. The proposed reforms do exactly that, allowing us to reach 2 million to 4 million more people who need help. U.S. food aid is a
key component of the U.S. national security strategy. Nations that struggle with severe poverty and hunger are at greater risk from terrorism and instability. This has been especially evident since the tragic events of Sept. 11, 2001. Beyond the national security imperative, we strongly believe that no global
superpower that claims to possess the moral high ground can afford to relinquish its leadership in addressing global hunger. As a moral nation, founded on moral principles, we diminish ourselves and our national reputation if we turn our backs on the obvious plight of hundreds of millions of people who are living on less than a dollar a day and facing severe risk from hunger and disease. Even while facing budget constraints, the United States must maintain its global leadership in humanitarian activities. Amid economic and budgetary realities, it is inevitable that some will question the role of the United States in global affairs at any level, extending even to U.S. humanitarian programs. Almost everyone expects that U.S. foreign-assistance funding will be constrained for the foreseeable future. U.S. assistance, however, when properly administered, remains a bargain for U.S. national security and for our own economic and moral standing in the world. Even in the worst of times, the United States remains a wealthy nation with interests in every corner of the globe. Stakeholders and vested interests on all sides - inside and outside government - should work together cooperatively toward reforms now. To do so would be participating in a victory of cost savings, stability in aid programs, greater flexibility and efficiency, enhancement of selfsufficiency in some of the most desperate regions of the world, and an appreciation of U.S. leadership in the world. Richard G. Lugar, a former Republican senator from Indiana and chairman of the Agriculture and Foreign Relations committees, runs TheLugarCenter.org. Thomas A. Daschle, a former Democratic senator from South Dakota and Senate majority leader, is senior policy adviser at the global law firm DLA Piper.
B) Terrorists will use nuclear weapons triggering global nuclear war and extinction Mohamed Sid-Ahmed, 2004 (http://weekly.ahram.org.eg/2004/705/op5.htm, 26 August - 1
September 2004) What would be the consequences of a nuclear attack by terrorists? Even if it fails, it would further exacerbate the negative features of the new and frightening world in which we are now living. Societies would close in on themselves, police measures would be stepped up at the expense of human rights, tensions between civilisations and religions would rise and ethnic conflicts would proliferate. It would also speed up the arms race and develop the awareness that a different type of world order is imperative if humankind is to survive. But the still more critical scenario is if the attack succeeds. This could lead to a third world war, from which no one will emerge victorious. Unlike a conventional war which ends when one side triumphs over another, this war will be without winners and losers. When nuclear pollution infects the whole planet, we will all be losers.
Food Aid Solves Hunger

Food banks are Key to solve hunger
John
Harrison 5/30/13 (staff writer, accessed from LexisNexus, Accessed 6/26/13)
Half a million people are now accustomed to using food banks, and according to a report by Oxfam and Church Action on Poverty, the UK is now facing "destitution, hardship and hunger on a large scale". Whether this news will achieve the impact it deserves is currently unclear: it doesn't quite feel like it, which only underlines how inured the media seems to have become to rising poverty, and how easily the government seems to be getting off the hook. Yet the facts are obvious enough: "Food aid" is something firmly built into our national life, the supposed safety net of social security is getting more threadbare by the month - and the question demands to be asked, not for reasons of melodrama, but hard political fact: what kind of country is Britain becoming? According the Trussell Trust, the UK's single biggest organiser of food banks, in 2011-12, the number of people
who received at least three days' emergency food was around 130,000. Their own informational material says that in 2012-13, "food banks fed 346,992 people nationwide", and of those who received help, "126,889 were children". Now comes this latest report, and the skyrocketing numbers speak for themselves - as
does the mess of factors behind them, and the responsibility of the coalition for pushing up the demand - no, need - for food banks so drastically. While we're here, it may also be worth cutting through the kind of officialspeak used to deal with such things: even the term "food bank" occasionally seems designed to obscure what's actually afoot, which is simple enough. So, let's not mess about: a skyrocketing number of people simply cannot afford to eat, and they have been put in that predicament thanks to deliberate government policy. We are now starting to see the consequences of George Osborne's move on so-called "welfare uprating", whereby increases in benefits are to be held at 1%, irrespective of inflation (over the last five years, incidentally, the cost of basic foods has risen by 35%). Changes to disability benefits are set to cut the income of about 600,000 people. A new council tax benefit regime has snatched money from vulnerable people's pockets, and the infamous bedroom tax has done its work. In all these cases, the people affected are hit by a straightforward enough problem. If your income comes down, your fixed costs - rent, most utility bills, the cost of a phone, or running a car - stay exactly where they are, and two
budgets tend to be cut back. The first is heating. The second, always, is food. By way of highlighting that
straightforward fact, I'll quote from a mother of four I met earlier this year, in Hartlepool, who was facing a cut of at least 16 - and as much as 28 - a week in her family's housing benefit: "We can't cut it from fuel, or electricity, or petrol. So when you lay that budget out over a month, with your council tax and water, and all your bills, there's nowhere else it can come from: the only place we can cut from is our food budget. And we're already having the cheapest food you can buy." There is another factor in all this, which does not get nearly enough coverage, and which plays a huge role in the rising need for food banks. For some time, it has become increasingly clear that rising numbers of people who need social security are being "sanctioned": having their benefits suddenly cut, or taken away altogether, on the flimsiest of pretexts. Whistleblowers working in job centres have spoken of a "culture change" and the imposition of targets for the numbers of people to be sanctioned, irrespective of the details of their cases. Again, a quote from a cob centre staffer on the frontline speaks volumes: "Most staff go in to work and they're thinking about it from moment one - who am I going to stop [ie sanction] this week?" Note also that job centre staff are now referring people to food banks, as are councils and housing associations. At the same time, one other chronically overlooked issue further drives people's need for emergency food. A couple of months ago, I spoke to a senior manager at a food bank, who talked at length about modern labour markets, and how the rising number of temporary and insecure jobs - witness the rise of the infamous "zero hours" contract - tends to put people who need emergency food in a grim loop. In, say, January, they may turn up in dire need, take their parcel and go away. Weeks later, they'll apparently find work. But by March or April they'll be back - freshly laid off, hit by a delay in their benefit payments and hungry. "The explosion in food poverty and the use of food banks is a national disgrace," says this latest report. It is. So too is the spectacle of silver-spooned politicians taking refuge in the language of "scroungers" and "welfare crackdowns"; and, for that matter, ministers demanding further cuts to social security so as to shore up defence spending. Enough, too, of those caricatured claims that hacking away at the benefits system will involve the sacrifice of nothing more than fags and flat-screen TVs, and the idea that hunger is something that happens only to the poor and unfortunate overseas. It's now here: outside everyone's door, gnawing away, ruining lives. Oh, and one other thing: research from the US suggests that the very "food uncertainty" the food bank phenomenon embodies may be a particularly insidious part of the obesity crisis - something you won't hear from any minister, but worth pointing out. We are at a fork in the road here. One way lies a collective recognition that British society has tumbled somewhere hitherto unimaginable, and it is time to renew our social contract; in the other direction there lie outcomes that, at this rate, may sooner or later explode into social disorder. By all means let's start a conversation about the billions of pounds in housing benefit
payments thrown at private landlords, the abject waste of money that is the work programme, and more. But enough of the relentless hacking-back of money used for people's most basic needs. As even the most knuckleheaded members of this wretched government now know, that way lies a world many of us thought we had left behind many, many decades ago.
Food Aid ModuleUS supplies most food aid

US supplies most of the worlds food aid Targeted News Service 6/21/13 (Rebecca Kaplan, accessed 6/26/2013, Lexis/Nexis)
"Tragically, Congress missed an historic opportunity today to fix our international food aid program ," said Timi Gerson, director of advocacy for AJWS. "The bipartisan Royce-Engel Food Aid Reform Amendment would have helped at least four million more hungry people get life-saving access to food aid. Unfortunately, today's vote leaves the status quo in place, which means we will continue to spend more food aid dollars to reach fewer hungry people around the world. The U.S. supplies approximately half of all food aid worldwide yet our Eisenhower-era program is outdated. There is an average delay of three to four months in delivery of food aid shipped from the U.S., a time lag that is a matter of life or death. Yet Congress did not take the steps necessary to streamline the program to make it more cost-effective and efficient. "Despite the outcome, today's vote was an historic one. For the first time ever, a floor vote was held on food aid reform and it brought together a broad range of support among members from across the political and geographic spectrum during a time when bipartisanship is rare. "While the self-interested supporters of the status quo have won this battle, but we will continue to work with members of Congress to enact meaningful food aid reform and to fight to reducehunger and improve access to food worldwide. When almost one billion people around the world go hungry every day, making every food aid dollar count is not only a responsible use of taxpayer money, it is a moral imperative. We thank House Foreign Affairs committee Chairman Ed Royce and Ranking Member Eliot Engel for their courageous leadership in recognizing the critical need forfood aid reform, and we appreciate the many Members who supported their amendment. Unfortunately the majority of their colleagues were not willing to stand up for policy that saves lives and taxpayer dollars," Gerson said. The Royce-Engel Food Aid Reform Amendment would have updated the Food for Peace program to provide greater flexibility and help more people with our overseas food assistance without spending any additional U.S. taxpayer dollars. Earlier this month, the Senate passed the Agriculture Reform, Food and Jobs Act of 2013 (the Farm Bill), including an amendment that would create a permanent $300 million program to buy food from small-scale farmers in developing countries, boosting agricultural economies and securing long-term, local food sources. While the Senate bill made incremental steps toward reform, it did not achieve the type of comprehensive modernization of the program that was included in the Royce-Engel Food Aid Reform Amendment. For the almost two years, American Jewish World Service, along with a coalition of leading international development, humanitarian and advocacy groups, has worked with members of Congress to reverse global hunger by reforming the current Food for Peace program to make it more effective at reaching hungry people today while creating a hunger-free world tomorrow.
Defense Cuts Module

A) Foreign aid cuts will come from defense: Alan Greenblatt 11-17-10 (Staff writer for Governing magazine, NPR, and recipient of the
National Press Clubs Sandy Hume award for political journalism, Pentagon's Budget On The Chopping Block, http://www.npr.org/2010/11/16/131360666/pentagon-s-budget-on-thechopping-block, accessed 6-28-13 TMW) For months, some defense experts have warned that the nation's growing deficit could morph into a national security problem, because it could force deep cuts in military spending. That day appears to have arrived sooner than they predicted. A week after the co-chairmen of President Obama's debt commission recommended cutting $100 billion from the Pentagon's budget over the next five years, a second high-profile group has proposed even deeper cuts. The proposal to save $1.1 trillion by freezing military spending after 2012 is part of a broader deficit reduction strategy released Wednesday by a panel headed by Alice Rivlin, who served as budget director under President Bill Clinton, and former Sen. Pete Domenici (R-NM). "There will be even more things on the chopping block there," says Gordon Adams, a defense budget official in the Clinton administration who has advised the Rivlin-Domenici group. The Rivlin-Domenici group would cut the number of active-duty personnel by 275,000, to 1.2 million; cancel or defer weapons systems, and impose more cost controls on health care. Defense spending has roughly doubled since the terrorist attacks of 2001, to about $700 billion per
year. That number represents half of all federal discretionary spending (everything aside from interest payments and entitlements such as Social Security) and more than a fifth of the federal budget in total.
Because it consumes such a large share of the budget, reducing the deficit would be a much more daunting task if the Pentagon were held harmless from spending cuts, warn the deficit hawks. "If you don't go to the $700 billion defense budget to make some reductions, it's just hard to take that big a bite out of any deficit," says a spokesman for Rep. Norm Dicks of
Washington, the current Democratic chairman of the House Defense Appropriations Subcommittee.
B) Defense budget cuts kill readiness Ernesto Londoo and Lisa Rein 2-21-13 (Washington Pentagon correspondent and Staff writer,
Military service chiefs warn budget cuts will undermine readiness http://articles.washingtonpost.com/2013-02-21/world/37218094_1_service-chiefs-budget-cutspentagon-civilians, accessed 6/26/13 TMW) After staying largely on the sidelines of the debate over deficit reduction, the U.S. militarys service leaders have begun painting a stark picture of the toll a congressionally mandated budget cut could take on the readiness of the worlds largest armed forces. In response, the militarys service chiefs are amplifying the months-long warnings of Defense Secretary Leon E. Panetta and others and providing what they have described as the specific and serious consequences of the across-the-board cuts. Gen. Ray Odierno, the Armys chief of staff, recently warned that the cuts may curtail training for 80 percent of ground forces, including some in the deployment pipeline, forcing him to extend the deployments of troops already in Afghanistan. Facing a $8.6 billion shortfall, the Navy has delayed the deployment of the USS Harry Truman, leaving just one aircraft carrier instead of two in the Persian Gulf, where tensions continue with Iran. The budget crunch also will mean delays for repairs of a carrier and the construction of another. The Air Force has warned that slashing $12.4 billion from its budget for the remainder of the fiscal year would require cutting 200,000 flying hours. That means that by May, two-thirds of the forces pilots would drop below acceptable level of readiness, Air Force chief Mark Welsh told lawmakers recently.
C) Readiness key to deter war. Spencer 2000

(Jack, Policy Analyst - Heritage Foundation, The Facts About Military Readiness, 9-15, http://www.heritage.org/Research/MissileDefense/BG1394.cfm) Military readiness is vital because declines in America's military readiness signal to the rest of the world that the United States is not prepared to defend its interests. Therefore, potentially hostile nations will be more likely to lash out against American allies and interests, inevitably leading to U.S. involvement in combat. A high state of military readiness is more likely to deter potentially hostile nations from acting aggressively in regions of vital national interest, thereby preserving peace.
Impacts: Budget Cuts Hurt Readiness

Now is not the time for defense cuts Robert Kagan 2-3-09 (MPP from the John F. Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University,
PhD in US history from American University in Washington, D.C., senior fellow at the Brookings Institution, No Time To Cut Defense, http://articles.washingtonpost.com/2009-0203/opinions/36845299_1_defense-budget-obama-administration-missile-defense, accessed 6-28-13 TMW) Pentagon officials have leaked word that the Office of Management and Budget has ordered a 10 percent cut in defense spending for the coming fiscal year, giving Defense Secretary Robert Gates a substantially smaller budget than he requested. Here are five reasons President Obama should side with Gates over the green-eyeshade boys. It doesn't make fiscal sense to cut the defense budget when everyone is scrambling for measures to stimulate the economy. Already, under the current Pentagon budget, defense contractors will begin shutting down production lines in the next couple of years -putting people out of work. Rather than cutting, the Obama administration ought to be increasing defense spending. As Harvard economist Martin Feldstein recently noted on this page, defense spending is exactly the kind of expenditure that can have an immediate impact on the economy. A reduction in defense spending this year would unnerve American allies and undercut efforts to gain greater cooperation. There is already a sense around the world, fed by irresponsible pundits here at home, that the United States is in terminal decline. Many fear that the economic crisis will cause the United States to pull back from overseas commitments. The announcement of a defense cutback would be taken by the world as evidence that the American retreat has begun. This would make it harder to press allies to do more. The Obama administration rightly plans to encourage European allies to increase defense capabilities so they can more equitably share the burden of global commitments. This will be a tough sell if the United States is cutting its own defense budget. In Afghanistan, there are already concerns that the United States may be "short of breath." In Pakistan, the military may be tempted to wait out what its members perceive as America's flagging commitment to the region. A reduction in defense funding would feed these perceptions and make it harder for Obama's newly appointed special envoy, Richard Holbrooke, to press for necessary changes in both countries. What worries allies cheers and emboldens potential adversaries. The Obama administration is right to reach out and begin direct talks with leaders in Tehran. But the already-slim chances of success will grow slimmer if Iranian leaders believe that the United States may soon begin pulling back from their part of the world. President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's spokesman has already declared that the United States has lost its power -- just because President Obama said he is willing to talk. Imagine how that perception would be reinforced if Obama starts cutting funding for an already inadequately funded force. Cuts in the defense budget would have consequences in other areas of the budget, most notably foreign aid. Some Republicans have already begun to grumble about foreign aid and development spending. If the Obama administration begins by cutting defense, it will be much harder to persuade Republicans to support foreign aid.
International threats too great for budget cuts Michaela Dodge 5-8-13 (masters of science degree in defense and strategic studies from Missouri
State University, bachelors degree in international relations and defense and strategic studies from Masaryk University, Czech Republic, National Security Fellow with the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies, Defense Budget Cuts Troubling in a Dangerous World,
http://blog.heritage.org/2013/05/08/defense-budget-cuts-troubling-in-a-dangerous-world/, accessed 628-13 TMW) Cuts in President Obamas fiscal year 2014 defense budget submission are troubling , according to Mike Rogers (RAL), Chairman of the Strategic Forces Subcommittee, House Armed Services Committee. While the President proposes to reduce the defense budget by about $120 billion in the next 10 years, the world is not getting any safer. North Korea recently threatened targets in the United States with nuclear annihilation, including Washington and San Francisco. It conducted its third nuclear weapon device test in defiance of international law in February. Iran continues to support terrorists attacking U.S. forces throughout the Middle East. Syria has been plagued by a civil war and the Assad regime crossed the Presidents red line when it reportedly used chemical weapons on its civilians. Such a dangerous world warrants strong U.S. involvement. Any of these situations can get out of control quickly, especially if the U.S. is not there to get involved and maintain peace. Consequences could be grave, not only for allies in these regions, but for Americans and their way of life. In this dangerous world, the Obama Administrations belief that others will follow its example is dangerous. Obamas nuclear
weapons strategy shows just how misplaced this belief is. While the Administration is moving toward reducing the role of nuclear weapons in the U.S. national security strategy, Russia and China continue to modernize and build up their nuclear weapons arsenal.
Defense cuts harm readiness Sidney J, Freedberg Jr. 6-17-2013 (Founder of Learning from Veterans: National Security Insights
from Afghanistan and Iraq, Bachelors degree Summa Cum Laude Harvard University, CSAF Welsh: Sequester Groundings Threaten Readiness for Syria, http://breakingdefense.com/2013/06/17/csafwelsh-sequester-groundings-threaten-readiness-for-syria/, accessed 6-27-2013 TMW) As if Syria and sequestration werent complicated enough on their own, the combat training cutbacks required by the sequester are cutting into the militarys readiness to intervene, the Air Force Chief of Staff, Gen. Mark Welsh, told reporters this morning. Army Chief of Staff Gen. Ray Odierno has expressed similar concerns about his services ability to act in Syria, and the Navy and Marine chiefs have raised readiness problems more generally. But policymakers profound aversion to sending US ground troops into a war-torn Islamic nation yet again means that by far the most likely form of intervention is airstrikes and a no-fly zone, where the heaviest burden would fall upon the Air Force. If we have aircraft that would be needed to conduct a no-fly zone, and they havent been flying, hopefully we would have time to get them up to speed before we use them, Welsh told the clustering reporters. Thats not quick and its not cheap: It takes 150 percent more money to get a fully grounded squadron combat-ready again than it would to simply keep it trained up all along, Welsh said, and the process can take about six months. Even if there wasnt time to train back up, however, he said, if we were ordered to go do it, wed go do it. And we would be accepting the risk of those people not being as current [on their training]. For me, thats a risk we dont want to be accepting. Thats especially true
because Syria is a more dangerous anti-aircraft adversary than was Libya in 2011 or even Iraq during the no-fly zone era from 1991 to 2003. We know the Syrians have more updated equipment than they had in Libya or Iraq. We also know they actually operate it, Welsh said. They turn it on, they use it, they train with it. So our assumption is theyre better trained.
Defense sequester undermining military effectiveness Sidney J, Freedberg Jr. 6-17-2013 (Founder of Learning From Veterans: National Security Insights
from Afghanistan and Iraq, Bachelors degree Summa Cum Laude Harvard University, HASC Finds $5 Billion Fix For Sequester Damage, But It Wont Matter, http://breakingdefense.com/2013/06/03/hascmarks-fix-to-2013-sequester-will-be-undone-by-2014s/, accessed 6-27-2013 TMW) Striving to address shortfalls in military readiness created by this years hasty and inefficient sequestration cuts, which are undermining everything from buying fighter aircraft to stopping drug shipments, cunning congressional staffers
found over $5 billion above and beyond what was in the Pentagons budget request. In a particularly nifty trick, that extra money would even count as supplemental spending, which is outside the sequester. (Specifically, it would be part of the sequester-exempt overseas contingency operations (OCO) fund that the House set at $85.5 billion for 2014. The base Defense Department budget is set at $552.1 billion, which sequester does affect.)
Defense Cuts harm national security Phil Roe N/d (Tennessee Congressman, M.D., Defense Cuts Must Be Addressed,
http://roe.house.gov/news/email/show.aspx?ID=6GU4X4PAXOVYSQP3GDUL4OYFYM, accessed 6-27-13 TMW) This week, the House will pass legislation to fund our military operations for fiscal year 2013. In total, the bill provides $519.2 billion in base funding and $88.5 billion for Overseas Contingency Operations (OCO) for Defense activities related to the Global War on Terror. This funding is critical to ensuring our troops around the globe remain the best-equipped fighting force in the world. As we start 2013, however, our national defense is facing large budget cuts due to a process known as sequestration. Adequately funding our military is the most important thing we must do to ensure our national security, and since these cuts have the potential to gut our nations defense, its my highest priority to find other savings to reduce our nations deficit and protect our military . Unfortunately, there are some in Congress that refuse to acknowledge the potential impact of these cuts. Since the socalled Super Committee failed to come to an agreement, an automatic $98 billion cut will take effect in January. For defense spending, this means over $50 billion will be cut on top of the nearly $50 billion of cuts that have already been implemented. These cuts would undoubtedly lead to disastrous consequences for our soldiers, veterans, national security and the economy. Even Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta has spoken out in opposition to these cuts several times, stating they will be devastating to our military.
Defense budget cuts undermine security Ernesto Londoo and Lisa Rein 2-21-13 (Washington Pentagon correspondent and Staff writer,
Military service chiefs warn budget cuts will undermine readiness http://articles.washingtonpost.com/2013-02-21/world/37218094_1_service-chiefs-budget-cutspentagon-civilians, accessed 6/26/13 TMW) After staying largely on the sidelines of the debate over deficit reduction, the U.S. militarys service leaders have begun painting a stark picture of the toll a congressionally mandated budget cut could take on the readiness of the worlds largest armed forces. In response, the militarys service chiefs are amplifying the months-long warnings of Defense Secretary Leon E. Panetta and others and providing what they have described as the specific and serious consequences of the across-the-board cuts. Gen. Ray Odierno, the Armys chief of staff, recently warned that the cuts may curtail training for 80 percent of ground forces, including some in the deployment pipeline, forcing him to extend the deployments of troops already in Afghanistan. Facing a $8.6 billion shortfall, the Navy has delayed the deployment of the USS Harry Truman, leaving just one aircraft carrier instead of two in the Persian Gulf, where tensions continue with Iran. The budget crunch also will mean delays for repairs of a carrier and the construction of another. The Air Force has warned that slashing $12.4 billion from its budget for the remainder of the fiscal year would require cutting 200,000 flying hours. That means that by May, two-thirds of the forces pilots would drop below acceptable level of readiness, Air Force chief Mark Welsh told lawmakers recently.
U.S. is at risk or nuclear war with Iran ADL 1-24-13 (The Iranian Nuclear Threat: Why it Matters, http://www.adl.org/israelinternational/iran/c/the-iranian-nuclear-threat-why-it-matters.html, accessed 6-28-13 TMW) Nuclear weapons in the hands of the Iranian regime will have severe repercussions for American security and the security of our allies. A nuclear-armed Iran would embolden Iran's aggressive foreign policy, resulting in greater confrontations with the international community. Iran already has a
conventional weapons capability to hit U.S. and allied troops stationed in the Middle East and parts of Europe. If Tehran were allowed to develop nuclear weapons, this threat would increase dramatically. Iran is one of the world's leading state sponsors of terrorism through its financial and operational support for groups such as Hezbollah, Hamas, and others. Iran could potentially share its nuclear technology and know-how with extremist groups hostile to the United States and the West. A nucleararmed Iran poses a threat to America's closest allies in the Middle East. Israel is most at risk as Iran's leaders have repeatedly declared that Israel should "be wiped from the map." America's moderate Arab allies, such as Saudi Arabia, UAE, Bahrain, and others are already alarmed at Iran's aggressive regional policy and would feel increasingly threatened by a nuclear-armed Iran. The Middle East remains an essential source of energy for the United States and the world. Iran's military posture has led to increases in arms purchases by its neighbors. A nuclear-armed Iran would likely spark a nuclear arms race in the Middle East that would further destabilize this volatile and vital region.
Defense Aid Necessary

U.S. is at risk of nuclear war with North Korea David Alexander 5-3-13 (30 year multinational journalist and staff writer, Pentagon: North Korea
could reach US with nuclear arms, http://news.msn.com/us/pentagon-north-korea-could-reach-uswith-nuclear-arms, accessed 6-28-13 TMW) WASHINGTON North Korea's continuing development of nuclear technology and long-range ballistic missiles will move it closer to its stated goal of being able to hit the United States with an atomic weapon, a new Pentagon report to Congress said Thursday. The report, the first version of an annual Pentagon assessment required by law, said Pyongyang's Taepodong-2 missile, with continued development, might ultimately be able to reach parts of the United States carrying a nuclear payload if configured as an intercontinental ballistic missile. North Korea launched a multi-stage rocket that delivered a satellite into orbit in December, an advance that "contributes heavily" to the country's development of a long-range ballistic missile capability, the report said. It is also continuing to refine its atomic weapons capability, including with a nuclear detonation in February, and is capable of conducting "additional nuclear tests at any time," the report said. "These advances in ballistic-missile delivery systems, coupled with developments in nuclear technology ... are in line with North Korea's stated objective of being able to strike the U.S. homeland," the report said. "North Korea will move closer to this goal, as well as increase the threat it poses to U.S. forces and allies in the region, if it continues testing and devoting scarce regime resources to these programs," it said. The document characterized North Korea as one of the biggest U.S. security challenges in the region because of its effort to develop nuclear arms and missiles, its record of selling weapons technology to other countries and its willingness to "undertake provocative and destabilizing behavior." The report comes at a sensitive time in the region, with friction between Washington and Pyongyang only now beginning to ease following two months of increasingly shrill rhetoric that seemed to edge the Korean peninsula close to war. Tensions between the two countries rose sharply after North Korea put the satellite into space in late December and conducted the nuclear test in February. The test triggered new U.N. sanctions, which led to a barrage of threats from Pyongyang. North Korea went so far as to warn of nuclear strikes on the United States and South Korea, as its new leader, Kim Jong Un, marked his first year in office following the death of his father. The U.S. and South Korean militaries went ahead with a long-scheduled military exercise despite the threats and Washington sending stealth bombers and other planes to the region in a show of force. North Korea signed a deal to get rid of its nuclear program in exchange for aid in 2005 but later backed out of the pact and now says it will not give up its atomic weapons program. The United States has firmly rejected North Korean demands that it be recognized as a nuclear-armed state. Washington has stepped up its diplomacy with China over the issue.
Economy Module
Global aid is critical to the US economy
Ashley Judd 10/10/2011 (board member of PSI, a global health organization, Benefits of Foreign Aid, http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/11/opinion/from-ashley-judd-the-benefits-of-foreignaid.html?_r=0, accessed 6/24/2013 TMW) Foreign Aid Faces Major Cutbacks in Budget Crisis (front page, Oct. 4) worried me because, in my eight years as a global health ambassador, I have learned that we live in an interconnected world. In 13 trips around the world, I have personally seen that defeating public health threats like malaria,
H.I.V./AIDS and tuberculosis and empowering reproductive health do not just enrich lives abroad, but also have a direct impact on the quality of American lives at home. At less than 1 percent of the federal budget, investments in foreign aid strengthen the United States economy. Nearly 50 percent of American exports go to the developing world. One in three domestic manufacturing jobs depends on these exports. Such statistics are critical when , in my home state of Tennessee alone, unemployment is nearly 10 percent. By investing in public health, American taxpayers are giving men and women the chance to live more productive lives and participate in the global economy. And when that happens, everyone from Mombasa to Manhattan benefits. B) Cuts to foreign aid hurt economy BBC Monitoring Europe, 2/26/2013 (Turkish commentary views new US secretary of state's
planned trip to Ankara, accessed from LexisNexis, 6/25/2013 TMW)
In his Charlottesville address, in order to turn his country's attention, currently focused inwards, to the outside world,
Kerry explained how accurate foreign policy moves would positively affect internal conditions. He posited that reducing foreign aid in the name of austerity would harm the US economy in the long run. He recalled how many countries that once received aid from America had now developed and were today importing American goods. He stressed that
his old haunt Congress putting the country's far-from-brilliant financial situation into order would help his credibility in the world as a diplomat.
Secretary Kerry also recalled that only 1 percent of the budget was allocated to the State Department. Saying: "It is cheaper to deploy a diplomat today than to send in the army tomorrow" he tried to save his
department from being the victim of austerity measures. In short, he argued the case for learning how to live with globalization in contrast to the rising isolationist trend in the country.
C) Economic collapse causes global nuclear war Friedberg and Schoenfeld, 2008 *Aaron, Prof. Politics. And IR @ Princetons Woodrow Wilson
School and Visiting Scholar @ Witherspoon Institute, and Gabriel, Senior Editor of Commentary and Wall Street Journal, The Dangers of a Diminished America http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122455074012352571.html] Then there are the dolorous consequences of a potential collapse of the world's financial architecture. For decades now,
Americans have enjoyed the advantages of being at the center of that system. The worldwide use of the dollar, and the stability of our economy, among other things, made it easier for us to run huge budget deficits, as we counted on foreigners to pick up the tab by buying dollar-denominated assets as a safe haven. Will this be possible in the future? Meanwhile, traditional
Iran and North Korea are continuing on their bellicose paths, while Pakistan and Afghanistan are progressing smartly down the road to chaos. Russia's new militancy and China's seemingly relentless rise also give cause for concern. If
foreign-policy challenges are multiplying. The threat from al Qaeda and Islamic terrorist affiliates has not been extinguished. America now tries to pull back from the world stage, it will leave a dangerous power vacuum. The stabilizing effects of our presence in Asia, our continuing commitment to Europe, and our position as defender of last resort for Middle East energy sources and supply lines could all be placed at risk. In such a scenario
there are shades of the 1930s,
when global trade and finance ground nearly to a halt, the peaceful democracies failed to cooperate, and aggressive powers led by the remorseless fanatics who rose up on the crest of economic disaster exploited their divisions. Today we run the risk that rogue states may choose to become ever more reckless with their nuclear toys , just at our moment of maximum vulnerability. The aftershocks of the financial crisis will almost certainly rock our principal strategic competitors
even harder than they will rock us. The dramatic free fall of the Russian stock market has demonstrated the fragility of a state whose economic performance hinges on high oil prices, now driven down by the global slowdown. China is perhaps even more fragile, its economic growth depending heavily on foreign investment and access to foreign markets. Both will now be constricted, inflicting economic pain and perhaps even sparking unrest in a country where political legitimacy rests on progress in the long march to prosperity. None of this is good news if the
leaders of these countries seek to divert attention from internal travails with external adventures.
authoritarian
Economy Module Extensions

Cuts to foreign aid hurt economy BBC Monitoring Europe, 2/26/2013 (Turkish commentary views new US secretary of state's
planned trip to Ankara, accessed from LexisNexis, 6/25/2013 TMW) In his Charlottesville address, in order to turn his country's attention, currently focused inwards, to the outside world, Kerry explained how accurate foreign policy moves would positively affect internal conditions. He posited that reducing foreign aid in the name of austerity would harm the US economy in the long run. He recalled how many countries that once received aid from America had now developed and were today importing American goods. He stressed that his old haunt Congress putting the country's far-from-brilliant financial situation into order would help his credibility in the world as a diplomat. Secretary Kerry also recalled that only 1 percent of the budget was allocated to the State Department. Saying: "It is cheaper to deploy a diplomat today than to send in the army tomorrow" he tried to save his department from being the victim of austerity measures. In short, he argued the case for learning how to live with globalization in contrast to the rising isolationist trend in the country.
Economy Module: Foreign Aid Bolsters the Economy

Foreign aid bolsters the US economy Lisa Meadowcroft 10/31/2012 (Executive director of the African Medical Research Foundation
(AMREF), Foreign Aid Cuts Affect Us All, http://www.interaction.org/blog/foreign-aid-cuts-affect-usall, accessed 6/26/2013 TMW) In their July 2012 issue brief on the human impact of potential, substantial budget cuts on global health, The Foundation for AIDS Research (amfAR) found that, applying sequestration cuts to U.S. government global health programming would have minimal impact on deficit reduction, but would be devastating to the lives of many thousands of people globally. In the key areas of HIV/AIDS, TB and malaria alone, which are not only high priority for AMREF but sectors where frontline health workers have critical impact on the millions of people who depend on them the world over, the amfAR brief notes that by cutting U.S. government support by 8.2 percent: HIV/AIDS treatment for 276,500 people will not be available, potentially leading to 63,000 more AIDS-related deaths and 124,000 more children becoming orphans. An additional 100,000 people will not be treated for HIV/AIDS. 2.2 million fewer insecticide-treated nets will be procured, leading to nearly 6,000 deaths due to malaria; 3.6 million fewer people will receive treatment. 88,000 fewer TB patients will receive treatment, leading to 11,000 more TB deaths. Health improvement in developing countries is not only critical to the populations of African countries, its also key to U.S. interests abroad. Improved health results in larger labor forces and greater educational opportunities, leading to more stable economies and the potential for growth. Stronger economies usually promote more stable political systems. Stable political systems and strong economies in Africa are in the strategic interests of the U.S. to promote peace overall and increase our trade opportunities around the globe. Whats more, Americans are genuinely moved to help ameliorate human suffering and according to a recent poll by the Better World Campaign, three out of four say that international issues influence their vote. We Americans want and expect the U.S. to do its fare share around the world. In the next presidential administration, we cant
cut foreign aid. We will all feel the consequences.

Aid Tradeoff Disadvantage

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Aid Tradeoff Disadvantage

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Aid Trade-off DA Daniel/Michael/Dr.

1 Samford Debate Institute 2013

Aid Trade-off DA Daniel/Michael/Dr. G

2 Samford Debate Institute 2013

Egyptian Aid Trade-off Shell

LINK: BUDGET PRESSURES WILL REQUIRE CUTS IN EGYPTIAN AID.

reform in Egypt provide a model for

smaller Arab nations, or go off track?

Aid Trade-off DA Daniel/Michael/Dr. G

3 Samford Debate Institute 2013

IMPACT: CUTTING AID TO EGYPT RISKS A DISASTROUS MIDDLE EAST WAR.

Aid Trade-off DA Daniel/Michael/Dr. G

4 Samford Debate Institute 2013

UQ: Egypt has sufficient aid now

Aid Trade-off DA Daniel/Michael/Dr. G

5 Samford Debate Institute 2013

Aid Trade-off DA Daniel/Michael/Dr. G

6 Samford Debate Institute 2013

Links: Aid to Mexico

Aid Trade-off DA Daniel/Michael/Dr. G

7 Samford Debate Institute 2013

Links: Aid to Cuba

Aid Trade-off DA Daniel/Michael/Dr. G

8 Samford Debate Institute 2013

Links: Aid to Venezuela

Aid Trade-off DA Daniel/Michael/Dr. G

9 Samford Debate Institute 2013

Internal Links: Egyptian Aid Will Be Cut

Aid Trade-off DA Daniel/Michael/Dr. G

10 Samford Debate Institute 2013

Aid Trade-off DA Daniel/Michael/Dr. G

11 Samford Debate Institute 2013

Internal Links: Budgets Trade-off

Aid Trade-off DA Daniel/Michael/Dr. G

12 Samford Debate Institute 2013

Internal Links: Foreign Aid Will Be Traded Off With

Aid Trade-off DA Daniel/Michael/Dr. G

13 Samford Debate Institute 2013

Foreign aid is the least popular program.

Public will support cuts in foreign aid.

Aid Trade-off DA Daniel/Michael/Dr. G

14 Samford Debate Institute 2013

Impacts: Cutting Aid To Egypt = Instability

Aid Trade-off DA Daniel/Michael/Dr. G

15 Samford Debate Institute 2013

Aid Trade-off DA Daniel/Michael/Dr. G

16 Samford Debate Institute 2013

Aid Trade-off DA Daniel/Michael/Dr. G

17 Samford Debate Institute 2013

Aid Trade-off DA Daniel/Michael/Dr. G

18 Samford Debate Institute 2013

Aid Trade-off DA Daniel/Michael/Dr. G

19 Samford Debate Institute 2013

Impacts: Aid to Egypt Key to Egypts Economy

Aid Trade-off DA Daniel/Michael/Dr. G

20 Samford Debate Institute 2013

Aid Trade-off DA Daniel/Michael/Dr. G

21 Samford Debate Institute 2013

Impact Module: Democracy Promotion

Aid Trade-off DA Daniel/Michael/Dr. G

22 Samford Debate Institute 2013

Impacts: Now Key Time for Egypt

Aid Trade-off DA Daniel/Michael/Dr. G

23 Samford Debate Institute 2013