Tournament: Glenbrooks | Round: 7 | Opponent: Westminster BG | Judge: Sam Shore
1AC Greenhill rr v.1
1AC 1
Advantage one is agriculture. 

Cuban agriculture is collapsing—now is key
oil extraction, petrochemicals and oil refinery infrastructure
King 12- Visiting Assistant Professor at Brown University’s Center for Environmental Studies
(M. Dawn, “Cuban Sustainability: The Effects of Economic Isolation on Agriculture and Energy” per Presentation for the Western Political Science Association Portland, OR, March 21-24, 2012, http://wpsa.research.pdx.edu/meet/2012/kingmdawn.pdf)//HA

Despite the potential to become more sustainable with a purposive and focused OENING of the economy, the recent surge in joint venture investment on expanding domestic oil extraction, petrochemical facilities, and oil refinery infrastructure reveals a trend toward decreasing environmental sustainability. Once heralded as the world’s most sustainable country by coupling environmental performance indicators with their human development scores, Cuba is slipping further away from this goal. Perhaps the most distressing part of this current trend is that it took Cuba decades to create a national identity that embraced sustainable environmental practices in both the energy and agricultural sector, and it seemingly took only a couple of years to derail these efforts. Undoubtedly, conservation efforts and sustainable education programs can only satiate citizen’s energy desires to a certain point. In order to further the quality of life in the country, electric production must increase to rural areas with little energy infrastructure and to Havana in order to spur foreign investment and domestic small business growth. Cuba’s trade agreement with Venezuela is bringing in much-needed petroleum for electricity production, but their dependence on a relatively unstable country for crude is trapping them into the same relationship that crippled their economy in 1990 – impairing their original goal of self-sufficiency. Cuba is at a turning point in their path toward environmental sustainability, and the current need for immediate foreign capital and increased energy production seem to be trumping its desire to achieve development sustainably. Cuba still has enough centralized control to leap-frog dirty electric production for cleaner renewable forms of energy and the potential to guide development strategies that emphasize investments in and research on renewable energy. It can utilize its expertise on organic farming strategies to increase sugar production in a much more ecologically friendly manner than their monoculture approach in the 1970s and 80s. Decisions made in the next five years will demonstrate whether Cuba embraces their newly created national identity as a society striving for sustainable development or rejects the goal of sustainable development to increase short-term capital and energy needs.

The plan is key to solve

1) Provides massive foreign capital
King 12- Visiting Assistant Professor at Brown University’s Center for Environmental Studies
(M. Dawn, “Cuban Sustainability: The Effects of Economic Isolation on Agriculture and Energy” per Presentation for the Western Political Science Association Portland, OR, March 21-24, 2012, http://wpsa.research.pdx.edu/meet/2012/kingmdawn.pdf)//HA

The “special period in peacetime” transformed Cuban agricultural practices toward a more sustainable, organic, low-input system. However, from the late 1990s to the mid-2000s, Cuban agricultural outputs began decreasing. Sugar production went from around 8.4 million tons per year in 1990 to a meager 1.5 million tons by 2007-2008 (Elledge 2009). Given the goals of the “special period” to decrease monoculture practices and increase food production, this statistic may not be all that surprising, yet total agricultural production fell 22 from 2000-2005 (Nova-Ganzález 2006) while basic food production declined another 8 from 2007-2008 (Elledge 2009). Further, Cuban dependence on U.S. food imports increased from $4.3 million in purchases in 2001 to $340 million in 2006 (Alvarez 2004, 1; Weissert 2011)1 , and urban agricultural plots decreased from 26,600 in 1997 to 9744 by 2000 (Premat 2005, 154-155)2 . Certainly, the decrease in sugar production is attributable to more than just increasing basic food production. In the early 2000s, the Castro government shut down half of the countries’ 156 sugar mills due to deteriorating infrastructure (Elledge 2009). A lack of national capital has led to many infrastructure problems throughout Cuba, but the disappearance of the sugar industry, once the cause of Cuba’s depleted soil conditions and lack of diverse food production, may lead to even more economic vulnerability for the country. Most of Cuba’s electric cogeneration is coupled with sugar production. A decrease in sugar production equates to a heavier reliance on fossil fuels, something Cuba does not want and cannot afford. With global sugar prices on the rise, partially due to an increase in world demand for sugarcane ethanol, Cuba can use what it learned in the “special period” to produce more sustainable sugarcane. Nicholas Elledge (2009) from the Council on Hemispheric Affairs, argues that by “using state of the art technology, a sugar mill can generate over 10 times the electricity needed for its own operation…roughly equivalent to adding 4 power plants to the island” and that “an action as simple as modernizing the existing mills would… represent more than a 50 increase…to the system’s power capacity.” Given Cuba’s dire need for capital and the fact that food production has decreased over the past decade anyway, one means to achieving Cuba’s goal of self-sufficiency could be increasing sugar production. This, of course, requires opening the market up to partial outside investment – an institutional change that may also aid in increasing total food production.

2) Recent developments mean now is key
Dialogue between farmers spread the model
cuba will be forced to abandon the model now
Thompson and Stephens, 12 – * Ph.D. Curriculum and Education Director @ Duke University AND  Marian Cheek Jackson Center (Charles D. and Alexander, “Visions for Sustainable Agriculture in Cuba and the United States: Changing Minds and Models through Exchange”, Southern States, March 22 2013, http://www.southernspaces.org/2012/visions-sustainable-agriculture-cuba-and-united-states-changing-minds-and-models-through-exchan) SP

With Cuba developing closer ties to the U.S. agriculture industry, increasing its trade with China, and, with Venezuela’s help, poised to explore oil fields off its northern coast, we cannot assume that the island nation will adopt a model of ecological sustainability.9 Resistance to the onslaught of ecologically destructive development that looms on Cuba’s horizon will come through cooperation and exchange, not isolation. What we do know about Cuba’s agricultural innovations is that domestic shortages brought on by the end of Soviet subsidies and the U.S. embargo forced the Cuban government to seek alternative solutions. This entailed ceding some degree of power to its innovative citizen farmers and gardeners who have, in turn, helped create an alternative to industrial agriculture through the formation of organic garden cooperatives known as "organopónicos," local distribution channels, information exchanges, and the like.10 Urban dwellers, many of them university trained, some of them scientists, have joined cooperative gardens in the cities. Working toward sustainability, Cuba’s rural farmers have received new freedoms to produce for more open markets. Such policy changes, along with newly revamped farms and numerous urban gardens, have contributed to a much-needed increase in the country’s food supply since the early 1990s.11 While overall food production in Cuba in 2010 was lower than in 2005, the organic movement coupled with local sales and farmers’ pocketing some of the profit, is one area of progress.12 Opportunities for a Sustainable Future The first stop on our trip was Vívero Alamar, one of the best known organopónicos in Havana, founded by Miguel Salcines Lopez, who also serves as the elected president. He graciously spent a morning with us, beginning by talking about Cuba’s history of agriculture. "Cuba’s first farmers were slaves," Miguel said, and because of this past as well as Cuba’s history of development, people did not want to enter agriculture. Cubans filled the cities, and the countryside soon depended on sugar exports alone. At its height, over 5 million acres were planted in sugarcane, and 160 different refineries dotted the landscape.13 This system created a dependency on one export crop and established a precedent for importing everything else. "The whole diet was based on imported food," Miguel said. When the USSR collapsed and ceased buying sugar at inflated prices—over five times the going international rate—and the U.S. continued its embargo (called a blockade by Cubans) on agricultural and other inputs, Cuba urgently explored ways to produce its own food. "The blockade was beneficial in one way for Cuba," added Miguel, "otherwise the talent would have left." Because of a lack of chemical fertilizers, pesticides, and machinery, the island nation turned to organic fertilization and pest control, all run by trained scientists, such as Miguel. "If we hadn’t gone organic, we’d have starved!" The goals were to avoid eating imports and to become self-sufficient in food. We met scores of people, young and old, engaged in harvest. We met a scientist named Marisol, who was conducting a lab experiment involving beneficial insects. We found her bent over a microscope in a small shed in the middle of the fields, her child playing nearby. We saw acres and acres of picture-perfect organic vegetables. Miguel characterized the impressive system they have built as a "biological machine" with everything self-contained. One hundred and eighty-one workers are employed by the garden. We were impressed by the organipónico’s sense of organization, its members’ dedication to having a biologically cyclical operation with no outside inputs, and most of all by the cooperative’s amazing production of healthy vegetables. Miguel claimed they are producing two hundred tons per acre off the plots, and we could see that production was at full-bore in December 2010. The diversity and the extent of crop production result from the number of hands that have carefully infused life into the plots. These gardens stand in sharp contrast to fields worked by machines on commercial farms, and unlike the land on monocultural, industrial farms, which declines in quality, the soil at the organopónico becomes richer with time and layers of vermiculture compost. Miguel and his colleagues are feeding over five thousand weekly, and lines of people form outside the gates daily to purchase the results of their work. "There is much to do," he said. "The market is waiting." There is a long list of people waiting to join the garden project at Vívero Alamar, both for the nutritional benefits and the income. We learned that while the minimum monthly salary in Cuba is around 250 Cuban pesos (approximately 25 Cuban pesos to the American dollar), the minimum brought in by members of the organopónico is 350, with as much as 700 for a number of leaders. While markets function differently in the U.S., similar models should be profitable here. Agriculture researchers are looking for ways to reverse the losses of family farms in the U.S. South by locating organic, sustainable markets. The Center for Environmental Farming Systems (CEFS) in Raleigh, North Carolina, is one of the best examples of a U.S. organization using sustainable agriculture to create jobs and further social justice in economically depressed areas.14 There is a growing market emphasizing "locavorism," with restaurants, cookbooks, and blogs supporting and promoting local foodways. Considering the parallels in their work, it would seem mutually beneficial for groups such as CEFS and Vívero Alamar to cultivate a relationship of exchange. The day after leaving the organopónico we met with Dr. Fernando Funes, internationally recognized leader of the sustainable agriculture movement in Cuba. His son, also Fernando, who increasingly has stepped into his father’s leadership role, told us, "My father was a farmer, and I thought he was backward." Young Fernando changed his mind as he witnessed commercial agriculture using tremendous amounts of fertilizers and other imports and began to realize that local farming knowledge was of critical importance. Following the collapse of the Soviet Union, during what came to be called the "Special Period," Cuba was unable to feed its people. This stark situation prompted frantic searches for innovative approaches and an eventual change to biological-intensive—as opposed to chemical-intensive—means of production. The government opened over three hundred agricultural research stations.15 Where urban agriculture had been prohibited previously because of the danger of chemical exposure, Fernando explained, after the policy change the number of gardens immediately shot up to over two hundred. Some 375,000 people joined the ranks of rooftop and vacant lot gardeners. "They were producing something to eat," Fernando said. The government supplied the land and opened channels of distribution. In the first year any new group of gardeners could secure the right to cultivate approximately thirty-three acres and, with success, this could double the next year, and triple in three years to a hundred acres. Dr. Funes published Sustainable Agriculture and Resistance: Transforming Food Production in Cuba with food activist Dr. Peter Rosset (formerly with the U.S. organization Food First), and is widely known as an international ambassador for Cuba’s sustainable agriculture. Funes’ organization, the Asociación Cubana de Agricultura Orgánica (ACAO), received the Right Livelihood Award in 1999. His affability and intelligence drew us in, and we left believing that new leaders and groups would continue to learn from his example.16 The following day we spent with Dr. Humberto Ríos Labrada, of the Cuban National Institute of Agricultural Sciences, and the recipient of the Goldman Prize in 2010 for his community-based research with Cuban farmers. We accompanied Humberto to talk with the "guajiros" (the nickname for people from the Cuban countryside) with whom he works daily. As we drove the four-lane road to Pinar del Rio, Humberto told us his organization works with a network of 55,000 farmers in seed sharing and farm-based research. Charged initially with increasing squash production in Cuba, Humberto began holding meetings with farmers who showed up to participate in an effort to find new seed varieties and improve their yields. Humberto recognized the need to turn the traditional extension model upside down. Instead of the scientists being the "experts", Humberto realized that the farmers themselves cultivated the necessary knowledge and crop diversity. The participation of farmers expanded exponentially, starting with a few hundred and increasing by the thousands. The opportunity to learn from the success of such grassroots organizing campaigns among farmers is another compelling reason for exchange across the Florida Straights. At midday we arrived at the farm of Maria Valido, Agustín Pimental, and their son Royber in Pinar del Rio, near Viñales. Royber, completing his degree in agronomy at the local university, was conducting experiments on the family farm, including one plot with seventy three different varieties of beans. This family and thousands of others like them began alternative agriculture in 2002 with Humberto Ríos’s encouragement. Suddenly farmers were sharing their knowledge and seed varieties together in meetings of campesinos. The family was eager to tell us about their operation, how they came to some of their innovations (Royber’s father had built a methane digester), and how their seeds performed. "Farmers listen with their eyes," said Agustín. By seeing results on other farms, they could duplicate and improve their own work. On this little piece of land, our research team found hope and innovation, and some of the friendliest smiles and open, informed attitudes we had experienced in Latin America. We left glowing, having consumed farm-raised food and taken in a large helping of farm entrepreneurship that included not only experiments with plant breeding and food preservation, but also solar and methane energy production. We took away a feeling that true exchange had taken place, and that we were the primary beneficiaries. If farmers could reach tourists and sell food directly as in the urban casas particulares where we stayed, people would pay handsomely to eat farm-raised food on a farm in place of the typical tourist fare. Humberto had explained that marketing ideas are as important as technical innovations. Miguel Salcines’s ideas for distribution are why many are flocking to join. The Vívero Alamar group has reached thousands of consumers because of the cooperative’s marketing, which includes an attractive farm stand with a cane press where people can buy fresh sugarcane juice as they buy their produce. Necessity is the driving force, but marketing keeps income rolling in for the members. Agritourism has already developed in parts of the U.S. South. Autumn drivers along the Blue Ridge Parkway can see apple orchards filled with tourists picking fruit. Likewise, a chance to try one’s hand at a plow powered by a pair of oxen, for example, might intrigue adventurous tourists in Cuba. Agritourism, of course, is no simple or straightforward solution, as historic experience with tourism and agritourism shows. If farmers and local communities are not in control, tourism could create greater inequalities and exacerbate food insecurity. Therefore any emphasis on tourism has to take into account who owns and controls the local food system. The next morning was Christmas day and we visited a small alley market named Agropecuario Beleu in Havana. We met Osiris Cueto, a buyer/seller who manages a small stall. She taught us how the Cuban agricultural authorities broker the sales of vegetables and fruits. Each seller registers with a market officer, charges a fixed price, and takes a percentage of the profit for the day, paying some of the return to the government. From Osiris we learned why growers would surely welcome the chance to sell directly to consumers. A policy change in December 2011 was supposed to permit just that.17 That afternoon we left on a bus for Trinidad, another UNESCO world heritage site on the south coast. Lacking prior introductions did not seem to matter. The first day, I met Tomás Pérez Ricardo and his uncle on the street corner, selling produce from their small semi-rural organopónico named "Framboyan." Tomás, like the farmers we had met in Pinar del Rio, was gracious, proud of his work, and eager to share both produce and ideas. After visiting his house and farm the next day, I was impressed by how promising this young man believed his garden work to be and how open he was to sharing its message. Riding a horse-drawn cart to town and living in a modest cinderblock house, Tomás had no designs on getting rich, but he saw the possibilities for raising a family on vegetable sales. This sense of hope from agriculture has been a rarity in the developing world. For years, hope for economic prosperity has also eluded many small farmers in the U.S. South. With the growing market for local and sustainably-produced food, the rural U.S. is beginning to benefit from employment associated with sustainable agriculture. And in Cuba, with only 20 of the market supplied by local production, there is plenty of room for more newcomers like Tomás. The next day we drove past thousands of acres of fallow sugarcane fields on our way to yet another UNESCO world heritage site, the Valley of the Ingenios (sugarcane mills) and specifically to the Manaca Iznaga estate. A tower, constructed for overseeing slaves in the fields nearly two centuries earlier, still looms over the old plantation. In the nearby garden of Organopónico Primero de Mayo, I could see the tower, as the ancestors of former slaves worked at a site of cooperation and member ownership. I imagined how non-profits working with former sharecropping families in the Mississippi Delta and Appalachia could find this model relevant. The garden at Primero de Mayo grows eight kinds of vegetables with seeds supplied by the state. Ten members share the proceeds of the produce sold in the streets. The vice-president of the cooperative garden, Pedro Rodriguez Pérez, explained that while the government supplied the land and seeds, the more the members sell, the more they make. The cooperative pays a percentage back to the government, but there is incentive in reaching more customers. The model is not yet generating enough income to allow farm families to have economic autonomy from state subsidies (the same is true of U.S. farmers). Even so, I appreciated watching a grandfather and grandson working side-by-side on land over which they had some say. The tradition of acquiring agricultural knowledge via parent or grandparent remains alive in Cuba in a way that it does not in most parts of the United States. This is largely because of efforts by organizations of small farmers between the Revolution and the Special Period.18 After spending the next night in Havana, we set out for Viñales. We had seen the edge of the region before, but had not quite reached the valley and round hills that appear in so many photographs, the actual location designated as the world heritage site. Our most important goal there was to meet farmers and, based on our previous experiences, we trusted we would find people willing to talk. We met an energetic young farmer named Noél Parrapito our first day there. For two days he took us through the Viñales Valley where we met ten other farmers, sampled their tobacco, ate their produce and home-raised chicken, and learned about their animal husbandry—from their close work with oxen to their horseback riding skills and horse carts. Those skills, juxtaposed with solar technology, water purification, and a generally high literacy rate, spoke of something more than harkening back to yesteryear. Time-after-time when we explained that we were from the United States, our acquaintances replied with both warmth and surprise: warmth because of an association with so many family members and former neighbors who now live there; and surprise because no one from the U.S. had ever visited them before. I found myself thinking at those times how lucky we were to be there—to be the first Americans to go there—knowing how much damage tourism as mentioned on the PBS Nature program had done in other places. I felt sadness as well, knowing how much the indigenous knowledge that these farmers possess was all but inaccessible to thousands of young people in the United States. This feeling was particularly acute because the farmers we met struck me as keenly interested in exchanging knowledge and ideas. With Noél, with whom we shared several meals and lots of conversation while on horseback, we talked about "agritourism." How many people would pay to live on his farm, learn to work with oxen, and cultivate rice, corn, and the huge variety of animals and vegetables he produces? He perked up at the idea and wanted me to repeat the word the next day. He was a patient teacher, showing us every insect, plant, cave, and soil type we passed in the Valley. Could farmers begin to rent their homes to visitors, a program already allowed by the government in urban areas? Could visitors work on the cooperative garden projects with innovators like Miguel Salcines and learn biological farming techniques? Could agritourism fit with the Viñales Valley model? And if it works in Cuba, what are the opportunities for us in the U.S. South to learn through exchange? Too often in the United States, the people who are trying to combine sustainable agriculture and tourism were not raised in these traditions. There are obvious differences between the aesthetics of their fields and those of experienced farmers with years of inherited wisdom. The Cuban farmers we met take great pride in the appearance of their plots, and for tourists appearance is a significant selling point. In both countries, the larger the profits generated by sustainable farms, the stronger the case for more alternatives to industrial agriculture. On the last day of our research trip, shortly after New Year’s Day, we took the public bus to Humberto’s farm and heard his band play songs about seed sharing and agriculture. He and his band use their music, as shown on the Goldman Prize website, for outreach and education.19 Conclusion: A Call for Exchange Individuals and small groups can begin to heal historic wounds between two countries—through common experiences, work, and dialogue. I came back to the U.S. enriched beyond measure, not by internalizing the policies of agriculture over the last century or even what might make an organopónico movement run better, but by human exchanges and in-person meetings. We should invent ways to enable visitors who are prepared to listen and learn to go to Cuba, as well as ways to bring farmers and technicians from Cuba to work in the U.S. South. The dialogue of resistance to imperialism in Cuba can help inform the politics of the U.S. sustainable agriculture movement. And with political and economic changes imminent in Cuba, there are lessons to be learned from U.S. organizations confronting corporate agriculture. It would be tragic if loosened commercial restrictions in Cuba resulted in planting an agribusiness model there that we are desperately trying to get away from in our own country. As Fernando Funes put it, the inclusion of small farmers through redistribution of resources "makes them critical actors in the new reconfigured economy."20 Cuban people, particularly rural people, are the true wealth of the island. Most are literate, savvy about change, and have developed opinions about workable solutions. The potential for exchange between Cuba and the U.S. South offers a collective possibility for agricultural sustainability, an exchange that must overcome boundaries between nations.

The Cuban model spills over globally
1) Access to new techniques and farm expansion
American investment allows Cuban farmers to explore new techniques like using plants as natural pesticides
no incentive to invest now bc of laws that prevent return on investment
Shkolnick, 12 - J.D. Candidate, Drake University Law School (Jacob, “SIN EMBARGO: n1 THE CUBAN AGRICULTURAL REVOLUTION AND WHAT IT MEANS FOR THE UNITED STATES” 17 Drake J. Agric. L. 683, Fall, lexis)

VI. New Opportunities While investment in Cuban businesses and sales or purchases of Cuban products must still move through official channels under the joint venture law or other Cuban programs, the time is ripe for organizations in the United States to begin laying groundwork for closer ties with Cuban agricultural entities. Recent regulatory changes implemented by the U.S. government provide a means for individuals and businesses to begin forming the relationships with their Cuban counterparts that will lead to future trade opportunities. n161 As previously mentioned, recent changes in U.S. policy now allow for any individual in the United States, not simply relatives, to donate money to Cuban citizens, though not to exceed $ 500 for any three month consecutive period, with the only restriction being that the recipient is not an official in the Cuban *704 government or the Communist Party. n162 Specifically written into these new regulations is the idea that these remittances may be spent "to support the development of private businesses." n163 A five hundred dollar infusion of capital to support a fledging business or farm can be enormously beneficial when the average monthly salary is only 448 pesos, or approximately twenty dollars. n164 Additional capital will enable small Cuban farms to expand operations by hiring additional help or perhaps purchasing additional farm animals. While purchasing a tractor may seem like an obvious choice for a growing farm, Medardo Naranjo Valdes of the Organoponico Vivero Alamar, a UBPC just outside of Havana, indicated that farm animals such as oxen would remain the preferred choice for the foreseeable future on the small and midsized farms that make up the majority of the newer agricultural cooperatives. n165 Not only do farm animals not require gasoline or incur maintenance costs beyond perhaps an occasional veterinarian charge, their waste can be used as fertilizer. Apart from additional labor, funds provided to agricultural cooperatives could be put to use in developing innovative pest control techniques that do not require the use of expensive pesticides or other chemicals. The Vivero Alamar is currently experimenting with a variety of natural pest control techniques such as introducing plants that serve as natural repellents to insects and the introduction of other insects that feed on harmful pests without harming the crops. n166 Investment in agricultural cooperatives done in this manner will likely fail to see much return on the investment for their foreseeable future, until policies in both the United States and Cuba are changed. n167 For a relatively small sum, American investors will get not only the benefit of a close relationship with a Cuban farm that will become a new source of both import and export business in the future, but potentially gain access to innovative agricultural techniques that could be used in the United States immediately. n168 Because the logistical structure needed to transport goods from large rural farms into city markets remains underdeveloped, urban and suburban agriculture makes up a growing portion of the food produced and consumed in Cuba. n169 As in other countries, the population trends in Cuba have continued to shift away from rural areas to more concentrated urban and suburban areas, with about *705 three-fourths of Cubans living in cities. n170 With this shift in population has also come a shift in the country's agricultural system. As of 2007, about 15 of all agriculture in Cuba could be classified as urban agriculture. n171 Not only have agricultural practices changed, but eating habits have as well. Without the Soviet Union to provide a ready source of income and the machinery needed to engage in large-scale livestock production, vegetable consumption has increased dramatically. n172 Nearly every urban area has direct access to a wide variety of locally grown, organic produce. n173 Many of the urban farms in Cuba, including the Vivero Alamar, make use of organoponics, a system where crops are produced in raised beds of soil on land that would otherwise be incapable of supporting intensive agricultural production. n174 Many of these raised beds can be constructed in a concentrated area to support a wide variety of produce, with the typical organoponic garden covering anywhere from one half to several hectares in size. n175 The rise of the organoponic production method was a shift away from the earlier centralized production model employed by the state. It has been supported through intensive research and development by a variety of state agencies, such as the National Institute of Agricultural Science, and continued development has been guided through intensive training and educational programs. n176 The organoponic system is not limited in its application to Cuban urban farms, but maintains potential to be applied worldwide, including in the United States. Urban agriculture in Cuba revitalized and put to use previously abandoned and unused land. A similar approach could be applied to the United States as a means to restore blighted areas. n177 Applying Cuban-derived organoponics in U.S. cities could potentially open up an enormous amount of land that was previously unusable. From a business perspective, investing in an organoponic agricultural program in the United States is also a sound decision since the demand for local produce reached $ 4.8 billion in 2008 and is only expected to grow further, potentially reaching $ 7 billion in 2012. n178 *706 In an American city beset with high unemployment such as Detroit, Michigan, for example, investing in urban agriculture could potentially generate as many as five thousand new jobs. n179 By utilizing Cuba's system of organoponics, the need to use expensive and complex farm machinery could be significantly reduced. Already companies in the United States, such as Farmscape Gardens in southern California, recognize what Cuba's organoponic system could achieve and have integrated it into their business practices. n180 Rachel Bailin, a partner in the company, indicated that it was Cuba's organic farming practices that helped inspire them to start a company devoted to urban agriculture. n181 They have already used Cuba's organoponic farming methods to produce more than 50,000 pounds of produce since the spring of 2009. n182 The potential for future growth in this industry is huge, as Farmscape Gardens' current levels of production make it the largest urban agriculture company in the state of California. n183 Cuba not only offers attractive prospects for trading in the future, but methods of agriculture pioneered out of necessity have broad prospects if applied to agriculture in the United States. As the demand for locally grown produce continues to increase, a cost-effective and proven agricultural model like Cuba's organoponic system may be just what is needed to allow for urban agriculture to flourish.

2) Market proximity and certification compatibility
proximity lowers transit costs
Kost, 4 – agricultural economist, Specialty Crops Branch, Economic Research. Service, US Department of Agriculture (William, “CUBAN AGRICULTURE: TO BE OR NOT TO BE ORGANIC?”
http://www.ascecuba.org/publications/proceedings/volume14/pdfs/kost.pdf)

In addition to the above European markets, the successful expansion and viability of Cuba’s organic production may also depend on access to geographically-close, high-income foreign markets, namely the United States and Canada. Currently, Cuban produce is not certified-organic in either of these markets. Only after Cuban products are certified for these countries could Cuba legally export produce labeled organic to these markets. Given that many technical production practices currently followed by Cuban producers are potentially compatible with U.S. certification standards and given Cuba’s prior experience in becoming Swiss-certified, Cuba could be well positioned to meet U.S. certification standards. For the U.S. organic market, in addition to a lifting of the U.S. embargo, Cuba would have to be certified by a USDA-accredited certification program that assures U.S. markets that Cuban products labeled organic meet all National Organic Program standards and regulations under the U.S. Organic Foods Production Act of 1990. If the U.S. embargo on Cuba were lifted, Cuban exports, once certified, could play a significant role in the U.S. organic market. In this current U.S. niche market, production costs are high. Opening the U.S. market would enable Cuba to exploit its significant comparative advantage in this area. This market could become a quick foreign exchange earner for Cuba. The largest barrier Cuba faces in expanding into the U.S. organic market will be meeting U.S. requirements for organic certification. Tapping the U.S. market may create sufficient price incentives for Cuban producers to take the necessary steps to meet the organic standards of other importing countries. Cuba could then expand production of organic produce geared to these specialty export markets. With sufficiently high prices for organic produce, urban labor may remain active in an organic urban gardening sector. Most likely, the viability of a vibrant organic produce production and processing sector in Cuba will depend on Cuba’s gaining access to the large, nearby U.S. market. Without such access, organic-oriented production of horticultural products in Cuba will likely remain a necessity-driven way to produce food for domestic consumption in an environment where other production approaches are just not available.

The impact’s environmental collapse
Wright, 9 - Deputy Director of Coventry University's Centre for Agroecology and Food Security (Julia, Sustainable Agriculture and Food Security in an Era of Oil Scarcity, p. 15-16)

Although successful in enabling the availability of a narrow range of foods to a wide range of people, industrialized and global farming and food systems have a long way to go to be acceptably efficient and effective. They degrade the very natural resource base upon which agriculture (and human life) depends – from soil and water quality to plant DNA structure – and inadequately provide in terms of both quantity and quality. Degradation of the natural resource base There is little contestation over the degradation of the natural resource base. Industrial practices result in vast tracts of degraded land, yield declines, loss of plant and animal species diversity, increase in susceptibility to disease, and other serious side-effects over the medium to long term, and have led to a loss of livelihoods (Tansey and Worsley, 1995; FAO, 1997; Conway, 1998; Pingali and Rosegrant, 1998; Oldeman, 1999; Sustain, 2003; Hole et al, 2005). This is particularly so for marginal lands, where the poor soils cannot sustain mono- cultures of annual crops, and which are more vulnerable to flood and drought (Hazell and Garrett, 2001; McNeely and Sherr, 2001). Environmental degradation is also expensive: even a decade ago, agricultural losses due to land degradation were about $550 million annually (Tansey and Worsley, 1995), and the UN estimates that global income loss due to desertification is $42 billion. Ecologically based, organic farming practices show themselves to be more successful at supporting a broad and adapted diversity of crop species and vari- eties, building soil fertility and plant resistance to disease and infection, and maintaining clean water courses (Greene and Kremen, 2003; SAN, 2003; Marriot and Wander, 2006). Strengthening the natural resource base also enables farms to better withstand external shocks and stresses, including drought and flood (Holt-Giménez, 2002; Lotter et al, 2003; Ching, 2004). Agriculture accounts for 70 per cent of freshwater use globally, and the UN predicts that, by 2025, 38 per cent of the population will have insufficient water supply (compared with 8 per cent in 2008) (Lang, 2008). Organic practices increase water retention capacity and efficiency by improving soil structure and increasing soil life, by cultivating climatically adapted varieties, and by growing polycultures of deeprooting and ground-covering crops. Evidence also indicates that organic farming approaches produce lower greenhouse-gas emissions. The reasons for this are threefold: they avoid ammonium nitrate fertilizer (the production of which was responsible for 10 per cent of Europe’s industrial gas emissions in 2003), they encourage carbon sequestration through cultivation of deeprooting plants, and livestock’s methane emissions are lower if they are feeding on legume pasture (Hamer and Anslow, 2008).

Environmental collapses causes extinction and nuclear resource wars
Takacs 96, Instructor in Department of Earth Systems Science and Policy at California State-Monterey Bay 96  (David, Philosophies of Paradise, Available online at www.dhushara.com/book/diversit/restor/takacs.htm, Accesssed 07/13/2012, ZR)

More often, however, humans are said to benefit from such ecosystem services. Half a century ago, Aldo Leopold warned: "Recent discoveries in mineral and vitamin nutrition reveal unsuspected dependencies in the up-circuit: incredibly minute quantities of certain substances determine the value of soils to plants, of plants to animals. What of the down-circuit? What of the vanishing species, the preservation of which we now regard as an esthetic luxury. They helped build the soil; in what unsuspected ways may they be essential to its maintenance?" More recently, Jane Lubchenco feels very strongly that people are in fact much more dependent on ecosystem services that are provided by both managed and unmanaged ecosystems than is generally perceived to be the case. So I think it's sheer folly for us to act in ways that are undermining the ability of both managed and unmanaged ecosystems to provide these services that we're depen dent on. And that we're doing that more and more as we pollute and destroy habitats, or alter habitats in one fashion or another. And I guess the bottom line is that we're changing the environment faster than our ability to understand the consequences of how we're changing it." Most predictions of eco-doom are predicated on this argument, and many are stated in much more dramatic terms than those Lubchenco employs. As the argument runs, a myriad of organisms, especially "little things," comprise ecosystems that provide countless services that keep the Earth's biotic and abiotic processes up and running.' According to Souls, "Many, if not all, ecological processes have thresholds below and above which they become discontinuous, chaotic, or suspended." Biodiversity may regulate these processes; among its many talents, biodiversity is said to create soil and maintain its fertility, control global climate, inhibit agricultural pests, maintain atmospheric gas balances, process organic wastes, pollinate crops and flowers, and recycle nutrients.' Confusion in this line of argumentation ties back into why the concept of biodiversity has risen to prominence. Remember that biologists have scant understanding of the roles that species or populations play in maintaining ecosystems. In interviews, Lovejoy, Falk, and Ray confessed that you can strip away many species from an ecosystem without loss of ecosystem function. Ehrlich points out that by the time a species is endangered, it has probably stopped playing an important role in keeping the system functioning anyway." Furthermore, it is not clear whether we should focus on species as functional cogs in the ecosystem wheel, or whether ecological services are emergent properties of ecosystems themselves. With the biodiversity concept, these dilemmas become nearly moot. Biodiversity embraces lists of species, lists of ecosystems, the interactions of species within ecosystems, and the processes that species may maintain or control. When arguing on behalf of bio-diversity, one need not focus on the specifics-specifically, the specifics of what we don't know. It is enough to explicate some of the functions that keep ecosystems running, or that ecosystems provide for us, and then extrapolate to the dangers associated with declining biodiversity. Peter Raven bases his thinking on Leopold's observation "To keep every cog and wheel is the first precaution of intelligent tinkering": "In every sense, in the sense of communities that will preserve soil, promote local climate, keep the atmosphere, preserve water, and every thing else, the first rule of being able to put together communities well or have the world go on functioning well, or to keep climates as they are, or to retard disease, to produce products we want sustainably, be cause, after all, plants, algae, and photosynthetic bacteria are the only device we have to capture energy from the sun effectively-in all those senses, and in the sense that we're losing the parts so rapidly, I consider the loss of biological diversity to be the most serious problem that we have-far more serious than global climate change or stratospheric ozone depletion, or anything else." "Habitat destruction and conversion are eliminating species at such a frightening pace that extinction of many contemporary species and the systems they live in and support ... may lead to ecological disaster and severe alteration of the evolutionary process," Terry Erwin writes." And E. 0. Wilson notes: "The question I am asked most frequently about the diversity of life: if enough species are extinguished, will the ecosystem collapse, and will the extinction of most other species follow soon afterward? The only answer anyone can give is: possibly. By the time we find out, however, it might be too late. One planet, one experiment."" So biodiversity keeps the world running. It has value in and for itself, as well as for us. Raven, Erwin, and Wilson oblige us to think about the value of biodiversity for our own lives. The Ehrlichs' rivet-popper trope makes this same point; by eliminating rivets, we play Russian roulette with global ecology and human futures: "It is likely that destruction of the rich complex of species in the Amazon basin could trigger rapid changes in global climate patterns. Agriculture remains heavily dependent on stable climate, and human beings remain heavily dependent on food. By the end of the century the extinction of perhaps a million species in the Amazon basin could have entrained famines in which a billion human beings perished. And if our species is very unlucky, the famines could lead to a thermonuclear war, which could extinguish civilization."" Elsewhere, Ehrlich uses different particulars with no less drama: What then will happen if the current decimation of organic diversity continues? Crop yields will be more difficult to maintain in the face of climatic change, soil erosion, loss of dependable water supplies, decline of pollinators, and ever more serious assaults by pests. Conversion of productive land to wasteland will accelerate; deserts will continue their seemingly inexorable expansion. Air pollution will increase, and local climates will become harsher. Humanity will have to forgo many of the direct economic benefits it might have withdrawn from Earth's well stocked genetic library. It might, for example, miss out on a cure for cancer; but that will make little difference. As ecosystem services falter, mortality from respiratory and epidemic disease, natural disasters, and especially famine will lower life expectancies to the point where can cer (largely a disease of the elderly) will be unimportant. Humanity will bring upon itself consequences depressingly similar to those expected from a nuclear winter. Barring a nuclear conflict, it appears that civilization will disappear some time before the end of the next century not with a bang but a whimper.

Resource wars are likely and escalate
Klare 13—professor of peace and world security studies at Hampshire College (Michael, April 23rd, “Entering A Resource-Shock World: How Resource Scarcity And Climate Change Could Produce A Global Explosion” http://www.countercurrents.org/klare230413.htm, chm)

Brace yourself. You may not be able to tell yet, but according to global experts and the U.S. intelligence community, the earth is already shifting under you. Whether you know it or not, you’re on a new planet, a resource-shock world of a sort humanity has never before experienced.¶ Two nightmare scenarios -- a global scarcity of vital resources and the onset of extreme climate change -- are already beginning to converge and in the coming decades are likely to produce a tidal wave of unrest, rebellion, competition, and conflict. Just what this tsunami of disaster will look like may, as yet, be hard to discern, but experts warn of “water wars” over contested river systems, global food riots sparked by soaring prices for life’s basics, mass migrations of climate refugees (with resulting anti-migrant violence), and the breakdown of social order or the collapse of states. At first, such mayhem is likely to arise largely in Africa, Central Asia, and other areas of the underdeveloped South, but in time all regions of the planet will be affected.¶ To appreciate the power of this encroaching catastrophe, it’s necessary to examine each of the forces that are combining to produce this future cataclysm.¶ Resource Shortages and Resource Wars¶ Start with one simple given: the prospect of future scarcities of vital natural resources, including energy, water, land, food, and critical minerals. This in itself would guarantee social unrest, geopolitical friction, and war.¶ It is important to note that absolute scarcity doesn’t have to be on the horizon in any given resource category for this scenario to kick in. A lack of adequate supplies to meet the needs of a growing, ever more urbanized and industrialized global population is enough. Given the wave of extinctions that scientists are recording, some resources -- particular species of fish, animals, and trees, for example -- will become less abundant in the decades to come, and may even disappear altogether. But key materials for modern civilization like oil, uranium, and copper will simply prove harder and more costly to acquire, leading to supply bottlenecks and periodic shortages.¶ Oil -- the single most important commodity in the international economy -- provides an apt example. Although global oil supplies may actually grow in the coming decades, many experts doubt that they can be expanded sufficiently to meet the needs of a rising global middle class that is, for instance, expected to buy millions of new cars in the near future. In its 2011 World Energy Outlook, the International Energy Agency claimed that an anticipated global oil demand of 104 million barrels per day in 2035 will be satisfied. This, the report suggested, would be thanks in large part to additional supplies of “unconventional oil” (Canadian tar sands, shale oil, and so on), as well as 55 million barrels of new oil from fields “yet to be found” and “yet to be developed.”¶ However, many analysts scoff at this optimistic assessment, arguing that rising production costs (for energy that will be ever more difficult and costly to extract), environmental opposition, warfare, corruption, and other impediments will make it extremely difficult to achieve increases of this magnitude. In other words, even if production manages for a time to top the 2010 level of 87 million barrels per day, the goal of 104 million barrels will never be reached and the world’s major consumers will face virtual, if not absolute, scarcity.¶ Water provides another potent example. On an annual basis, the supply of drinking water provided by natural precipitation remains more or less constant: about 40,000 cubic kilometers. But much of this precipitation lands on Greenland, Antarctica, Siberia, and inner Amazonia where there are very few people, so the supply available to major concentrations of humanity is often surprisingly limited. In many regions with high population levels, water supplies are already relatively sparse. This is especially true of North Africa, Central Asia, and the Middle East, where the demand for water continues to grow as a result of rising populations, urbanization, and the emergence of new water-intensive industries. The result, even when the supply remains constant, is an environment of increasing scarcity.¶ Wherever you look, the picture is roughly the same: supplies of critical resources may be rising or falling, but rarely do they appear to be outpacing demand, producing a sense of widespread and systemic scarcity. However generated, a perception of scarcity -- or imminent scarcity -- regularly leads to anxiety, resentment, hostility, and contentiousness. This pattern is very well understood, and has been evident throughout human history.¶ In his book Constant Battles, for example, Steven LeBlanc, director of collections for Harvard’s Peabody Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology, notes that many ancient civilizations experienced higher levels of warfare when faced with resource shortages brought about by population growth, crop failures, or persistent drought. Jared Diamond, author of the bestseller Collapse, has detected a similar pattern in Mayan civilization and the Anasazi culture of New Mexico’s Chaco Canyon. More recently, concern over adequate food for the home population was a significant factor in Japan’s invasion of Manchuria in 1931 and Germany’s invasions of Poland in 1939 and the Soviet Union in 1941, according to Lizzie Collingham, author of The Taste of War.¶ Although the global supply of most basic commodities has grown enormously since the end of World War II, analysts see the persistence of resource-related conflict in areas where materials remain scarce or there is anxiety about the future reliability of supplies. Many experts believe, for example, that the fighting in Darfur and other war-ravaged areas of North Africa has been driven, at least in part, by competition among desert tribes for access to scarce water supplies, exacerbated in some cases by rising population levels.¶ “In Darfur,” says a 2009 report from the U.N. Environment Programme on the role of natural resources in the conflict, “recurrent drought, increasing demographic pressures, and political marginalization are among the forces that have pushed the region into a spiral of lawlessness and violence that has led to 300,000 deaths and the displacement of more than two million people since 2003.”¶ Anxiety over future supplies is often also a factor in conflicts that break out over access to oil or control of contested undersea reserves of oil and natural gas. In 1979, for instance, when the Islamic revolution in Iran overthrew the Shah and the Soviets invaded Afghanistan, Washington began to fear that someday it might be denied access to Persian Gulf oil. At that point, President Jimmy Carter promptly announced what came to be called the Carter Doctrine. In his 1980 State of the Union Address, Carter affirmed that any move to impede the flow of oil from the Gulf would be viewed as a threat to America’s “vital interests” and would be repelled by “any means necessary, including military force.”¶ In 1990, this principle was invoked by President George H.W. Bush to justify intervention in the first Persian Gulf War, just as his son would use it, in part, to justify the 2003 invasion of Iraq. Today, it remains the basis for U.S. plans to employ force to stop the Iranians from closing the Strait of Hormuz, the strategic waterway connecting the Persian Gulf to the Indian Ocean through which about 35 of the world’s seaborne oil commerce passes.¶ Recently, a set of resource conflicts have been rising toward the boiling point between China and its neighbors in Southeast Asia when it comes to control of offshore oil and gas reserves in the South China Sea. Although the resulting naval clashes have yet to result in a loss of life, a strong possibility of military escalation exists. A similar situation has also arisen in the East China Sea, where China and Japan are jousting for control over similarly valuable undersea reserves. Meanwhile, in the South Atlantic Ocean, Argentina and Britain are once again squabbling over the Falkland Islands (called Las Malvinas by the Argentinians) because oil has been discovered in surrounding waters.¶ By all accounts, resource-driven potential conflicts like these will only multiply in the years ahead as demand rises, supplies dwindle, and more of what remains will be found in disputed areas. In a 2012 study titled Resources Futures, the respected British think-tank Chatham House expressed particular concern about possible resource wars over water, especially in areas like the Nile and Jordan River basins where several groups or countries must share the same river for the majority of their water supplies and few possess the wherewithal to develop alternatives. “Against this backdrop of tight supplies and competition, issues related to water rights, prices, and pollution are becoming contentious,” the report noted. “In areas with limited capacity to govern shared resources, balance competing demands, and mobilize new investments, tensions over water may erupt into more open confrontations
Independently, industrial ag will cause extinction
Johan Rockström et al 9 is a Environmental Professor in natural resource management at Stockholm University, and the Executive Director of the Stockholm Environment Institute and the Stockholm Resilience Centre, along with 27 other members of the SEI and SRC, A safe operating space for humanity, Nature 461, 472-475 (24 September 2009), www.nature.com/nature/journal/v461/n7263/full/461472a.html
Crossing certain biophysical thresholds could have disastrous consequences for humanity
Three of nine interlinked planetary boundaries have already been overstepped
Although Earth has undergone many periods of significant environmental change, the planet's environment has been unusually stable for the past 10,000 years 1, 2, 3. This period of stability — known to geologists as the Holocene — has seen human civilizations arise, develop and thrive. Such stability may now be under threat. Since the Industrial Revolution, a new era has arisen, the Anthropocene4, in which human actions have become the main driver of global environmental change5. This could see human activities push the Earth system outside the stable environmental state of the Holocene, with consequences that are detrimental or even catastrophic for large parts of the world.
During the Holocene, environmental change occurred naturally and Earth's regulatory capacity maintained the conditions that enabled human development. Regular temperatures, freshwater availability and biogeochemical flows all stayed within a relatively narrow range. Now, largely because of a rapidly growing reliance on fossil fuels and industrialized forms of agriculture, human activities have reached a level that could damage the systems that keep Earth in the desirable Holocene state. The result could be irreversible and, in some cases, abrupt environmental change, leading to a state less conducive to human development6. Without pressure from humans, the Holocene is expected to continue for at least several thousands of years7.
To meet the challenge of maintaining the Holocene state, we propose a framework based on 'planetary boundaries'. These boundaries define the safe operating space for humanity with respect to the Earth system and are associated with the planet's biophysical subsystems or processes. Although Earth's complex systems sometimes respond smoothly to changing pressures, it seems that this will prove to be the exception rather than the rule. Many subsystems of Earth react in a nonlinear, often abrupt, way, and are particularly sensitive around threshold levels of certain key variables. If these thresholds are crossed, then important subsystems, such as a monsoon system, could shift into a new state, often with deleterious or potentially even disastrous consequences for humans8, 9.
Most of these thresholds can be defined by a critical value for one or more control variables, such as carbon dioxide concentration. Not all processes or subsystems on Earth have well-defined thresholds, although human actions that undermine the resilience of such processes or subsystems — for example, land and water degradation — can increase the risk that thresholds will also be crossed in other processes, such as the climate system.
We have tried to identify the Earth-system processes and associated thresholds which, if crossed, could generate unacceptable environmental change. We have found nine such processes for which we believe it is necessary to define planetary boundaries: climate change; rate of biodiversity loss (terrestrial and marine); interference with the nitrogen and phosphorus cycles; stratospheric ozone depletion; ocean acidification; global freshwater use; change in land use; chemical pollution; and atmospheric aerosol loading (see Fig. 1 andTable).
The inner green shading represents the proposed safe operating space for nine planetary systems. The red wedges represent an estimate of the current position for each variable. The boundaries in three systems (rate of biodiversity loss, climate change and human interference with the nitrogen cycle), have already been exceeded.
In general, planetary boundaries are values for control variables that are either at a 'safe' distance from thresholds — for processes with evidence of threshold behaviour — or at dangerous levels — for processes without evidence of thresholds. Determining a safe distance involves normative judgements of how societies choose to deal with risk and uncertainty. We have taken a conservative, risk-averse approach to quantifying our planetary boundaries, taking into account the large uncertainties that surround the true position of many thresholds. (A detailed description of the boundaries — and the analyses behind them — is given in ref. 10.)
Humanity may soon be approaching the boundaries for global freshwater use, change in land use, ocean acidification and interference with the global phosphorous cycle (see Fig. 1). Our analysis suggests that three of the Earth-system processes — climate change, rate of biodiversity loss and interference with the nitrogen cycle — have already transgressed their boundaries. For the latter two of these, the control variables are the rate of species loss and the rate at which N2 is removed from the atmosphere and converted to reactive nitrogen for human use, respectively. These are rates of change that cannot continue without significantly eroding the resilience of major components of Earth-system functioning. Here we describe these three processes.

Also causes warming
Cummins 10 (Ronnie, founder and Director of the Organic Consumers Association (OCA), a non-profit, U.S. based network of 850,000 consumers, dedicated to safeguarding organic standards and promoting a healthy, just, and sustainable system of agriculture and commerce. The OCA’s primary strategy is to work on national and global campaigns promoting health, justice, and sustainability that integrate public education, marketplace pressure, media work, litigation, and grassroots lobbying. Cummins is also editor of OCA’s website www.organicconsumers.org (30,000 visitors a day) and newsletters, Organic Bytes (270,000 subscribers), and Organic View, he has served as director of US and international efforts such as the Pure Food Campaign, and the Global Days of Action Against GMOs. From 1992-98 Cummins served as a campaign director for the Foundation on Economic Trends in Washington, D.C, October 10th, 2010, “Industrial Agriculture and Human Survival: The Road Beyond 10/10/10”, http://www.commondreams.org/view/2010/10/07-9)//moxley
Industrial Food and Farming: A Deadly Root of Global Warming Although transportation, industry, and energy producers are obviously major fossil fuel users and greenhouse gas polluters, not enough people understand that the worst U.S. and global greenhouse gas emitter is “Food Incorporated,” transnational industrial food and farming, of which Monsanto and GMOs constitute a major part. Industrial farming, including 173 million acres of GE soybeans, corn, cotton, canola, and sugar beets, accounts for at least 35 of U.S. greenhouse gas emissions (EPA’s ridiculously low estimates range from 7 to 12, while some climate scientists feel the figure could be as high as 50 or more). Industrial agriculture, biofuels, and non-sustainable cattle grazing - including cutting down the last remaining tropical rainforests in Latin America and Asia for GMO and chemical-intensive animal feed and biofuels - are also the main driving forces in global deforestation and wetlands destruction, which generate an additional 20 of all climate destabilizing GHGs. In other words the direct (food, fiber, and biofuels production, food processing, food distribution) and indirect damage (deforestation and destruction of wetlands) of industrial agriculture, GMOs, and the food industry are the major cause of global warming. Unless we take down Monsanto and Food Inc. and make the Great Transition to a relocalized system of organic food and farming, we and our children are doomed to reside in Climate Hell. Overall 78 of climate destabilizing greenhouse gases come from CO2, while the remainder come from methane, nitrous oxide, and black carbon or soot. To stabilize the climate we will need to drastically reduce all of these greenhouse gas emissions, not just CO2, and sequester twice as much carbon matter in the soil (through organic farming and ranching, and forest and wetlands restoration) as we are doing presently. Currently GMO and industrial/factory farms (energy and chemical-intensive) farms emit at least 25 of the carbon dioxide (mostly from tractors, trucks, combines, transportation, cooling, freezing, and heating); 40 of the methane (mostly from massive herds of animals belching and farting, and manure ponds); and 96 of nitrous oxide (mostly from synthetic fertilizer manufacture and use, the millions of tons of animal manure from factory-farmed cattle herds, pig and poultry flocks, and millions of tons of sewage sludge spread on farms). Black carbon or soot comes primarily from older diesel engines, slash and burn agriculture, and wood cook stoves. Per ton, methane is 21 times more damaging, and nitrous oxide 310 times more damaging, as a greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide, when measured over a one hundred year period. Damage is even worse if you look at the impact on global warming over the next crucial 20-year period. Many climate scientists admit that they have previously drastically underestimated the dangers of the non-CO2 GHGs, including methane, soot, and nitrous oxide, which are responsible for at least 22 of global warming. Almost all U.S. food and farm-derived methane comes from factory farms, huge herds of confined cows, hogs, and poultry operations, in turn made possible by heavily subsidized ($15 billion per year) GMO soybeans, corn, cottonseed, and canola; as well as rotting food waste thrown into landfills instead of being separated out of the solid waste stream and properly composted. To drastically reduce C02, methane, and nitrous oxide releases we need an immediate consumer boycott, followed by a government ban on factory farms, dairies, and feedlots. To reduce black carbon or soot emissions we will need to upgrade old diesel engines, and provide farmers and rural villagers in the developing world with alternatives to slash and burn agriculture (compost, compost tea, biochar) and non-polluting cook stoves and home heating. We also need to implement mandatory separation and recycling of food wastes and “green garbage” (yard waste, tree branches, etc.) at the municipal level, so that that we can reduce methane emissions from landfills. Mandatory composting will also enable us to produce large quantities of high quality organic compost to replace the billions of pounds of chemical fertilizer and sewage sludge, which are releasing GHGs, destroying soil fertility, polluting our waters, and undermining public health. Nearly all nitrous oxide pollution comes from dumping billions of pounds of synthetic nitrogen fertilizer and sewage sludge on farmland (chemical fertilizers and sludge are banned on organic farms and ranches), mainly to grow GMO crops and animal feed. Since about 80 of U.S. agriculture is devoted to producing non-organic, non-grass fed meat, dairy, and animal products, reducing agriculture GHGs means eliminating the overproduction and over-consumption of GMO crops, factory-farmed meat, and animal products. It also means creating massive consumer demand for organic foods, including pasture-raised, grass-fed animal products. The fact that climate change is now metastasizing into climate chaos is indisputable: massive flooding in Pakistan, unprecedented forest fires in Russia and the Amazon, melting of the glaciers that supply water for crops and drinking water of a billion people in Asia and South America, crop failures in regions all over the globe, record heat waves in the U.S. and Europe, methane leaking from the Arctic tundra and coastlines, killer hurricanes in the Gulf of Mexico and Central America, and steadily spreading pestilence, crop failures, and disease. The realization that every time we eat non-organic processed food, we are ingesting unlabeled, hazardous GMO foods and pesticides is indeed alarming. But the impending threat of industrial food and farming detonating runaway climate change (i.e. moving from our current .8 degree Centigrade average global rise in temperature to 2-6 degrees) is terrifying. Either we rein in industrial food and farming and GMOs, out-of-control politicians and corporations, and make the transition to an organic and green economy or we will perish.

Warming is real and anthropogenic --- causes extinction
Flournoy 12 – PhD and MA from the University of Texas, Former Dean of the University College @ Ohio University, Former Associate Dean @ State University of New York and Case Institute of Technology, Project Manager for University/Industry Experiments for the NASA ACTS Satellite, Currently Professor of Telecommunications @ Scripps College of Communications @ Ohio University (Don, "Solar Power Satellites," January, Springer Briefs in Space Development, Book)

In the Online Journal of Space Communication , Dr. Feng Hsu, a NASA scientist at Goddard Space Flight Center, a research center in the forefront of science of space and Earth, writes, “The evidence of global warming is alarming,” noting the potential for a catastrophic planetary climate change is real and troubling (Hsu 2010 ) . Hsu and his NASA colleagues were engaged in monitoring and analyzing climate changes on a global scale, through which they received first-hand scientific information and data relating to global warming issues, including the dynamics of polar ice cap melting. After discussing this research with colleagues who were world experts on the subject, he wrote: I now have no doubt global temperatures are rising, and that global warming is a serious problem confronting all of humanity. No matter whether these trends are due to human interference or to the cosmic cycling of our solar system, there are two basic facts that are crystal clear: (a) there is overwhelming scientific evidence showing positive correlations between the level of CO2 concentrations in Earth’s atmosphere with respect to the historical fluctuations of global temperature changes; and (b) the overwhelming majority of the world’s scientific community is in agreement about the risks of a potential catastrophic global climate change. That is, if we humans continue to ignore this problem and do nothing, if we continue dumping huge quantities of greenhouse gases into Earth’s biosphere, humanity will be at dire risk (Hsu 2010 ) . As a technology risk assessment expert, Hsu says he can show with some confidence that the planet will face more risk doing nothing to curb its fossil-based energy addictions than it will in making a fundamental shift in its energy supply. “This,” he writes, “is because the risks of a catastrophic anthropogenic climate change can be potentially the extinction of human species, a risk that is simply too high for us to take any chances” (Hsu 2010 ) . It was this NASA scientist’s conclusion that humankind must now embark on the next era of “sustainable energy consumption and re-supply, the most obvious source of which is the mighty energy resource of our Sun” (Hsu 2010 ) (Fig . 2.1 ). 

1AC 2
Advantage two is legitimacy—plan solves 

1) Creates a new, non-contradictory image of American policy
The UN voted against it hella times
We have relations with similar nations (china, Saudi Arabia etc.)
this is all amplified by our cuban transition advantage
we solve even if cuba puts up internal barriers
Conditioning on Democracy is bad because it is imposes it which fails and looks terrible—trade is better for democracy
Cuba probably won’t reciprocate—it’s our fault
Embargo just legitimizes the failing regime
Embargo definitionally fails because it doesn’t have international support
Dickerson 10 – Lieutenant Colonel, US Army, paper submitted in fulfillment of a Master of Strategic Studies Degree at the US Army War College (Sergio M, “UNITED STATES SECURITY STRATEGY TOWARDS CUBA,” 1/14/10, http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a518053.pdf)//SJF

At the international political level, President Obama sees resuming relations with Cuba as a real step towards multilateralism and leadership. U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon made the following statement about then President-elect Barrack Obama’s national election. “He spoke about a “new era of global partnership…I am confident that we can look forward to an era of renewed partnership and a new multilateralism." To highlight this point further, U.N. nations have voted overwhelmingly since 1992 to overturn the Cuban Embargo. In 2007, 184 nations voted against the embargo 5 - a powerful statement about U.S. unilateralism with regards to Cuba. The argument can also be made that the U.S. has foreign relations with China, Saudi Arabia and other non-democratic governments while applying a different standard towards Cuba. With growing perception that Cuba no longer poses a credible threat to the U.S., it appears that U.S. policy has changed from coercive to punitive following the end of the Cold War. With a renewed focus on multilateralism, President Obama could go a long way to break this image by spreading the seeds of a “new beginning” in U.S.-Cuba relations. While dismissing Cuba’s immediate security threat to the U.S., we cannot ignore their 90-mile proximity to the U.S. shore. As we struggle to contain the illegal Mexican exodus into the U.S. and all the security concerns it poses, we neglect to see the historical similarities in past encounters with the Cuban government that led to similar incursions. So if we critically reexamine the current U.S. – Cuba embargo, why does the U.S. believe it will only lead to Cuban democratization? What about government collapse? A Cuban government collapse akin to Somalia could create a significant refugee situation not to mention an implied U.S. responsibility to provide humanitarian and even stability operations in Cuba. If catastrophe does occur, a search for causes would certainly lead back to our punitive approaches to U.S. diplomacy towards Cuba. On the other hand, consider that foreign diplomacy achieves a breakthrough under Raul’s Cuba. It could certainly hedge our influence in Latin America. According to Dr. DeShazo, “close bilateral relationships with Venezuela is a product of Fidel Castro-Hugo Chavez friendship and does not enjoy much popular support in Cuba-nor with Raul.” If true, perhaps having a U.S. - Cuba option can become an alternative to that relationship post Fidel Castro. Loosening or lifting the embargo could also be mutually beneficial. Cuba’s need and America’s surplus capability could be mutually beneficial - and eventually addictive to Cuba. Under these conditions, diplomacy has a better chance to flourish. If negotiations break down and a decision to continue the embargo is reached, international support would be easier to garner. Almost 21 years since the wall fell in Berlin, it is time to chip away at the diplomatic wall that still remains between U.S. and Cuba. This paper will further define our interests in Cuba and why President Obama should continue his quest for renewed diplomatic relations with Cuba. It will discuss potential risks associated with retaining the current 50-year diplomatic policy and give some broad suggestions regarding a new U.S. – Cuba foreign policy. Policy and National Interest Present U.S. policy towards Cuba is economic isolation imposed via embargo to coerce Cuba into establishing a representative government. While the basic policy remains unchanged, the same is not true about U.S. interests in Cuba. During the Cold War, stated U.S. interest was to contain Communism, the leading edge of which was Cuba. More than anything the U.S. wanted Castro’s demise but international support hinged on preventing the spread of communism. After 1989, communism was under siege and capitalism was on the rise. U.S. interests now shifted towards peace and regional stability. Of course, removing the Castro regime was still the preferred method, but without Soviet collusion Castro’s Cuba was no longer a credible threat to the U.S. Not surprisingly, international support quickly dwindled leaving the U.S. as the unilateral enforcer. In hindsight many argued it was the right time to loosen the embargo and seek better relations with Cuba. Instead, a renewed passion to topple Castro and establish democracy fractured any hopes to rekindle relations. In retrospect, Kennedy could not have foreseen a 50-year embargo that survives the Soviet Union’s demise but fails to remove Castro. The same cannot be said about the Obama Administration today. This section will analyze U.S. – Cuba policy, past opportunities and ultimate failure over the past 50 years. From 1959 to1964, beginning with President Eisenhower but shaped primarily by the Kennedy Administration, U.S. policy was to remove Fidel Castro and establish Democracy in Cuba.6 It can be argued that this policy resonates today but during the early period the U.S. actively pursued removal as the decisive action that would lead to Democracy in Cuba. Political and military efforts to remove Castro in 1961 were reinforced by the initial embargo implementation and tightening that was most effective. Between1965 and 1970, U.S. attempts to maintain a multilateral embargo failed and its effectiveness withered as western governments refused to acquiesce to U.S. - led sanctions. By the time the OAS officially lifted the embargo, Cuba had successfully diversified its trade portfolio and by 1974, 45 of Cuba’s exports came from western governments.7 The period 1965-1972, although officially endorsing the previous administration’s tough stance, largely ignored its neighbor while it dealt with the more pressing conflict in Viet Nam. Containment and a period of Presidential ambivalence towards Cuba allowed tensions to cool between nations. This coupled with a growing fatigue with the Viet Nam War resulted in a renewed engagement to normalize relations with Cuba. A policy of “rapprochement” or normalization began with the Nixon Administration and received promising traction under the Carter Administration in 1977. The rapprochement period, 1973 – 1980, was President Carter’s attempt to curtail communism in Africa and Latin America. By normalizing relations with Cuba, President Carter could leverage this good will to reverse Cuban presence in Ethiopia, Angola and Zaire. Several overt measures were taken to reduce embargo restrictions and in February, 1977 State Department spokesmen Fred Brown “publically acknowledged and accepted a Cuban proposal to begin bilateral talks on maritime boundaries and fishing rights.”8 In June, U.S. National Security Council decided to end the practice of blacklisting foreign ships that called on Cuban ports. Perhaps the most notable improvement that year was to allow foreign diplomats to occupy each other’s embassies. This allowed direct communication between countries; the previous practice had been to use Swiss and Czech proxies.9 Several incidents including the “Soviet Brigade” and the “Mariel Boatlift” in 1980 intensified this opposition and quickly derailed Carter’s initiatives in Congress. As President Reagan took office in 1980, U.S. – Cuba relations had already soured. The Reagan Administration would reinforce the weakened embargo and a return to a containment strategy under the auspices that Cuba was “promoting terrorism and subversion in virtually every Latin American country”. But strong Congressional opposition against normalizing relations took center stage during the 1980 presidential elections. Several incidents including the “Soviet Brigade” and the “Mariel Boatlift” in 1980 intensified this opposition and quickly derailed Carter’s initiatives in Congress. 10 The White House policy was to “disrupt and destabilize the island’s economy, terminate the Cuban-Soviet alliance, end Cuba’s internationalism, and finally reinsert Cuba within the capitalist politicaleconomic orbit.”11 President Reagan made every attempt to return to an “airtight” embargo but Cuba’s persistent trade with the west subverted the effort. In fact, British and Canadian companies could conduct trade in “America’s back garden without having to compete with U.S. companies.”12 Reagan did however, exact a toll on Cuba’s economy by preventing other nations from allowing Cuba to reschedule its debt: “a process of negotiating new loans to replace existing obligations, either by lengthening maturities, deferring of loan principal payment.”13 This action compelled Cuba to make its most overt concessions towards normalizing U.S. - Cuban relations. Castro removed troops from Africa and reclaimed 2,700 Cuban refugees that had departed to America during the 1980 Mariel Boatlift. Castro even allowed a U.S. Human Rights delegation to visit prisoners in Cuba. In return, the Reagan and Bush Administrations made no significant concessions to Cuba and status quo between countries remained. The last meaningful opportunity for change occurred after the fall of the Berlin Wall and particularly the window it presented the U.S. following the collapse in Soviet – Cuba relations. During the period 1990 – 1993, internal and economic turmoil following the Soviet Union’s break-up led to a drastic cut in Soviet subsidies and trade relations with Cuba. This action compelled Cuba to make its most overt concessions towards normalizing U.S. - Cuban relations. Castro removed troops from Africa and reclaimed 2,700 Cuban refugees that had departed to America during the 1980 Mariel Boatlift. Castro even allowed a U.S. Human Rights delegation to visit prisoners in Cuba. In return, the Reagan and Bush Administrations made no significant concessions to Cuba and status quo between countries remained. 14 This led to a 34 drop in Cuban economy forcing Castro to renew western trade options and relook his own draconian business and commercial practices. The first Bush Administration passed on this precious opportunity, ignoring Cuba’s overt concessions late in the previous administration and choosing instead to enact the 1992 Cuban Democracy Act reversing Carter’s amendment to allow third country U.S. companies from trading with Cuba.15 By the time President Clinton came to office, momentum had already shifted in Cuba’s favor. Cuba’s economy began to rise in 1994 reaching its apex in 1996 with a 41 increase thanks to foreign investments in tourism. The introduction of the HelmsBurton legislation in 1996 gained Congressional traction after the Cuban Air force shot down two, anti-Castro “Brothers in Rescue,” planes over Cuba. The Helms-Burton Act created unrealistic expectations for the Cuban government before U.S. would loosen restrictions with Cuba. A total of eight requirements had to be met and the most controversial of these included; a transitional government in place unlike the Castro regime; the dissolution of the Department of State; Cuba must hold free and fair elections and a controversial property law that allowed property owners that left Cuba as early as 1959, to make claims in U.S. Courts on that property. With Cuba’s economy on the rise, this new measure to tighten the noose failed terribly and only succeeded in further alienating both governments. The second Bush Administration did little to engage Cuba and after September 11, 2001, was completely engrossed in the War on Terror. U.S. policy towards Cuba has changed little in 50 years. Although the embargo continues to fail despite our best efforts to tighten it, our policy has remained steadfast and the U.S. is no closer to normalizing relations with Cuba. A History of Anger and Distrust After 50 years, deep-seated distrust and anger exists between the U.S. and Cuba. Perhaps an obvious assessment, but one that if ignored could undermine attempts to repair diplomatic relations between countries. Several diplomatic pitfalls developed over the years could hinder any attempt to reestablish relations. They could spell disaster and set an already tenuous relationship back decades. These triggers are subtle but recognizable over a long and tumultuous period in U.S. – Cuba relations. A historical account will help identify these political impasses and create favorable conditions for diplomatic success in future U.S. – Cuba relations. Experts argue over who’s started the dispute between nations: was it the Cuban Agrarian Reform Act in 1959 that nationalized agrarian land in Cuba to include U.S. owned lands? Could it have been Cuba’s decision to resume trade with the Soviet 9Union that led to a U.S. imposed embargo on Cuba in 1960? Perhaps the bigger issue was how diplomatic, economic and military efforts by both countries continued to aggravate already strained relations.16 In 1961, Cuban exiles supported by the Central Intelligence Agency failed to topple the Castro government. The Bay of Pigs fiasco sent Cuba a clear signal that the U.S. was not interested in negotiation. Castro answered immediately by allowing Soviets to position nuclear missiles in Cuba, threatening U.S. vital security and leading to the Cuban Missile Crises. These intentions have survived to the present undermining any attempt to pursue common interest and reduce tensions. The underlying fear that U.S. remains committed to toppling the Cuban government constitutes the first diplomatic pitfall in U.S. – Cuban relations. For this very reason, democratic reform will not succeed as a diplomatic bargaining tool with Cuba. Suspicions run deep among Cuban leaders and any inferences to government reform, albeit noble, will impede meaningful relations. Human rights advocacy, free trade and limited business opportunities in Cuba may be more plausible and could eventually encourage the long-term changes U.S. wants in Cuba. The embargo itself remains a perpetual albatross that continues to undermine any real diplomatic progress between nations. A series of coercive measures designed to topple the Castro regime began with U.S. – led efforts to expel Cuba from the Organization of American States (OAS) in January 1962 followed by trade prohibitions on imports and exports to Cuba by the U.S. Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC). 17 This was achieved by leveraging an existing 1954 OAS Caracas Resolution designed to prevent trade with communist countries called Trading with the Enemy.18 After bilateral sanctions are established, U.S. pursued broader international support by 10enacting the October 1962 Battle Act prohibiting U.S. assistance to any country that traded with Cuba. An early attempt to persuade the North American Treaty Organization (NATO) nations to comply with the embargo yielded limited success.19 However, a new perceived security threat brought on by the Cuban Missile Crises in late 1962 gave U.S. the leverage it needed in February 1964 to convince NATO nations to effectively cease trade with Cuba. In July 1964, OAS followed NATO’s lead; U.S. had succeeded in isolating Cuba from its western traders.20 Tightening the noose placed extraordinary economic pressure on Cuba considering U.S. multilateral efforts reduced western trade by 73 in 1964. Cuba was obliged to subsidize this deficit with the Soviet Union and China between1961 – 1973. This trend continued by enticing Latin American and other western countries like Canada and England in the 1980s and following the Soviet fall in the 1990s.21Commensurately, Presidential administrations have loosened and tightened the embargo repeatedly as the climate between nations improved or deteriorated. The Cuban Defense Act in 1992 and the Helms Burton Act in 1996 tightened embargo restrictions signaling continued U.S. intentions to remove the Castro regime. But the U.S. - led embargo played right into Castro’s hand. Castro accused the U.S. calling it “another economic aggression” and stating that Cubans would have to undergo “long years of sacrifice.”22 By demonizing U.S. policy, he was able to galvanize Cuban support during the toughest times. The embargo helped create the American enemy, removing any popular support for rebellion and elevating Castro’s struggle to a legitimate Cuban struggle.11Castro was also complicit in the failure to mend U.S. – Cuba relations. Hiscontinued attempts to export communism began in Africa with a total 55,000 troops in Angola and Ethiopia by 1978. He focused efforts closer to Latin America by supporting Puerto Rican independence movement in 1975, the Sandinistas overthrow in Nicaragua in 1979 and the Farabundo Marti National Liberation (FMLN) in El Salvador. Cuba’s support to Columbia’s M19 (Columbian Election Day April 19, 1970) guerilla movement labeled Cuba a “state sponsor of terrorism” in 1982.23 Castro’s expansion efforts fueled U.S. security paranoia and prevented several overt efforts by the Carter Administration to improve relations with Cuba. In April 1980, an incident at the U.S. Mission in Havana led 120,000 Cubans to depart Mariel Port by boat to the U.S.24 The incident better known as the “Mariel Boatlift” became the tipping point that inhibited further relations with Cuba. Despite the growing tensions between the U.S. and Cuba, trade between the west and Cuba increased. NATO compliance with U.S. - brokered trade restrictions broke down after 1966 in particular due to British and Canadian opposition. U.S. efforts to use the OAS embargo to influence the United Nations also failed. In 1974, Latin American leaders pushed to end the OAS embargo. In 1975 the OAS lifted the embargo with Cuba and the embargo returned to a bilateral embargo now condemnedby most western countries.25 In 1982, Cuba’s failing economy led Castro to pursue western trade with a renewed vigor. By “1987, more than 370 firms from twenty-three European, Latin American, and Asian countries participated in Cuba’s largest ever annual trade fair.”26 Castro’s interest in improving U.S. - Cuba relations was perhaps the greatest from 1982-1988. Castro made statements in 1982 to resume talks with the U.S.; he took back more than 1000 Mariel Boatlift criminals that came to the U.S. in 1987 and pulled troops out of Angola in 1988 to mention a few. These rare moments and apparent seams in Castro’s armor were left unanswered by the Reagan and Bush Administrations. Instead renewed efforts to continue ratcheting a now largely ineffective bilateral embargo served only to increase animosity between both countries. It is difficult to quantify, but essential to note, that U.S. action over the years seems to support a hatred for Fidel Castro that interferes with any attempt to established diplomatic relations with Cuba. If true, to neglect this assumption could undermine any efforts to reverse our seemingly punitive approach. Perhaps it can be traced to his support for a Soviet-style communism. After all, few things in 1960 America were feared and despised more than communism. Any country affiliated with the communist movement became an affront to the American way of life. Furthermore, Americans shed blood in Cuba during the 1898 Spanish American War leading to Cuban Independence in 1902.27 Fidel Castro became evil’s face in Cuba and any attempt to partner with Castro seemed equally tainted. Fast forwarding to the present, with communism no longer a threat, perhaps it’s time to let the anger fade and deal with Cuba for its’ diplomatic merit not past indiscretions. The question remains whether clear objectiveness leads U.S. diplomatic efforts with Cuba? It is important to note that what’s at stake here is U.S. national interests and not the legacy of Fidel Castro. Another important pitfall is to exploit democracy as a precondition for diplomacy and economic engagement in Cuba. If democracy is virtuous, then why must we exploit it? It casts a negative shadow on a positive change in government. There is a common perception that U.S. policy with regards to security and stability can only exist under the precondition of a “Democratic Cuba”. It has prevented any real progress in U.S. – Cuba relations because of well placed fears that we mean to subvert the Cuban government. A popular Cuban American lobby group, The Cuban American National Foundation summarizes traditional U.S. beliefs towards Cuba. They suggest, “U.S. – Cuba policy should focus on (1) advancing U.S. interests and security in the region and (2) empowering Cuban people in their quest for democracy and prosperity…that these are “intertwined and one cannot be individually accomplished without the other.”28 The recommendation then focuses largely on steps to pursue a democratic Cuba. To separate security and stability from democratic pursuits in Cuba could benefit both causes. Focusing on better diplomatic relations could further democracy as a byproduct of increased exposure to open markets, businesses and globalization. China is a good example. The U.S. has diffused tensions with China by exposing them to open markets. Although they continue to embrace communism, their version of communism has been somewhat diluted as they modified their business practices, trade and other aspects to compete in the global marketplace. If you take into account that Cuba’s Growth National Product (GDP) decreased by 4 since 2006 while their debt grew by 16 to almost $20B in 2008, Cuba certainly has incentive to do the same.29 By imposing democracy we jeopardize diplomatic avenues to our principal security and stability pursuits. To assuage the Cuban America position on this issue may be simpler today than 10 years ago. Today’s younger Cuban-American generation is more amenable to closer relations with Cuba. The anger carried by their immigrant forefathers14after 50 years may be passing and perhaps the time is right to leverage this new Cuban American generation to open dialogue with Cuba without the democratic preconditions tied to negotiations. As we pursue diplomatic relations with Cuba we should not expect full disclosure, immediate results and a Cuban government anxious to please the U.S. We should expect a cautious and limited first engagement that appears noticeably weighted in U.S. effort. Let us assume the U.S. makes significant diplomatic and economic concessions but Cuba is less willing to provide some reciprocal offering. U.S. policy could conclude that Cuba has no genuine desire to consummate new diplomatic relations and diplomacy could fail. It is imperative to understand that the U.S. has done most of the “taking” and hence will, at least for the near future, do most of the “giving”. A steady, patient and continued engagement is needed until Cuba has the confidence to commit to further diplomatic relations. Current U.S.-Cuba Policy Analysis Understanding the deep-seated animosity and distrust that continues to fuel U.S. - Cuba tensions will aid us in properly analyzing the feasibility, acceptability and suitability (FAS) of current and future U.S. policy with Cuba. Identifying FAS applications to diplomacy, information, military, economic, finance, intelligence and law enforcement (DIME-FIL) will highlight weaknesses in current U.S. – Cuba relations that can be modified for future improvement. The logical question with regards to current U.S. – Cuba policy is whether it’s feasible to continue the current policy. At least for the foreseeable future, the answer is yes. It equates to doing nothing diplomatically, militarily and economically. Perhaps this 15 option is appealing given a robust domestic agenda and U.S. involvement in two wars. According to Professor Schwab and other experts however, the U.S. has lost the information campaign targeted at the Cuban people. It has only, “buttressed Fidel’s popularity in Cuba and elsewhere, which eviscerates the very purposes the embargo was set up for.”30 It’s like the classic biblical story of David triumphing over Goliath – the bigger the oppressor the greater the victory. True or not, Fidel has made the case successfully to the Cuban people. While it’s feasible for the U.S. to pursue the current course there is no evidence it will succeed. How acceptable is it to U.S. foreign policy? There are three elements of national power that highlight our current policy: diplomacy, economy and law enforcement. It is subjective to evaluate acceptability strictly in terms of current national power invested and subsequent pay offs in foreign policy. U.S. needs international cooperation to achieve the coercive effects that only complete economic strangulation can accomplish. This is tough to do and North Korea and Iran bear this true. If we look at it from a broader international and economic perspective we can begin to see why it’s not acceptable. Take a UN General Assembly vote renouncing the U.S.-led embargo on Cuba for instance; since1992 there has been overwhelming vote to end the embargo.31 In essence, it has garnered sympathy for Castro and encouraged western nations like Canada and Spain to continue open relations with Cuba. Even if the embargo could work, U.S. diplomacy has failed to yield the international tourniquet needed to bring change in Cuba. Applying economic force without first garnering the necessary diplomatic support failed to achieve intended changes, succeeding instead in hurting the Cuban people it hoped to protect. Whether or not an embargo can work in Cuba is suspect but succeeding without international support is impossible. Since the embargo hinges on a larger multinational participation, international and not just U.S. acceptability is necessary to achieve U.S. ends in Cuba. Several embargo refinements over the years like the Libertad Act have further tightened restrictions on Cuba. These restrictions have placed a heavy burden on the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), and the Customs and Border Protection (CBP) particularly in Miami. A 2007 GAO report highlights these burdens and how they impede other more important Law Enforcement activities in defense of the homeland.32 GAO findings suggest there’s a real need to balance U.S. paranoia for “everything Cuba.” This rebalancing purports an unacceptable cost-benefit to the current law enforcement aspect of the embargo. It diminishes our greater need to defend against terrorist, criminals and other real threats to our national security. In essence, our efforts to impose embargo restrictions are unacceptable tradeoffs for homeland security. In the final analysis, U.S. – Cuba policy is not sustainable because it has failed to meet desired national ends: Cuban democracy and human rights. Prior to 1989, the U.S. could make the argument that the embargo contained communism and generally marginalized the Castro government. It failed however, to depose Fidel Castro and democratize the Cuban government. A post Cold War Cuba no longer poses a threat to the U.S. - communism is contained and Cuba is still under embargo. Despite a 50-year failure to affect change in Castro’s government, our policy with regards to Cuba remains unchanged. We have foregone diplomatic engagement and chosen coercive economic power as our only political tool.

2) Cuba is the key test case
historic ties
Allows north korea and iran to see the positive benefits of engagement
Human rights and democracy can’t be forced but the plan solves
Econ addon—4.84 billion dollars
Hinderdael, 11– M.A. candidate at SAIS Bologna Center (Klaas, “Breaking the Logjam: Obama's Cuba Policy and a Guideline for Improved Leadership”, http://bcjournal.org/volume-14/breaking-the-logjam.html?printerFriendly=true)//NG

Conclusion The two countries’ histories have long been intertwined, particularly after the Monroe Doctrine of 1823 gave rise to the American belief that it would become the hemisphere’s protector. Until the immediate aftermath of Fidel Castro’s revolution, Cuba provided a testing ground for the promotion of American ideals, social beliefs, and foreign policies. In the context of Raúl shifting course in Cuba, the Obama administration has the opportunity to highlight the benefits of both the use of soft power and a foreign policy of engagement. As evidence mounts that the United States is ready to engage countries that enact domestic reforms, its legitimacy and influence will grow. Perhaps future political leaders, in Iran or North Korea for example, will be more willing to make concessions knowing that the United States will return in kind. The United States should not wait for extensive democratization before further engaging Cuba, however. One legacy of the Cold War is that Communism has succeeded only where it grew out of its own, often nationalistic, revolutions. As it has with China and Vietnam, the United States should look closely at the high payoffs stemming from engagement. By improving relations, America can enhance its own influence on the island’s political structure and human rights policies. At home, with the trade deficit and national debt rising, the economic costs of the embargo are amplified. Recent studies estimate that the US economy foregoes up to $4.84 billion a year and the Cuban economy up to $685 million a year.50While US-Cuban economic interests align, political considerations inside America have shifted, as “commerce seems to be trumping anti-Communism and Florida ideologues.”51 Clearly, public opinion also favors a new Cuba policy, with 65 percent of Americans now ready for a shift in the country’s approach to its neighboring island.52 At this particular moment in the history of US-Cuban relations, there is tremendous promise for a breakthrough in relations. In a post-Cold War world, Cuba no longer presents a security threat to the united States, but instead provides it with economic potential. American leaders cannot forget the fact that an economic embargo, combined with diplomatic isolation, has failed to bring democracy to Cuba for over 50 years. American policymakers should see Cuba as an opportunity to reap the political, economic, and strategic rewards of shifting its own policies toward engagement. By ending the economic embargo and normalizing diplomatic relations with the island, President Obama would indicate that he is truly willing to extend his hand once America’s traditional adversaries unclench their fists.

3) Latin America is key
Unilat will fail because ideology, corporate and sectional interests and the political system hamper the ability to act
LA key because there are no threats and most countries agree with our end goal even if they don’t like the US and they like Obama
Plan solves Brazilian relations because of agriculture cooperation
Grandin 10 – teaches history at New York University and is a member of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences (Greg, “Empire's Senescence: U.S. Policy in Latin America,” New Labor Forum, 19:1, Winter 2010, pg. 14-23)SJF

Washington’s relations with Latin America—particularly in terms of the gap between what its policy toward the region is and what it could be—precisely measure the degree to which domestic ideologies, narrow corporate and sectional interests, and a sclerotic political system are hastening the decline of the United States as a global power. As a result, the U.S. is deepening its dependence on unstable policies in order to leverage its dwindling influence in the hemisphere. It is easy to imagine an improved U.S. diplomacy toward Latin America, designed not to advance a set of altruistic ideals but merely to defend its interests—broadly defined to mean stable politics and economies that are open to U.S. capital and commodities—and to achieve what those in the liberal wing of the foreign policy establishment have long advocated: a maximization of U.S. “soft power.” Harvard’s Joseph S. Nye defines soft power as “the ability to get what you want through attraction rather than coercion,” through an enhanced understanding and utilization of multilateral institutions, mutually beneficial policies, cultural exchanges, and commercial relations.1 There are no immediate threats to the U.S. in Latin America. A majority of the region’s political elite—even most of its current govern- ing leftists—share many of the same values the United States claims to embody, even more so following the election of the first African-American president, who is wildly popular in Latin America. As a result, there is no other place in the world that offers U.S. president Barack Obama the opportunity to put into place the kind of intelligent foreign policy that he and his closest advisors, such as United Nations (U.N.) ambassador Susan Rice, believe is necessary to stop the hemorrhaging of U.S. prestige—one that would both improve Washington’s ability to deploy its many competitive advantages, while removing key points of friction. Here’s what such a policy could look like: Washington would concede to longstanding Brazilian demands by reducing tariffs and subsidies that protect the U.S. agricultural industry, opening its market to Brazilian com- modities, especially soy and sugar, as well as value-added ethanol. It would yield on other issues that have stalled the proposed Free Trade Agreement of the Americas (FTAA), such as a demand for strident intellectual property rights enforcement, which Brazil objects to because it would disadvantage its own pharmaceutical industry and hinder its ability to provide low-cost medicine to those infected with the HIV virus. Such concessions would provide an incentive for Brasilia to take the lead in jumpstarting the FTAA, a treaty that would ultimately benefit U.S. corporations, yet would be meaningless without Brazil, South America’s largest and most dynamic economy. The U.S. would scale back its military operations in Colombia—including recent con- troversial plans to establish a series of military bases which have raised strong criticisms from the governments of Chile, Argentina, Brazil, Ecuador, Bolivia, and Venezuela. Brazil’s president Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva—who is entering the last year of his second and last term—has become the spokesperson for the collective discontent, an indication of his country’s regional authority. In exchange for the U.S. dialing down its military presence, a soon-to-be post-Lula Brazil might find it convenient to tilt away from Venezuela and toward the United States. Washington would also drop the five-decade-old trade embargo on Cuba, thus burying a Cold War relic that continues to tarnish the U.S. image. Normalizing relations with Cuba would create an additional enticement for Brazil to cooperate with the U.S., since its formidable agro-industry is beginning to invest in Cuba and is therefore well-placed to export to the U.S. market. Politically, Washington would formally recommit to a multilateral foreign policy, even as it set up a de facto arrangement with Brazil to administer the region. This would mean demonstrating its willingness to work through the Organization of American States (OAS). More importantly, it would mean leashing the quasi-privatized “democracy promotion” organizations—largely funded by the National Endowment for Democracy (NED) and the Agency for International Development, and run by the International Republican Institute—that have become vectors of trans- national, conservative coalition building throughout the hemisphere. These groups today do overtly what the CIA used to do covertly, as NED's first president, Allen Weinstein, admitted—they fund oppositional “civil soci- ety” groups that use the rhetoric of democracy and human rights to menace Left govern- ments throughout the region, including the promotion of an aborted coup in Venezuela in 2002 and successful ones in Haiti in 2004 and Honduras in 2009.2 Similar destabilization efforts tried to topple Bolivia’s Evo Morales in 2008 but failed, at least partly because Brazil and Chile let it be known that they would not accept those kinds of machinations in their backyards. It would be easy for the Obama administration to rein these groups in, and to agree to Latin American demands to make their funding more transparent and their actions more accountable. Washington would also take a number of other initiatives to modernize hemispheric diplomacy, including deescalating its failed “War on Drugs,” as Latin America’s leading intellectuals and policymakers—including many former presidents—are demanding; in the last few months, both Mexico and Argentina have legalized some drug use and possession, including small quantities of cocaine and heroin.3 The U.S. would renew its assault weapons ban, as Mexico—battered by over five thousand narcotics-related murders a year, many of them committed with smuggled U.S. guns—is begging. It could also pass meaningful immigration reform, providing a path to U.S. citizenship for the millions of undocumented Latin Americans, mostly from Mexico, Central America, the Caribbean, and the Andes, but also Brazil. Such a move would go a long way toward improving relations with south- ern neighbors. It would also be good domestic politics for the Democrats, guaranteeing the loyalty of the Latino vote in 2012 and moving Texas, by creating millions of new vot- ers, closer to swing-state status. It could also provide progressives and the Democratic Party with a real wedge issue: Catholics, increasingly pulled into the con- servative camp by issues such as abortion and gay rights, overwhelmingly favor immigration reform. Any one of the above steps would go far in reestablishing U.S. legitimacy in Latin America. Taken together they could serve as a diplomatic revolution, one which would not weaken U.S. power but consolidate US power it much the way the Good Neighbor Policy did, allowing Washington to project its power in the region through stable multilateral mechanisms freed from the burdens of confrontation and militarism. A retooled FTAA, updated for the post-Great Recession world and stripped of the ideologi- cal baggage of failed neoliberal globalization, might provide a blueprint for a sustainable regional economy, one that balances national development and corporate profit.4 And like the Good Neighbor Policy, a reinvigorated hemispheric diplomacy could serve as a model for the rest of the world, a design for a practical twenty-first century multilateralism, capable of responding to transnational problems—both those that concern liberals, such as climate change, poverty, and migration, and those that concern conservatives, such as crime and ter- rorism—while respecting, at least rhetorically, the sovereignty of individual nations. In short, the Western Hemisphere offers an unparalleled opportunity to realize the vision of Barack Obama’s September 2009 address to the United Nations—hailed by many as a clarion call for a new internationalism—to, in his words, “embrace a new era of engagement based on mutual interest and mutual respect.”

The impact is multiple scenarios for extinction
Economic collapse
Nuclear proliferation
Terrorism
Water,
 AIDS,
mass migration of people,
 desertification,
 poverty,
hunger,
disease
Montalván, 10 - a 17-year veteran of the U.S. Army including multiple combat tours in Iraq, master's of science from Columbia University's Graduate School of Journalism (Luis, “Multilateralism is Essential for Peace in the 21st Century” Huffington Post, 4/23, http://www.huffingtonpost.com/luis-carlos-montalvan/multilateralism-is-essent_b_550332.html)

Unilateralism is the wrong approach for American Diplomacy. There is nothing to suggest its efficacy since 9/11. There is nothing to suggest its usefulness for future conflict. In allowing the US to go it alone, America's partners and allies risk the havoc and catastrophic consequences that will accompany "Imperial Overstretch." The residue of overstretch will include loss of US leadership in the world, an economy whose decline affects billions of dollars in international markets, and certainly emboldens rogue states. The whole world will pay the price if we let unilateralism pervade this century. As the bloodiest 100 years in recorded history, the 20th Century is replete with examples of how policy and practice intersect to foment war. The proliferation of nuclear, biological and chemical weapons and the constantly mutating dynamic of terrorism inform our current, dangerous reality. Amidst this backdrop of destruction, there are lessons for those who are looking for them. Seeds of peacemaking and conflict resolution were planted which we must germinate in order to halt and then reverse the trend toward violence and chaos. Perhaps the 21st Century could be the first 100 years in which nations invest more in building peace than in making war. In the 20th Century, local conflicts ignited global tensions and genocide on an unprecedented scale, costing incalculable life and treasure. The two world wars and other explosive conflicts erupted over such issues as ethnic disputes, the securing of natural resources, corporate interests, ideology and religion. The international business of war produced economies of scale prompted by the industrial, technological, and communications revolutions. The assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand of Austria and his wife in Sarajevo by anarchist Gavrilo Princip was the spark that ignited WWI. In time, some 15 million people would be killed. The sheer brutality of that war led Woodrow Wilson to issue his "Fourteen Points" in 1918, which included the establishment of a League of Nations "for the purpose of affording mutual guarantees of political independence and territorial integrity to great and small states alike." Just like our present-day difficulties in pursuing compromise, the US Congress politicized the concept, bucked the President, and did not support that initiative. The subsequent failure of the League of Nations to prevent WWII may have galvanized our culture's distrust of multilateralism. Throughout the 20th Century and until today, nations and other entities have invested precious financial, intellectual, social, institutional and political capital into arming themselves with weaponry, instead of building their capacity for peace. Technologies change and improve with increasing rapidity, but those advances have included improvements in how to kill more people more efficiently and with smaller devices. WWII was the shining example of multilateralism and its power. Vietnam and Korea were examples of its limitations. South Africa and India demonstrated that the support of the international community could enable countries to pull themselves up by their own bootstraps. All these contribute and form the basis of the state of nations today. The 20th Century left us at a crossroads: will we perpetuate the machinery and culture of war or surpass our greatest dreams by encouraging and enforcing peace policies and practices worldwide? The 21st Century began ominously with the attacks of September 11, 2001, which ushered in a new era of US foreign policy and global response to war, conflict and terrorism. Rather than engage a sympathetic world in developing multilateral and inclusive strategies similar to the precursors to the 2003 Iraq War and as was done before the Persian Gulf War, the US squandered its global capital to pursue "pre-emptive" unilateral military action. The equal and increasingly matching reaction is a global culture of military aggression and war. The resulting disintegration of the international community contributed to the most serious economic disaster since the Great Depression. Already struggling to survive amidst broken economies, the proliferation of nuclear, biological and chemical weapons and global terrorism strains multilateralism when it should embolden it. If it is true that every weapon invented is eventually used, we have much to fear if we do not reverse this lethal trend. Since national conflicts frequently spill over into regional and world-wide conflict, multilateral organizations have been very strong supporters of Truth and Reconciliation Commissions. Even the US found a way to first investigate and then come to terms with its terrible policy of putting Japanese-Americans in internment camps during WWII and apologized and paid reparations to survivors and their children. There were important Truth and Reconciliation Commissions in South Africa, supported by the international community. Victims and perpetrators of Apartheid who participated in Truth and Reconciliation Commissions demonstrated in compelling ways the healing and restorative power of those gatherings. Perhaps more importantly, they showed the world that a nonviolent response to unthinkable oppression and injustice can foster the peaceful development of a society intent upon making amends for the past and embarking upon a brighter, shared future. Since conflict-resolution and peacemaking at the local or national level work, why not apply it multilaterally? Concerned about the resurgence of unilateralism in the US's current Marjeh and Kandahar operations in Afghanistan, former Assistant Secretary of State Gene Dewey recently noted that "it's been very lonely being a leading multilateralist in Washington over the last nine years. Too few policy-makers have sensed where our unilateralism has led, and is leading." Saudi Arabia and other authoritarian Islamic countries generated the seeds that not only birthed the terrorists who carried out 9/11, but also attacks in Madrid, London, Mumbai and Chechnya. No matter where terrorists are determined to attempt to disrupt the lives of others, it's time for countries to realize that the only way to confront contemporary terrorism is through multilateralism. This must be a multilateralism that is thoroughly infused with peacemaking and conflict-resolution, instead of only "joint forces." At this crossroads, we can use the knowledge economy, social network and the international community to turn the rhetoric of hope into reality. We sit upon an historical precipice of policies and practices of sustainable, culturally responsive peace-building and violence prevention within and beyond our borders. Despite their faults, the institutions set up after in response to WWII (UN) and the Cold War (NATO) can be the 21st Century's vehicles for peace. We can use those instruments of multilateralism to build the peacekeeping, disaster relief, and conflict resolution forces that bring countries together. "Actually, I believe we have strategically shifted from that of a global war on terror (GWOT) to containing violent extremism (CVE). That said, the reason extremists do what they do is because they recruit from amongst the most desperate people on the earth. And, the reasons for desperation are strategic---but not necessarily military in nature. In fact, we have the capability to wage peace that is just as sophisticated as our capability to make war. Water, AIDS, mass migration of people, desertification, poverty, hunger, and disease---What would happen if our National Security Strategy became a multilateral one of economic engagement, and used the brain power and resources available to mitigate these issues?" -- Lt. Col. Matthew Canfield, U.S. Army (Currently on his second tour in Iraq) Concerns over economic stability, limited resources and security have divided us. Now is the time to create rather than divide common ground.

Cooperation solves extinction
Jervis 9—chaired prof of IR at Columbia. PhD (Robert, Unipolarity; A Structural Perspective, World Politics 61;1 Jan 2009)

To say that the system is unipolar is not to argue that the unipole can get everything it wants or that it has no need for others. American power is very great, but it is still subject to two familiar limitations: it is harder to build than to destroy, and success usually depends on others’ decisions. This is particularly true of the current system because of what the U.S. wants. If Hitler had won World War II, he might have been able to maintain his system for some period of time with little cooperation from others because “all” he wanted was to establish the supremacy of the Aryan race. The U.S. wants not only to prevent the rise of a peer competitor but also to stamp out terrorism, maintain an open international economic system, spread democracy throughout the world, and establish a high degree of cooperation among countries that remain juridically equal. Even in the military arena, the U.S. cannot act completely alone. Bases and overflight rights are always needed, and support from allies, especially Great Britain, is important to validate military action in the eyes of the American public. When one matches American forces, not against those of an adversary but against the tasks at hand, they often fall short.54
Against terrorism, force is ineffective without excellent intelligence. Given the international nature of the threat and the difficulties of gaining information about it, international cooperation is the only route to success. The maintenance of international prosperity also requires joint efforts, even leaving aside the danger that other countries could trigger a run on the dollar by cashing in their holdings. Despite its lack of political unity, Europe is in many respects an economic unit, and one with a greater gdp than that of the U.S. Especially because of the growing Chinese economy, economic power is spread around the world much more equally than is military power, and the open economic system End Page 210 could easily disintegrate despite continued unipolarity. In parallel, on a whole host of problems such as aids, poverty, and international crime (even leaving aside climate change), the unipole can lead and exert pressure but cannot dictate. Joint actions may be necessary to apply sanctions to various unpleasant and recalcitrant regimes; proliferation can be stopped only if all the major states (and many minor ones) work to this end; unipolarity did not automatically enable the U.S. to maintain the coalition against Iraq after the first Gulf War; close ties within the West are needed to reduce the ability of China, Russia, and other states to play one Western country off against the others.
But in comparison with the cold war era, there are fewer incentives today for allies to cooperate with the U.S. During the earlier period unity and close coordination not only permitted military efficiencies but, more importantly, gave credibility to the American nuclear umbrella that protected the allies. Serious splits were dangerous because they entailed the risk that the Soviet Union would be emboldened. This reason for avoiding squabbles disappeared along with the USSR, and the point is likely to generalize to other unipolar systems if they involve a decrease of threats that call for maintaining good relations with the superpower.
This does not mean that even in this particular unipolar system the superpower is like Gulliver tied down by the Lilliputians. In some areas opposition can be self-defeating. Thus for any country to undermine American leadership of the international economy would be to put its own economy at risk, even if the U.S. did not retaliate, and for a country to sell a large proportion of its dollar holding would be to depress the value of the dollar, thereby diminishing the worth of the country’s remaining stock of this currency. Furthermore, cooperation often follows strong and essentially unilateral action. Without the war in Iraq it is not likely that we would have seen the degree of cooperation that the U.S. obtained from Europe in combating the Iranian nuclear program and from Japan and the PRC in containing North Korea.
Nevertheless, many of the American goals depend on persuading others, not coercing them. Although incentives and even force are not irrelevant to spreading democracy and the free market, at bottom this requires people to embrace a set of institutions and values. Building the world that the U.S. seeks is a political, social, and even psychological task for which unilateral measures are likely to be unsuited and for which American military and economic strength can at best play a supporting role. Success requires that others share the American vision and believe that its leadership is benign. End Page 211

our impact is reverse causal—failing multilateralism causes global instability that goes nuclear
Scientific advances magnify the impact
solves global problems
first steps like the plan are necessary
it’s key to space colonization
Masciulli 11—Professor of Political Science at St Thomas University (Joseph, “The Governance Challenge for Global Political and Technoscientific Leaders in an Era of Globalization and Globalizing Technologies,” Bulletin of Science, Technology and Society February 2011 vol. 31 no. 1 pg. 3-5)NG
What is most to be feared is enhanced global disorder resulting from the combination of weak global regulations; the unforeseen destructive consequences of converging technologies and economic globalization; military competition among the great powers; and the prevalent biases of short-term thinking held by most leaders and elites. But no practical person would wish that such a disorder scenario come true, given all the weapons of mass destruction (WMDs) available now or which will surely become available in the foreseeable future. As converging technologies united by IT, cognitive science, nanotechnology, and robotics advance synergistically in monitored and unmonitored laboratories, we may be blindsided by these future developments brought about by technoscientists with a variety of good or destructive or mercenary motives. The current laudable but problematic openness about publishing scientific results on the Internet would contribute greatly to such negative outcomes. To be sure, if the global disorder-emergency scenario occurred because of postmodern terrorism or rogue states using biological, chemical, or nuclear WMDs, or a regional war with nuclear weapons in the Middle East or South Asia, there might well be a positive result for global governance. Such a global emergency might unite the global great and major powers in the conviction that a global concert was necessary for their survival and planetary survival as well. In such a global great power concert, basic rules of economic, security, and legal order would be uncompromisingly enforced both globally and in the particular regions where they held hegemonic status. That concert scenario, however, is flawed by the limited legitimacy of its structure based on the members having the greatest hard and soft power on planet Earth. At the base of our concerns, I would argue, are human proclivities for narrow, short-term thinking tied to individual self-interest or corporate and national interests in decision making. For globalization, though propelled by technologies of various kinds, “remains an essentially human phenomenon . . . and the main drivers for the establishment and uses of disseminative systems are hardy perennials: profit, convenience, greed, relative advantage, curiosity, demonstrations of prowess, ideological fervor, malign destructiveness.” These human drives and capacities will not disappear. Their “manifestations now extend considerably beyond more familiarly empowered governmental, technoscientific and corporate actors to include even individuals: terrorists, computer hackers and rogue market traders” (Whitman, 2005, p. 104). In this dangerous world, if people are to have their human dignity recognized and enjoy their human rights, above all, to life, security, a healthy environment, and freedom, we need new forms of comprehensive global regulation and control. Such effective global leadership and governance with robust enforcement powers alone can adequately respond to destructive current global problems, and prevent new ones. However, successful human adaptation and innovation to our current complex environment through the social construction of effective global governance will be a daunting collective task for global political and technoscientific leaders and citizens. For our global society is caught in “the whirlpool of an accelerating process of modernization” that has for the most part “been left to its own devices” (Habermas, 2001, p. 112). We need to progress in human adaptation to and innovation for our complex and problematical global social and natural planetary environments through global governance. I suggest we need to begin by ending the prevalent biases of short-termism in thinking and acting and the false values attached to the narrow self-interest of individuals, corporations, and states. I agree with Stephen Hawking that the long-term future of the human race must be in space. It will be difficult enough to avoid disaster on planet Earth in the next hundred years, let alone the next thousand, or million. . . . There have been a number of times in the past when its survival has been a question of touch and go. The Cuban missile crisis in 1962 was one of these. The frequency of such occasions is likely to increase in the future. We shall need great care and judgment to negotiate them all successfully. But I’m an optimist. If we can avoid disaster for the next two centuries, our species should be safe, as we spread into space. . . . But we are entering an increasingly dangerous period of our history. Our population and our use of the finite resources of planet Earth, are growing exponentially, along with our technical ability to change the environment for good or ill. But our genetic code still carries the selfish and aggressive instincts that were of survival advantage in the past. . . . Our only chance of long term survival is not to remain inward looking on planet Earth, but to spread out into space. We have made remarkable progress in the last hundred years. But if we want to continue beyond the next hundred years, our future is in space.” (Hawking, 2010) Nonetheless, to reinvent humanity pluralistically in outer space and beyond will require securing our one and only global society and planet Earth through effective global governance in the foreseeable future. And our dilemma is that the enforcement powers of multilateral institutions are not likely to be strengthened because of the competition for greater (relative, not absolute) hard and soft power by the great and major powers. They seek their national or alliance superiority, or at least, parity, for the sake of their state’s survival and security now. Unless the global disorder-emergency scenario was to occur soon—God forbid—the great powers will most likely, recklessly and tragically, leave global survival and security to their longer term agendas. Pg. 4-5

1AC Plan

Plan: The United States federal government should offer to normalize its trade relations with Cuba. 

1AC 3
Advantage three is Cuba transition instability
Cuba’s current reforms fail—the plan is key
Shifter et al 10/15 – Michael is an Adjunct Professor of Latin American Studies at Georgetown University's School of Foreign Service. He is a member of the Council on Foreign Relations and writes for the Council's journal Foreign Affairs. He serves as the President of Inter-American Dialogue. Matthew Aho is a consultant in the corporate practice group of Akerman Senterfitt in New York. Collin Laverty is the founder and president of Cuba Educational Travel. Kirby Jones is the president of Alamar Associates in Arizona. Carmelo Mesa-Lago is a professor emeritus of economics and Latin American studies at the University of Pittsburgh. Archibald Ritter is a distinguished research professor emeritus of economics and international affairs at Carleton University. (“Are Raul Castro’s Reforms Helping Cuba’s Economy, 10/15/13, Latin America Adviser, pdf)
*This card is from pages 1,3, and 4 of the pdf.  Page two contains a wholly different article.  “Are Raúl Castro's Reforms Helping Cuba's Economy?” is published on pages 1, 3 and 4 of the PDF.  Our evidence is the entirety of the article.  We will provide you the PDF if you are curious*
In late September, Cuba's government¶ announced the legalization¶ of 18 new categories of private¶ employment, including real¶ estate agents, bringing the total number of¶ approved types of independent employment¶ to 199. While Raúl Castro's government¶ has issued more than 430,000 private¶ employment licenses since 2010, the latest¶ employment legalization effort also¶ included bans on certain economic activities,¶ including the reselling of imported¶ goods. Are Cuba's newest economic¶ reforms likely to bear fruit? How much has¶ the state ceded control of the economy to¶ market forces in recent years? What surprises¶ might lie in store for Cuba's economy¶ and its business climate?¶ AMatthew Aho, consultant in the¶ corporate practice group of¶ Akerman Senterfitt in New York:¶ "The decision to legalize new categories¶ of private employment is yet¶ another incremental step that—combined¶ with other changes since 2010—clearly¶ indicates a shift away from total state control¶ and toward a 21st-century mixed market¶ economy. Other recent examples¶ include the September publication of new¶ rules governing foreign investment at the¶ Mariel Export Processing Zone and the¶ Oct. 9 decision to allow state tourism agencies¶ to do business with private enterprises,¶ such as bed and breakfasts and restaurants.¶ The Cuban state will remain the economy's¶ dominant player, but the space it has yielded¶ so far was inconceivable five years ago.¶ And it's paying off: visitors to Havana¶ report a never-before-seen economic¶ vibrancy transforming the urban landscape,¶ as black-market businesses leave the¶ shadows and new, remittance-fueled ventures¶ arise. What's more, the recent loosening¶ of migration restrictions and the passage¶ (likely in 2014) of new foreign investment¶ laws signal that policymakers are¶ preparing for infusions of foreign investment¶ and remittance capital in the medium-¶ to-long terms. There is a bevy of potential surprises, foreign and domestic.¶ At home, the recent ban on reselling¶ imported goods met swift and unusually¶ vocal opposition from entrepreneurs¶ vowing to disobey the rules. In the¶ months ahead, the government must¶ decide how to engage 430,000 private¶ economic actors (and those dependent¶ on them) as a rising political force on the¶ island. Abroad, President Obama will¶ decide whether to support the Cuban people in their pursuit of greater economic¶ self-determination through¶ proactive policies or do nothing—thereby¶ clinging to decades of failed sanctions—¶ because he sees no political¶ upside. 2014 could be a real tipping¶ point in U.S.–Cuba relations, but only if¶ both sides seize the moment. That,¶ unfortunately, would be the biggest surprise¶ of all."¶ ACollin Laverty, founder and¶ president of Cuba Educational¶ Travel: "Time will tell how far¶ and how fast the reforms go,¶ which will determine their economic,¶ political and social impact. Up until now,¶ the government has been very cautious—¶ prioritizing stability while also¶ making drastic changes within the context¶ of the last five decades of communist¶ rule. Legalizing small-scale enterprise,¶ expanding cooperatives and creating a¶ housing market are important steps,¶ affecting the psychology of Cubans and¶ how they see and operate in the market.¶ However, these important reforms will¶ not result in significant improvements in¶ the overall performance of the economy.¶ Larger, more controversial and difficult¶ reforms will need to be implemented in¶ order to fundamentally change the¶ makeup and output of the economy,¶ such as currency reform, increased foreign¶ investment, legalization of more¶ private enterprises, including those of¶ medium-scale, the organic creation of¶ cooperatives, an end to excessive subsidies¶ to inefficient state-owned enterprises¶ and increased access to telecommunications.¶ The government's decision in late September to expand private enterprise but simultaneously restrict the sale of imported goods shows contradictions¶ in the process. Official discourse is to¶ remove the state from non-essential¶ areas of the economy, but the forces that be are unwilling to relinquish their monopoly in the retail sector. A better¶ approach would be to remove luxury¶ taxes on goods sold at dollar stores and¶ focus on currency reform and economywide¶ pricing adjustments, which would¶ allow it to compete with the private sector.¶ Albeit slowly, the process continues¶ to be two steps forward, a half step backwards,¶ and demographics and economic¶ necessity should keep it that way."¶ AKirby Jones, president of¶ Alamar Associates in Arizona:¶ "The numbers speak for themselves:¶ the reforms in Cuba are¶ real, will continue and have already¶ changed the face of Cuba. If you had¶ asked me just a few years ago whether I¶ would expect what is going on in Cuba¶ today, I would say a resounding no. But¶ the reforms have already borne fruit.¶ The Batistianos like Rep. Ileana Ros-¶ Lehtinen and Sen. Robert Menendez can¶ question the reforms all they want, but¶ their criticisms do not change the reality¶ on the ground. And now we hear of pilot¶ projects with only one currency. Facts¶ speak for themselves. And through all of¶ this, the United States is on the outside¶ clinging to a policy rooted in the last¶ century. The Cuban government has¶ ceded some control on economic matters,¶ and true market forces are at work.¶ Is that not what the United States wants? These reforms are like toothpaste that¶ cannot be put back into the tube. There¶ will be problems as well as starts and¶ stops along the way. The United States¶ could be helping this process instead of¶ trying to stop it. Meanwhile Brazil,¶ China and many others are part of the¶ change, realize that it is real, are investing¶ in Cuba and are making money in¶ the process. The United States should do¶ the same." Carmelo Mesa-Lago, professor¶ emeritus of economics and¶ Latin American studies at the¶ University of Pittsburgh: "The¶ re-authorization/extension of selfemployment¶ is a key of Raúl's reform to¶ enlarge the private sector and dismiss 1.8¶ million workers unneeded in the state sector.¶ Currently, 22 percent of the labor¶ force is in the non-state sector. It should¶ jump to around 40 percent by 2015 and¶ account for a rising percentage of GDP.¶ But self-employment is obstructed by several¶ constraints: 1.) The large majority of¶ occupations are unskilled or require little¶ skills, whereas most of the state employees to be fired are professionals or skilled¶ workers. 2.) University graduates (badly¶ needed in the private sector, such as managers,¶ engineers and architects) can't practice as self-employed, hence they may¶ work as taxi drivers or food sellers but not¶ in their professions. 3.) Taxes are quite a burden. For instance, the tax rates on the¶ labor force gradually increase with the¶ number of employees hired, therefore¶ penalizing those self-employed that hire¶ more employees, which is a disincentive¶ for the self-employed and counterproductive¶ in the state quest to get rid of surplus¶ labor. 4.) The government sends contradictory signals, such as raids to shut down self-employed Cubans who have stands¶ under Havana porches, or the government¶ first taxes and then bans the sale of¶ imported goods. Currently the reforms are insufficient to solve the many economic and social problems accumulated under half a century of centralized, inefficient socialism. There is a wide consensus¶ inside and outside Cuba that they must be deepened and accelerated to accomplish¶ that task, but Raúl has little time left to do¶ so before he retires in 2018."¶ AArchibald Ritter, distinguished¶ research professor emeritus of¶ economics and international¶ affairs at Carleton University:¶ "Major changes have been implemented¶ already, and further reforms are in the¶ works or on the horizon. The reforms will¶ continue to orient economic policy and¶ lead to substantial improvements in the¶ Cuban economy and in citizens' living¶ standards. The market-oriented component¶ of the Cuban economy has expanded¶ and now includes about 27.5 percent¶ of the employed labor force. It will¶ expand dramatically if the pseudo-cooperative¶ state farms and non-agricultural¶ state enterprises become authentic cooperatives.¶ Registered micro-enterprises¶ now include 430,000 people, 8.6 percent¶ of the employed labor force. The marketoriented¶ joint foreign/state enterprises¶ employ about 1 percent of the labor¶ force. The market-oriented underground¶ economy provides full- or part-time first¶ or second jobs for maybe 10 percent of¶ the labor force. Under September 2012¶ legislation, the Unidades Básicas de¶ Producción Cooperativa should become¶ real cooperatives, increasing the mainly¶ private sector in agriculture to approximately¶ 11.6 percent of the labor force.¶ Non-agricultural cooperatives in time¶ should include most of the goods- and¶ services-producing state sector. They are¶ to be worker-managed and under the¶ forces of supply and demand. The new¶ Mariel Export Processing Zone may¶ attract major investments, especially¶ from China and Brazil, and provide a¶ strong market-propelled stimulus. The transformation of state enterprises into authentic market-oriented cooperatives would constitute a change and improvement of historic dimension. Cuba could¶ become a country of 'worker ownership¶ and management' and continue to be¶ unique in the world. In contrast to the¶ ideology-based policy impetuosity and¶ vacillation of President Fidel Castro over¶ 47 years, the approach of President Raúl¶ Castro has been cautious, gradual, pragmatic,¶ stable and 'evidence-based.' There¶ are downside risks. Bureaucratic footdragging¶ may slow the reforms. The 'special¶ relationship' with Venezuela may falter¶ with political change and changed¶ economic priorities in that country. But¶ the economic surprises are more likely to¶ be positive, and there may even be some¶ positive political surprises—I never cease¶ to hope. A most welcome surprise would¶ be a normalization of U.S.-Cuba relations¶ during the presidency of Barack Obama."

Now is key—governmental transition and liberalization coming
Ashby 13, Senior Research Fellow at the Council on Hemispheric Affairs. He served in the U.S. Commerce Department's International Trade Administration as Director of the Office of Mexico and the Caribbean and acting Deputy Assistant Secretary of Commerce for the Western Hemisphere(Timothy, "Preserving Stability in Cuba After Normalizing Relations with the United States – The Importance of Trading with State-Owned Enterprises" 3/29/13, Council on Hemispheric Affairs, http://www.coha.org/preserving-stability-in-cuba-timothy-ashby/)//AD

Cuba under Raúl Castro has entered a new period of economic, social, and political transformation. Reforms instituted within the past few years have brought the expansion of private sector entrepreneurial activity, including lifting restrictions on the sales of residential real estate, automobiles, and electronic goods. Additional reforms included, more than a million hectares of idle land has been leased to private farmers, where citizens have been granted permission to stay in hotels previously reserved for tourists, and freedom being granted for most Cubans to travel abroad. Stating that it was time for the “gradual transfer” of “key roles to new generations,” President Raúl Castro announced that he will retire by 2018, and named as his possible successor a man who was not even born at the time of the Cuban Revolution. 1 The twilight of the Castro era presents challenges and opportunities for US policy makers. Normalization of relations is inevitable, regardless of timing, yet external and internal factors may accelerate or retard the process. The death of Venezuelan President Hugo Chávez is likely to undermine the already dysfunctional Cuban economy, if it leads to reductions in oil imports and other forms of aid. This could bring social chaos, especially among the island’s disaffected youth. Such an outcome would generate adverse consequences for US national and regional security. To maintain Cuba’s social and economic stability while reforms are maturing, the United States must throw itself open to unrestricted bilateral trade with all Cuban enterprises, both private and state-owned. The collapse of Cuba’s tottering economy could seismically impact the United States and neighboring countries. It certainly did during the Mariel Boatlift of 1980, precipitated by a downturn in the Cuban economy which led to tensions on the island. Over 125,000 Cuban refugees landed in the Miami area, including 31,000 criminals and mental patients. Today, the United States defines its national security interests regarding Cuba as follows: • Avoid one or more mass migrations; • Prevent Cuba from becoming another porous border that allows continuous large-scale migration to the hemisphere; • Prevent Cuba from becoming a major source or transshipment point for the illegal drug trade; • Avoid Cuba becoming a state with ungoverned spaces that could provide a platform for terrorists and others wishing to harm the United States. 2 All of these national security threats are directly related to economic and social conditions within Cuba. US policy specifically supports “a market-oriented economic system” 3 toward Cuba, yet regulations prohibit the importation of any goods of Cuban origin, whether from the island’s potentially booming private sector – including 300,000 agricultural producers – or State-Owned Enterprises (“SOEs”). 4 Such a policy is counterproductive to US interests. Regardless of over 400,000 entrepreneurs, including agricultural cultivators, it could be many years, if ever, when Cuba’s private sector would be ready to serve as the engine of economic growth. SOEs employ 72 percent of Cuban workers. 5 A rational commercial rapprochement towards Cuba would therefore require a change in current laws and in the system of regulations prohibiting the importation of Cuban goods and products. Normalized bilateral trade will benefit the Cuban people by helping to provide economic stability and fostering the growth of a middle class – both of which are essential for the foundation of democratic institutions. Two-way trade must include both Cuba’s private sector as well as SOEs.

Causes civil war ensuring multiple conflicts
Exiles return to try and claim authority
Dissidents try to claim power
US policy encourages anarchy
Also encourages criminal enterprises—floods the US with drugs
Extremist groups use cuba as a base—it’s close enough for an attack to succeed
Regional instability causes state failure throughout the region because it collapses economic growth—causes draw in
Draw in causes worse anti-americanism because it’s perceived as imperialism
Detracts focus—causes instability in the following regions: Iran, North Korea, China/Taiwan, Africa, the Caucuses,  
Gorrell, 5 - Lieutenant Colonel, US Army, paper submitted for the USAWC STRATEGY RESEARCH PROJECT (Tim, “CUBA: THE NEXT UNANTICIPATED ANTICIPATED STRATEGIC CRISIS?” http://www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?AD=ADA433074  GWOT=Global War on Terrorism

Regardless of the succession, under the current U.S. policy, Cuba’s problems of a post Castro transformation only worsen. In addition to Cubans on the island, there will be those in exile who will return claiming authority. And there are remnants of the dissident community within Cuba who will attempt to exercise similar authority. A power vacuum or absence of order will create the conditions for instability and civil war. Whether Raul or another successor from within the current government can hold power is debatable. However, that individual will nonetheless extend the current policies for an indefinite period, which will only compound the Cuban situation. When Cuba finally collapses anarchy is a strong possibility if the U.S. maintains the “wait and see” approach. The U.S. then must deal with an unstable country 90 miles off its coast. In the midst of this chaos, thousands will flee the island. During the Mariel boatlift in 1980 125,000 fled the island.26 Many were criminals; this time the number could be several hundred thousand fleeing to the U.S., creating a refugee crisis. Equally important, by adhering to a negative containment policy, the U.S. may be creating its next series of transnational criminal problems. Cuba is along the axis of the drug-trafficking flow into the U.S. from Columbia. The Castro government as a matter of policy does not support the drug trade. In fact, Cuba’s actions have shown that its stance on drugs is more than hollow rhetoric as indicated by its increasing seizure of drugs – 7.5 tons in 1995, 8.8 tons in 1999, and 13 tons in 2000.27 While there may be individuals within the government and outside who engage in drug trafficking and a percentage of drugs entering the U.S. may pass through Cuba, the Cuban government is not the path of least resistance for the flow of drugs. If there were no Cuban restraints, the flow of drugs to the U.S. could be greatly facilitated by a Cuba base of operation and accelerate considerably. In the midst of an unstable Cuba, the opportunity for radical fundamentalist groups to operate in the region increases. If these groups can export terrorist activity from Cuba to the U.S. or throughout the hemisphere then the war against this extremism gets more complicated. Such activity could increase direct attacks and disrupt the economies, threatening the stability of the fragile democracies that are budding throughout the region. In light of a failed state in the region, the U.S. may be forced to deploy military forces to Cuba, creating the conditions for another insurgency. The ramifications of this action could very well fuel greater anti-American sentiment throughout the Americas. A proactive policy now can mitigate these potential future problems. U.S. domestic political support is also turning against the current negative policy. The Cuban American population in the U.S. totals 1,241,685 or 3.5 of the population.28 Most of these exiles reside in Florida; their influence has been a factor in determining the margin of victory in the past two presidential elections. But this election strategy may be flawed, because recent polls of Cuban Americans reflect a decline for President Bush based on his policy crackdown. There is a clear softening in the Cuban-American community with regard to sanctions. Younger Cuban Americans do not necessarily subscribe to the hard-line approach. These changes signal an opportunity for a new approach to U.S.-Cuban relations. (Table 1) The time has come to look realistically at the Cuban issue. Castro will rule until he dies. The only issue is what happens then? The U.S. can little afford to be distracted by a failed state 90 miles off its coast. The administration, given the present state of world affairs, does not have the luxury or the resources to pursue the traditional American model of crisis management. The President and other government and military leaders have warned that the GWOT will be long and protracted. These warnings were sounded when the administration did not anticipate operations in Iraq consuming so many military, diplomatic and economic resources. There is justifiable concern that Africa and the Caucasus region are potential hot spots for terrorist activity, so these areas should be secure. North Korea will continue to be an unpredictable crisis in waiting. We also cannot ignore China. What if China resorts to aggression to resolve the Taiwan situation? Will the U.S. go to war over Taiwan? Additionally, Iran could conceivably be the next target for U.S. pre-emptive action. These are known and potential situations that could easily require all or many of the elements of national power to resolve. In view of such global issues, can the U.S. afford to sustain the status quo and simply let the Cuban situation play out? The U.S. is at a crossroads: should the policies of the past 40 years remain in effect with vigor? Or should the U.S. pursue a new approach to Cuba in an effort to facilitate a manageable transition to post-Castro Cuba?

All of those conflicts escalate conflicts escalate
Bosco 6
David Bosco (David Bosco is an assistant professor at American University's School of International Service  and a senior editor at Foreign Policy magazine) July 2006 “Forum: Keeping an eye peeled for World War III” http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/06211/709477-109.stm_

The understanding that small but violent acts can spark global conflagration is etched into the world's consciousness. The reverberations from Princip's shots in the summer of 1914 ultimately took the lives of more than 10 million people, shattered four empires and dragged more than two dozen countries into war. This hot summer, as the world watches the violence in the Middle East, the awareness of peace's fragility is particularly acute. The bloodshed in Lebanon appears to be part of a broader upsurge in unrest. Iraq is suffering through one of its bloodiest months since the U.S.-led invasion in 2003. Taliban militants are burning schools and attacking villages in southern Afghanistan as the United States and NATO struggle to defend that country's fragile government. Nuclear-armed India is still cleaning up the wreckage from a large terrorist attack in which it suspects militants from rival Pakistan. The world is awash in weapons, North Korea and Iran are developing nuclear capabilities, and long-range missile technology is spreading like a virus. Some see the start of a global conflict. "We're in the early stages of what I would describe as the Third World War," former House Speaker Newt Gingrich said recently. Certain religious Web sites are abuzz with talk of Armageddon. There may be as much hyperbole as prophecy in the forecasts for world war. But it's not hard to conjure ways that today's hot spots could ignite. Consider the following scenarios: Targeting Iran: As Israeli troops seek out and destroy Hezbollah forces in southern Lebanon, intelligence officials spot a shipment of longer-range Iranian missiles heading for Lebanon. The Israeli government decides to strike the convoy and Iranian nuclear facilities simultaneously. After Iran has recovered from the shock, Revolutionary Guards surging across the border into Iraq, bent on striking Israel's American allies. Governments in Syria, Jordan, Egypt and Saudi Arabia face violent street protests demanding retribution against Israel -- and they eventually yield, triggering a major regional war. Missiles away: With the world's eyes on the Middle East, North Korea's Kim Jong Il decides to continue the fireworks show he began earlier this month. But this time his brinksmanship pushes events over the brink. A missile designed to fall into the sea near Japan goes astray and hits Tokyo, killing a dozen civilians. Incensed, the United States, Japan's treaty ally, bombs North Korean missile and nuclear sites. North Korean artillery batteries fire on Seoul, and South Korean and U.S. troops respond. Meanwhile, Chinese troops cross the border from the north to stem the flow of desperate refugees just as U.S. troops advance from the south. Suddenly, the world's superpower and the newest great power are nose to nose. Loose nukes: Al-Qaida has had Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf in its sights for years, and the organization finally gets its man. Pakistan descends into chaos as militants roam the streets and the army struggles to restore order. India decides to exploit the vacuum and punish the Kashmir-based militants it blames for the recent Mumbai railway bombings. Meanwhile, U.S. special operations forces sent to secure Pakistani nuclear facilities face off against an angry mob. The empire strikes back: Pressure for democratic reform erupts in autocratic Belarus. As protesters mass outside the parliament in Minsk, president Alexander Lukashenko requests Russian support. After protesters are beaten and killed, they appeal for help, and neighboring Poland -- a NATO member with bitter memories of Soviet repression -- launches a humanitarian mission to shelter the regime's opponents. Polish and Russian troops clash, and a confrontation with NATO looms. As in the run-up to other wars, there is today more than enough tinder lying around to spark a great power conflict. The question is how effective the major powers have become at managing regional conflicts and preventing them from escalating. After two world wars and the decades-long Cold War, what has the world learned about managing conflict? The end of the Cold War had the salutary effect of dialing down many regional conflicts. In the 1960s and 1970s, every crisis in the Middle East had the potential to draw in the superpowers in defense of their respective client states. The rest of the world was also part of the Cold War chessboard. Compare the almost invisible U.N. peacekeeping mission in Congo today to the deeply controversial mission there in the early 1960s. (The Soviets were convinced that the U.N. mission was supporting a U.S. puppet, and Russian diplomats stormed out of several Security Council meetings in protest.) From Angola to Afghanistan, nearly every Cold War conflict was a proxy war. Now, many local crises can be handed off to the humanitarians or simply ignored. But the end of the bipolar world has a downside. In the old days, the two competing superpowers sometimes reined in bellicose client states out of fear that regional conflicts would escalate. Which of the major powers today can claim to have such influence over Tehran or Pyongyang? Today's world has one great advantage: None of the leading powers appears determined to reorder international affairs as Germany was before both world wars and as Japan was in the years before World War II. True, China is a rapidly rising power -- an often destabilizing phenomenon in international relations -- but it appears inclined to focus on economic growth rather than military conquest (with the possible exception of Taiwan). Russia is resentful about its fall from superpower status, but it also seems reconciled to U.S. military dominance and more interested in tapping its massive oil and gas reserves than in rebuilding its decrepit military. Indeed, U.S. military superiority seems to be a key to global stability. Some theories of international relations predict that other major powers will eventually band together to challenge American might, but it's hard to find much evidence of such behavior. The United States, after all, invaded Iraq without U.N. approval and yet there was not even a hint that France, Russia or China would respond militarily.

Lifting the embargo independently checks escalation
Dickerson 10 – Lieutenant Colonel, US Army, paper submitted in fulfillment of a Master of Strategic Studies Degree at the US Army War College (Sergio M, “UNITED STATES SECURITY STRATEGY TOWARDS CUBA,” 1/14/10, http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a518053.pdf)//SJF

Conclusion Today, 20 years have passed since the fall of the Berlin Wall – it’s time to chip away at the diplomatic wall that still remains between U.S. and Cuba. As we seek a new foreign policy with Cuba it is imperative that we take into consideration that distrust will characterize negotiations with the Cuban government. On the other hand, consider that loosening or lifting the embargo could also be mutually beneficial. Cuba’s need and America’s surplus capability to provide goods and services could be profitable and eventually addictive to Cuba. Under these conditions, diplomacy has a better chance to flourish. If the Cuban model succeeds President Obama will be seen as a true leader for multilateralism. Success in Cuba could afford the international momentum and credibility to solve other seemingly “wicked problems” like the Middle East and Kashmir. President Obama could leverage this international reputation with other rogue nations like Iran and North Korea who might associate their plight with Cuba.35 The U.S. could begin to lead again and reverse its perceived decline in the greater global order bringing true peace for years to come.

Taiwan goes nuclear
Lowther 13 William, Taipei Times, citing a report by the Center for Strategic and International Studies, 3/16/13, “Taiwan could spark nuclear war: report,” http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/taiwan/archives/2013/03/16/2003557211
Taiwan is the most likely potential crisis that could trigger a nuclear war between China and the US, a new academic report concludes.¶ “Taiwan remains the single most plausible and dangerous source of tension and conflict between the US and China,” says the 42-page report by the Washington-based Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS).¶ Prepared by the CSIS’ Project on Nuclear Issues and resulting from a year-long study, the report emphasizes that Beijing continues to be set on a policy to prevent Taiwan’s independence, while at the same time the US maintains the capability to come to Taiwan’s defense.¶ “Although tensions across the Taiwan Strait have subsided since both Taipei and Beijing embraced a policy of engagement in 2008, the situation remains combustible, complicated by rapidly diverging cross-strait military capabilities and persistent political disagreements,” the report says.¶ In a footnote, it quotes senior fellow at the US Council on Foreign Relations Richard Betts describing Taiwan as “the main potential flashpoint for the US in East Asia.”¶ The report also quotes Betts as saying that neither Beijing nor Washington can fully control developments that might ignite a Taiwan crisis.¶ “This is a classic recipe for surprise, miscalculation and uncontrolled escalation,” Betts wrote in a separate study of his own.¶ The CSIS study says: “For the foreseeable future Taiwan is the contingency in which nuclear weapons would most likely become a major factor, because the fate of the island is intertwined both with the legitimacy of the Chinese Communist Party and the reliability of US defense commitments in the Asia-Pacific region.”¶ Titled Nuclear Weapons and US-China Relations, the study says disputes in the East and South China seas appear unlikely to lead to major conflict between China and the US, but they do “provide kindling” for potential conflict between the two nations because the disputes implicate a number of important regional interests, including the interests of treaty allies of the US.¶ The danger posed by flashpoints such as Taiwan, the Korean Peninsula and maritime demarcation disputes is magnified by the potential for mistakes, the study says.¶ “Although Beijing and Washington have agreed to a range of crisis management mechanisms, such as the Military Maritime Consultative Agreement and the establishment of a direct hotline between the Pentagon and the Ministry of Defense, the bases for miscommunication and misunderstanding remain and draw on deep historical reservoirs of suspicion,” the report says.¶ For example, it says, it is unclear whether either side understands what kinds of actions would result in a military or even nuclear response by the other party.¶ To make things worse, “neither side seems to believe the other’s declared policies and intentions, suggesting that escalation management, already a very uncertain endeavor, could be especially difficult in any conflict,” it says.¶ Although conflict “mercifully” seems unlikely at this point, the report concludes that “it cannot be ruled out and may become increasingly likely if we are unwise or unlucky.”¶ The report says: “With both sides possessing and looking set to retain formidable nuclear weapons arsenals, such a conflict would be tremendously dangerous and quite possibly devastating.”

African instability causes global nuclear war
Deutsch PhD and political risk consultant 02 Jeffrey, and Founder, Rabid Tiger Project, 11/18/02 (http://www.rabidtigers.com/rtn/newsletterv2n9.html)

The Rabid Tiger Project believes that a nuclear war is most likely to start in Africa. Civil wars in the Congo (the country formerly known as Zaire), Rwanda, Somalia and Sierra Leone, and domestic instability in Zimbabwe, Sudan and other countries, as well as occasional brushfire and other wars (thanks in part to “national” borders that cut across tribal ones) turn into a really nasty stew. We’ve got all too many rabid tigers and potential rabid tigers, who are willing to push the button rather than risk being seen as wishy-washy in the face of a mortal threat and overthrown. Geopolitically speaking, Africa is open range. Very few countries in Africa are beholden to any particular power. South Africa is a major exception in this respect - not to mention in that she also probably already has the Bomb. Thus, outside powers can more easily find client states there than, say, in Europe where the political lines have long since been drawn, or Asia where many of the countries (China, India, Japan) are powers unto themselves and don’t need any “help,” thank you. Thus, an African war can attract outside involvement very quickly. Of course, a proxy war alone may not induce the Great Powers to fight each other. But an African nuclear strike can ignite a much broader conflagration, if the other powers are interested in a fight. Certainly, such a strike would in the first place have been facilitated by outside help - financial, scientific, engineering, etc. Africa is an ocean of troubled waters, and some people love to go fishing. 

central asia war—goes nuclear
Starr, IR prof, 1 (He is a research professor at the Paul H. Nitze School of Advanced International Studies at Johns Hopkins University, Frederick, December 13, Chair of Central Asia-Caucasus Institute at John Hopkins University (Frederick, The War Against Terrorism and U.S. Bilateral Relations with the Nations of Central Asia, http://www.cacianalyst.org/Publications/Starr_Testimony.htm, AG)

However, this does not mean that US actions are without risk to the Central Asian states. Quite the contrary. For a decade they have faced not only the dangers arising from Afghanistan but also the constant threat posed by certain groups in Russia, notably the military and security forces, who are not yet reconciled to the loss of empire. This “imperial hangover” is not unique to Russia. France exhibited the same tendencies in Algeria, the Spanish in Cuba and Chile, and the British when they burned the White House in 1812. This imperial hangover will eventually pass, but for the time being it remains a threat. It means that the Central Asians, after cooperating with the US, will inevitably face redoubled pressure from Russia if we leave abruptly and without attending to the long-term security needs of the region. That we have looked kindly into Mr. Putin’s soul does not change this reality. The Central Asians face a similar danger with respect to our efforts in Afghanistan. Some Americans hold that we should destroy Bin Laden, Al Queda, and the Taliban and then leave the post-war stabilization and reconstruction to others. Such a course runs the danger of condemning all Central Asia to further waves of instability from the South. But in the next round it will not only be Russia that is tempted to throw its weight around in the region but possibly China, or even Iran or India. All have as much right to claim Central Asia as their “backyard” as Russia has had until now. Central Asia may be a distant region but when these nuclear powers begin bumping heads there it will create terrifying threats to world peace that the U.S. cannot ignore.

Tournament: Grapevine | Round: 2 | Opponent: Katy Taylor | Judge:
Cuba is a flashpoint for Russian Tensions—plan solves
Lee 08
Rens Lee President of Global Advisory Service, Stanford PhD, Foreign affairs, Rethinking the Embargo, November, December 2008 http://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/64618/rens-lee/rethinking-the-embargo, JLB

Jorge Castañeda (and#34;Morning in Latin America,and#34; September/October 2008) argues for
AND
Russia may feel more comfortable deploying strategic or intelligence assets on the island.
taking steps to reduce the probability of war is key
Baum ‘12
Seth Baum, Executive Director of the Global Catastrophic Risk Institute,  
Nuclear War Group Discusses Ongoing Risk Of US-Russia Nuclear War, 12/30/2012, Global Catastrophic Risk Institute, http://gcrinstitute.org/nuclear-war-group-discusses-ongoing-risk-of-us-russia-nuclear-war/, JLB

The key statistic here is the probability of US-Russia nuclear war per unit
AND
Putin’s concerns about NATO plans for a missile defense shield in Eastern Europe.

US-Russia nuclear miscalc over external crises is likely—risks extinction
Barrett et al. 13 (Anthony M. Barrett- Global Catastrophic Risk Institute, Seth D. Baum- Center for Research on Environmental Decisions, Columbia University, Kelly R. Hostetler- Department of Geography, Pennsylvania State University, 2013, “Analyzing and Reducing the Risks of Inadvertent Nuclear War Between the United States and Russia”, http://sethbaum.com/ac/fc_NuclearWar.pdf)
War involving significant fractions of the U.S. and Russian nuclear arsenals,
AND
likely to misinterpret events as attacks. 60,61,62,63

Plan

The United States federal government should normalize its economic relations with the Republic of Cuba.

1AC OFAC
OFAC is overstretched—the plan is key to effective sanctions
Johnson, Spector and Lilac 10 - Andy Johnson, Director, National Security Program, Kyle Spector, Policy Advisor, National Security Program, Kristina Lilac, National Security Program, Senior Fellows of The Third Way Institute, (“End the Embargo of Cuba”, Article for The Third Way Institute, 9/16/10, http://content.thirdway.org/publications/326/Third_Way_Memo_-_End_the_Embargo_of_Cuba.pdf, Accessed 7/02/13, AW)

Keeping the embargo in place requires that the US government devote time and resources to
AND
resources to respond to the current threats posed by rogue states and terrorist networks
That revamps sanctions on Iran – previous lack of focus and disorganization
Maberry and Jensen 13 – J. Scott Maberry, J.D, Georgetown University Law Center, International Trade partner in the Government Contracts, Investigations and International Trade Practice Group, Mark L. Jensen, J.D, Harvard Law School, International Trade associate in the Government Contracts, Investigations and International Trade Practice Group, (“OFAC gets hot, bothered on Iran and Cuba: how economic sanctions work today”, Report for Sheppard Mullin Richter and Hampton LLP, 5/7/13, http://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=8657e6ce-454a-4eaf-ba8b-d225ea59ecdd, Accessed 7/9/13, AW)

People who practice U.S. economic sanctions law like to talk about how
AND
and economy further, it seems likely that additional sanctions will be applied.

Sanctions solve Iran prolif – multilateral coalitions – international position of strength
DeLeon et al 12 - Rudy deLeon, National and International Security, John F. Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University, Recipient of The Defense Civilian Distinguished Service Award in 1994, 1995, and 2001, National Intelligence Distinguished Service Medal in 2001, Former US Senior Department of Defense Official, Senior Vice President of National Security and International Policy at American Progress, with Brian Katulis, Peter Juul, Matt Duss and Ken Sofer, (“Strengthening America’s Options on Iran”, Report for The Center for American Progress, April 2012, http://www.americanprogress.org/wp-content/uploads/issues/2012/04/pdf/iran_10questions_INTRO.pdf, Accessed 7/10/13, AW)
*NOTE: P5+1 is comprised of: United States, Russia, China, United Kingdom, France and Germany*

Indeed, amid an array of political transitions and military conflicts around the globe,
AND
notions and make decisions based on facts while preparing fully for all contingencies.

Iran is trying to proliferate now
Tirone 7/17
(Jonathan, 2013, “Iran’s North Korea Links Draw Scrutiny at Nuclear-Weapon Meeting,” Bloomberg reporter, http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-07-17/iran-s-north-korea-links-draw-scrutiny-at-nuclear-weapon-meeting.html, jkim)
The possibility …. a test facility south of February’s blast.

OFAC is unique – involves allied cooperation
DoT 05 – United States Department of Treasury, (“OFAC”, Report Written for the Federal Financial Institutions Examination Council, June 2005, http://www.treasury.gov/resource-center/sanctions/OFAC-Enforcement/Documents/ofac_sec_frb.pdf, Accessed 7/9/13, AW)

OFAC administers and enforces economic and trade sanctions based on U.S. foreign
AND
logically connected to the examination of a financial institution’s compliance with OFAC sanctions.

Nuclear Iran causes extinction
Rubin, ‘9 (Barry, director of the Global Research in International Affairs (GLORIA) Center in Israel and editor of the Middle East Review of International Affairs (MERIA) Journal, 3/9/09, pg online @ http://articles.nydailynews.com/2009-03-09/news/17917609_1_nuclear-weapons-iran-middle-eastgreenhill-au, alp)

If and when Iran gets nuclear weapons it …….. era in the Middle East would bring risks and the probability of war for America that would dwarf all the regionand#39;s current troubles and the crises faced by the United States in the whole world. And thatand#39;s why itand#39;s so important to avoid Iran getting nuclear weapons in the first place.

Sanctions solve Korean prolif
Bishop, United States Army War College, 2004 (Colonel David J.,  “DISMANTLING NORTH KOREA’S NUCLEAR WEAPONS PROGRAMS”, USAWC Strategy Research Project, March 19th)
CONTAINMENT
A second course of action is to pursue a policy of containment. One dictionary defines containment as “a policy of creating strategic alliances in order to check the expansion of a hostile power or ideology or to force it to negotiate peacefully.”54 Containment seeks to force North Korea to abandon its …….. of containment is it directly addresses the risk presented by North Korea’s nuclear weapons today as well as the risk of proliferation in the future through a direct path to resolving the issue.62 However this approach presents significant operational and political risks.

Korean prolif causes nuclear war
Hayes and Hamel-Green 9—Professor of International Relations, RMIT University, Executive Director of the Nautilus Institute for Security and Sustainable Development, degree in History, PhD from Berkeley—AND—Michael Hamel-Green, Professor, Executive Dean, Faculty of Arts, Education and Human Development @ Victoria University, BA MA Melb, DipEd Hawthorn, PhD La Trobe (Peter, 14 December 2009, The Path Not Taken, The Way Still Open: Denuclearizing The Korean Peninsula And Northeast Asia,and#34; The Asia-Pacific Journal, http://www.japanfocus.org/-Michael-Hamel_Green/3267, RBatra)

The consequences of failing to address the proliferation threat posed by the North Korea developments, and related political and economic issues, are serious, not only for the Northeast Asian region but for the whole ……… by the Non-Proliferation Treaty. Failure to reverse the DPRK’s nuclear breakout is also an important factor driving a general malaise in the exercise of American power which one of the authors has characterized elsewhere as “the end of American nuclear hegemony.”8

Korean conflict is likely—the impact is catastrophic
Wit and Town 4/16
(Joel, fellow with the US-Korea institute at Johns Hopkins school of International Studies, and Jenny, researcher at the same institute; “7 Reasons to Worry about North Korea’s Weapons”, http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2013/04/7-reasons-to-worry-about-north-koreas-weapons/275020//HH)
It is getting so you need a scorecard to keep …….. even used by different factions against rivals, or they might simply disappear, smuggled abroad and sold to the highest bidder. Moreover, there is nothing that could be done to stop it from happening; restoring order in a collapsing North would require hundreds of thousands of outside troops, and finding the bombs before they are used or exported would require almost 100,000 more. And what would the Chinese do if these troops approach the Yalu River like American soldiers did during the Korean War? Talk about mission impossible. The bottom line is that, even if this current crisis recedes, North Koreaand#39;s WMD programs pose serious security risks in the region and to the U.S. that will continue to grow if not addressed in a direct and compelling way. Warning Pyongyang against aggression and reacting to nuclear and missile tests with sanctions, while tactically necessary, is strategically inadequate. The challenge for statesmen is to find a strategy that does not just wait for the Northand#39;s next bellicose outburst, but seeks to moderate its behavior and goes beyond military countermeasures and economic sanctions. It may be distasteful given the nature of the North Korean regime, but there is no substitute for diplomacy and direct contact with Pyongyang. Only through such contacts can the United States and the international community figure out whether there is a peaceful way forward.

1AC Latin America
Advantage one is latin America relations--solves nuclear material transfer and warming
Shifter 12
(Michael is an Adjunct Professor of Latin American Studies at Georgetown Universityand#39;s School of Foreign Service. He is a member of the Council on Foreign Relations and writes for the Counciland#39;s journal Foreign Affairs. He serves as the President of Inter-American Dialogue. “Remaking the Relationship: The United States and Latin America,” April, IAD Policy Report, http://www.thedialogue.org/PublicationFiles/IAD2012PolicyReportFINAL.pdf)

Cuba, too, poses a significant challenge for relations between the United States and Latin America. The 50-year-old US embargo against Cuba is rightly criticized throughout the hemisphere as a failed and punitive instrument. It has long been a strain on US-Latin American relations. Although the United States has recently moved in the right direction and taken steps to relax restrictions on travel to Cuba, Washington needs to do far more to dismantle its severe, outdated constraints on normalized relations with Cuba. Cuba is one of the residual issues that most ………… on a critical policy challenge. Latin Americans are taking more active leadership on drug policy in the hemisphere and could become increasingly influential in global discussions of drug strategies. Although the United States and Latin America are often at odds on drug policy, they have mutual interests and goals that should allow consultation and collaboration on a new, more effective approach to the problem.

Now is the key time for improved US-Latin American ties. Permanent collapse is coming.
Shifter ‘12
(Michael is an Adjunct Professor of Latin American Studies at Georgetown Universityand#39;s School of Foreign Service. He is a member of the Council on Foreign Relations and writes for the Counciland#39;s journal Foreign Affairs. He serves as the President of Inter-American Dialogue. “Remaking the Relationship: The United States and Latin America,” April, IAD Policy Report, http://www.thedialogue.org/PublicationFiles/IAD2012PolicyReportFINAL.pdf)

If the United States and Latin America ……… could become much worse, adversely affecting everyone’s interests and wellbeing. It is time to seize the moment and overhaul hemispheric relations.

The risk of nuclear terrorism is high
Brill and Luongo ’12 (Kenneth C. Brill is a former U.S. ambassador to the I.A.E.A.Kenneth N. Luongo is president of the Partnership for Global Security. Both are members of the Fissile Material Working Group, a nonpartisan nongovernmental organization, “Nuclear Terrorism: A Clear Danger”, March 15, http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/16/opinion/nuclear-terrorism-a-clear-danger.html, CMR)

Terrorists exploit gaps in security……….. smuggling ring attempting to sell highly enriched uranium; one member is thought to remain at large with a kilogram of this material.

Terrorism causes extinction—

1) loose nukes and US retaliation
Wright 7 – New America Foundation senior fellow (Robert, 4/28, Planet Of The Apes, http://select.nytimes.com/2007/04/28/opinion/28wright.html, AG)

(3) Terrorism. Alas, the negative-feedback loop -- bad outcomes ………. And the catalyst would be terrorism, along with our mishandling of it. 

2) Puts on the dead-hand which ensures preemption
Ayson 10
Robert – Professor of Strategic Studies and Director of the Centre for Strategic Studies: New Zealand at the Victoria University of Wellington – “After a Terrorist Nuclear Attack: Envisaging Catalytic Effects,” Studies in Conflict and Terrorism, Volume 33, Issue 7, July, obtained via InformaWorld

But these two nuclear worlds—a non-state actor ……… on the control of existing fissile material holdings.

Warming is real and anthropogenic -~-- causes extinction
Flournoy 12 – PhD and MA from the University of Texas, Former Dean of the University College @ Ohio University, Former Associate Dean @ State University of New York and Case Institute of Technology, Project Manager for University/Industry Experiments for the NASA ACTS Satellite, Currently Professor of Telecommunications @ Scripps College of Communications @ Ohio University (Don, and#34;Solar Power Satellites,and#34; January, Springer Briefs in Space Development, Book)

In the Online Journal of Space Communication , Dr. Feng Hsu, a …… energy resource of our Sun” (Hsu 2010 ) (Fig . 2.1 ). 

Global warming is real and anthropogenic—positive feedbacks cause nuclear war
Kaku 11 – Michio Kaku, co-creator of string field theory, a branch of string theory. He received a B.S. (summa cum laude) from Harvard University in 1968 where he came first in his physics class. He went on to the Berkeley Radiation Laboratory at the University of California, Berkeley and received a Ph.D. in 1972. In 1973, he held a lectureship at Princeton University. Michio continues Einstein’s search for a “Theory of Everything,” seeking to unify the four fundamental forces of the universe—the strong force, the weak force, gravity and electromagnetism. He is the author of several scholarly, Ph.D. level textbooks and has had more than 70 articles published in physics journals, covering topics such as superstring theory, supergravity, supersymmetry, and hadronic physics. Professor of Physics — He holds the Henry Semat Chair and Professorship in theoretical physics at the City College of New York, where he has taught for over 25 years. He has also been a visiting professor at the Institute for Advanced Study at Princeton, as well as New York University (NYU). “Physics of the Future” http://213.55.83.52/ebooks/physics/Physics20of20the20Future.pdf Accessed 6/26/12 BJM

By midcentury, the full impact of a fossil fuel economy should be in full swing: global warming. ……….. a runaway cycle of global warming. 

Plan solves

A) Signal of anti-Americanism
White 13
ROBERT E. WHITE  March 7,2013 He is currently president of the Center for International Policy “a Chance to Rethink Relations With Cuba” New York times http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/08/opinion/after-chavez-hope-for-good-neighbors-in-latin-america.html?pagewanted=all
ACCESSED 7/16/13 BE

Throughout his career, the autocratic Mr. Chávez used our ………. United States wants a new, warmer relationship with democratic forces seeking social change throughout the Americas.

B) litmus test
Sheridan ‘9 (Mary Beth Sheridan; Washington Post Staff Writer, May 29, 2009, “U.S. Urged to Relax Cuba Policy to Boost Regional Relations,” LexisNexis Accessed 7/17/13) S.E.
The U.S. government is fighting an effort to allow Cuba to return to the Organization of American States after a 47-year suspension. But the resistance is putting it at odds with ……….. hemispheric leaders in Trinidad and Tobago last month that he wanted to form closer partnerships and not have the United States dictate policy.¶ and#34;Thereand#39;s really two different values at play here: multilateralism versus democracy. You canand#39;t have multilateralism and then let one country, i.e. the U.S., make the decision for a multilateral organization,and#34; Hakim said.

C) brings us into line with the region
McKenna and Kirk ’09 (Peter McKenna and John M. Kirk are the co-authors of the recently released book, Fighting Words: Competing Voices from Revolutionary Cuba, April 17, 2009, “U.S.-Cuba relations ripe for change; If Washington wants to revitalize its role in the Americas, it must repeal Cuban embargo” from the Toronto Star, Accessed 7/17/2013 on Lexis Nexis)
At the Summit of the Americas that begins today in Trinidad and Tobago, the elephant in the room will clearly be revolutionary Cuba. It is worth noting here that all of the countries of the Americas, with the exception of the United States, have ……. outdated and discredited policy of hostility and pettiness toward Cuba. The fifth Summit of the Americas offers Obama a perfect opportunity to fundamentally alter that policy approach, and to set U.S.-Cuba relations on a course for eventual normalization.

the embargo fails but won’t be lifted
Chapman ‘13
Steve Chapman is a columnist and editorial writer for the Chicago Tribune. Reason Magazine – April 15th – “Itand#39;s Time to End the U.S. Embargo of Cuba” – ¶ http://reason.com/archives/2013/04/15/its-time-to-end-the-us-embargo-of-cuba

The communist regime in Cuba was just …….. to do by the superpower next door.

The Plan is necessary and sufficient
Rowen 13
(Dolores Rowen, graduate student at Seton Hall University focusing on International Economics/Development and Latin America and the Caribbean, “What about Cuba?”, The Alternative Press.com: Maplewood’s News Online, 4/19/13, http://thealternativepress.com/articles/what-about-cuba, accessed 7/17/13.) ZP
The international community does ….. and have productive dialogue as long as the US respects the country’s sovereignty.

Gradualism doesn’t solve – Cuban leadership won’t end and embargo won’t fall
Sanchez ‘12
Alex is a Research Fellow at the Council on Hemispheric Affairs where he focuses on geopolitics and security issues. His analyses have appeared in numerous refereed journals like Cuban Affairs. “Cuba ends 2012 looking for oil and with Castro brothers still in power” – VOXXI – December 26th – ¶ http://www.voxxi.com/cuba-2012-oil-castro-brothers-power/#ixzz2V59ocrSu

The structure of the Cuban government … political barriers.

Tournament: Greenhill | Round: 2 | Opponent: St Vincent de Paul | Judge: Talon Powers
The United States federal government should lift its economic embargo on Cuba.

Unilateralism will fail—latin America is the key region to begin the transition to multilateralism
Unilat will fail because ideology, corporate and sectional interests and the political system hamper the ability to act
LA key because there are no threats and most countries agree with our end goal even if they don’t like the US and they like Obama
Plan solves Brazilian relations because of agriculture cooperation
Grandin 10 – teaches history at New York University and is a member of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences (Greg, “Empire's Senescence: U.S. Policy in Latin America,” New Labor Forum, 19:1, Winter 2010, pg. 14-23)SJF

Washington’s relations with Latin America—particularly in terms of the gap between what its
AND
embrace a new era of engagement based on mutual interest and mutual respect.”

cuba stands out as a blatant affront to the multilateral system—plan is necessary and sufficient
Dickerson 10 – Lieutenant Colonel, US Army, paper submitted in fulfillment of a Master of Strategic Studies Degree at the US Army War College (Sergio M, “UNITED STATES SECURITY STRATEGY TOWARDS CUBA,” 1/14/10, http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a518053.pdf)//SJF

At the international political level, President Obama sees resuming relations with Cuba as a
AND
foregone diplomatic engagement and chosen coercive economic power as our only political tool.

cuba is the key test case for multilateralism
historic ties
Allows north korea and iran to see the positive benefits of engagement
Human rights and democracy can’t be forced but the plan solves
Econ addon—4.84 billion dollars
Hinderdael, 11– M.A. candidate at SAIS Bologna Center (Klaas, “Breaking the Logjam: Obama's Cuba Policy and a Guideline for Improved Leadership”, http://bcjournal.org/volume-14/breaking-the-logjam.html?printerFriendly=true)//NG

Conclusion The two countries’ histories have long been intertwined, particularly after the Monroe Doctrine
AND
truly willing to extend his hand once America’s traditional adversaries unclench their fists.

Unilateralism fails and triggers every impact—Mulitlateralism is key
Montalván, 10 - a 17-year veteran of the U.S. Army including multiple combat tours in Iraq, master's of science from Columbia University's Graduate School of Journalism (Luis, “Multilateralism is Essential for Peace in the 21st Century” Huffington Post, 4/23, http://www.huffingtonpost.com/luis-carlos-montalvan/multilateralism-is-essent_b_550332.html)

Unilateralism is the wrong approach for American Diplomacy. There is nothing to suggest its
AND
us. Now is the time to create rather than divide common ground.

Multilateralism is good—it shows the US isn’t exceptionable enough to blow off the rest of the world which is the only way to solve global problems
Rothkopf 13——visiting scholar at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace where he chairs the Carnegie Economic Strategy Roundtable. He was formerly chief executive of Intellibridge Corporation, managing director of Kissinger Associates and U.S. Deputy Under Secretary of Commerce for International Trade Policy.¶ Rothkopf has also taught international affairs and national security studies at Columbia University's School of International and Public Affairs and Georgetown's School of Foreign Service, (David, “Leaning Away
Maybe the real failed states are the ones that have the means to help other nations -- but choose to retreat inward.” August, http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2013/06/24/leaning_away?page=0,0, chm)we don’t endorse gendered language

There are no failed states. There is only a failure of our international system
AND
Or the ones that are strong enough to help, yet do not?

Failure of the system causes global great-power war, collapses trade and spreads economic nationalism and protectionism
Zhang and Shi 11 – Yuhan Zhang, researcher at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace; Lin Shi, Columbia University, independent consultant for the Eurasia Group and consultant for the World Bank, January 22, 2011, “America’s decline: A harbinger of conflict and rivalry,” East Asia Forum, online: http://www.eastasiaforum.org/2011/01/22/americas-decline-a-harbinger-of-conflict-and-rivalry/

Over the past two decades, no other state has had the ability to seriously
AND
forecast in a future that will inevitably be devoid of unrivalled US primacy.

Trade mitigates the incentives for war
Gartzke 11 Erik Gartzke is an associate Professor of political science at the University of California, San Diego PhD from Iowa and B.A. from UCSF "SECURITY IN AN INSECURE WORLD" www.cato-unbound.org/2011/02/09/erik-gartzke/security-in-an-insecure-world/

Almost as informative as the decline in warfare has been where this decline is occurring
AND
the consolidating forces of prosperity prevail, that war becomes a durable anachronism. 

War is at its lowest level in history because of the US cooperating --- it makes globalization and democratic peace resilient
Owen 11 John M. Owen Professor of Politics at University of Virginia PhD from Harvard "DON’T DISCOUNT HEGEMONY" Feb 11 www.cato-unbound.org/2011/02/11/john-owen/dont-discount-hegemony/

Andrew Mack and his colleagues at the Human Security Report Project are to be congratulated
AND
U.S. material and moral support for liberal democracy remains strong.

Absolute decline means the US will become uncooperative and desperate---causes lash out
Goldstein 7 Professor of Global Politics and International Relations @ University of Pennsylvania “Power transitions, institutions, and China's rise in East Asia: Theoretical expectations and evidence,” Journal of Strategic Studies, Volume 30, Issue 4 and 5 August 2007, pages 639 – 682

Two closely related, though distinct, theoretical arguments focus explicitly on the consequences for
AND
the period prior to the possible crossover.19 pg. 647-650

The alternative that causes transition wars
Walton 7 Lecturer in International Relations and Strategic Studies at the University of Reading in Reading, England, 07 Dale C, “geopolitics and the great powers in the twenty-first century”, http://books.google.com/books?id=AQLTD1R-47ACandprintsec=frontcoverandsource=gbs_navlinks_s#v=onepageandq=andf=false

Although international political conditions will differ enormously in the coming decades from those of the
AND
over the long term and minimize the probability of a great power war.

Studies show violence is decreasing now because of everything consistent with the aff---it’s only a question of sustaining current dynamics and preventing shocks to the system
Pinker 11 Steven Pinker is Professor of psychology at Harvard University "Violence Vanquished" Sept 24 online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424053111904106704576583203589408180.html

On the day this article appears, you will read about a shocking act of
AND
that the Long Peace and rights revolutions coincided with the electronic global village.

Shocks to the democratic system are the ONLY propensity for conflict—globalization and liberal norms have eradicated warfare and reduced structural violence—every field study proves
JOHN HORGAN 9 is Director of the Center for Science at Stevens Institute of Technology, former senior writer at Scientific American, B.A. from Columbia and an M.S. from Columbia “The End of the Age of War,” Dec 7 http://www.newsweek.com/id/225616/page/1

The economic crisis was supposed to increase violence around the world. The truth is
AND
pageant -contestants—or something like it may finally come to pass.

Tournament: Greenhill Round Robin | Round: 2 | Opponent: Niles West | Judge: Kirk Gibson, Paul Johnson
1AC 1
Advantage one is agriculture. 

Cuban agriculture is collapsing—now is key
oil extraction, petrochemicals and oil refinery infrastructure
King 12- Visiting Assistant Professor at Brown University’s Center for Environmental Studies
(M. Dawn, “Cuban Sustainability: The Effects of Economic Isolation on Agriculture and Energy” per Presentation for the Western Political Science Association Portland, OR, March 21-24, 2012, http://wpsa.research.pdx.edu/meet/2012/kingmdawn.pdf)//HA

Despite the potential to become more sustainable with a purposive and focused opening of the
AND
goal of sustainable development to increase short-term capital and energy needs.

The plan is key to solve

1) Provides massive foreign capital
King 12- Visiting Assistant Professor at Brown University’s Center for Environmental Studies
(M. Dawn, “Cuban Sustainability: The Effects of Economic Isolation on Agriculture and Energy” per Presentation for the Western Political Science Association Portland, OR, March 21-24, 2012, http://wpsa.research.pdx.edu/meet/2012/kingmdawn.pdf)//HA

The “special period in peacetime” transformed Cuban agricultural practices toward a more sustainable
AND
– an institutional change that may also aid in increasing total food production.

2) Recent developments mean now is key
Dialogue between farmers spread the model
cuba will be forced to abandon the model now
Thompson and Stephens, 12 – * Ph.D. Curriculum and Education Director @ Duke University AND  Marian Cheek Jackson Center (Charles D. and Alexander, “Visions for Sustainable Agriculture in Cuba and the United States: Changing Minds and Models through Exchange”, Southern States, March 22 2013, http://www.southernspaces.org/2012/visions-sustainable-agriculture-cuba-and-united-states-changing-minds-and-models-through-exchan) SP

With Cuba developing closer ties to the U.S. agriculture industry, increasing
AND
possibility for agricultural sustainability, an exchange that must overcome boundaries between nations.

The Cuban model spills over globally
1) Access to new techniques and farm expansion
American investment allows Cuban farmers to explore new techniques like using plants as natural pesticides
no incentive to invest now bc of laws that prevent return on investment
Shkolnick, 12 - J.D. Candidate, Drake University Law School (Jacob, “SIN EMBARGO: n1 THE CUBAN AGRICULTURAL REVOLUTION AND WHAT IT MEANS FOR THE UNITED STATES” 17 Drake J. Agric. L. 683, Fall, lexis)

VI. New Opportunities While investment in Cuban businesses and sales or purchases of Cuban
AND
may be just what is needed to allow for urban agriculture to flourish.

2) Market proximity and certification compatibility
proximity lowers transit costs
Kost, 4 – agricultural economist, Specialty Crops Branch, Economic Research. Service, US Department of Agriculture (William, “CUBAN AGRICULTURE: TO BE OR NOT TO BE ORGANIC?”
http://www.ascecuba.org/publications/proceedings/volume14/pdfs/kost.pdf)

In addition to the above European markets, the successful expansion and viability of Cuba’s
AND
domestic consumption in an environment where other production approaches are just not available.

The impact’s environmental collapse
Wright, 9 - Deputy Director of Coventry University's Centre for Agroecology and Food Security (Julia, Sustainable Agriculture and Food Security in an Era of Oil Scarcity, p. 15-16)

Although successful in enabling the availability of a narrow range of foods to a wide
AND
if they are feeding on legume pasture (Hamer and Anslow, 2008).

Environmental collapses causes extinction and nuclear resource wars
Takacs 96, Instructor in Department of Earth Systems Science and Policy at California State-Monterey Bay 96  (David, Philosophies of Paradise, Available online at www.dhushara.com/book/diversit/restor/takacs.htm, Accesssed 07/13/2012, ZR)

More often, however, humans are said to benefit from such ecosystem services.
AND
the end of the next century not with a bang but a whimper.

Resource wars are likely and escalate
Klare 13—professor of peace and world security studies at Hampshire College (Michael, April 23rd, “Entering A Resource-Shock World: How Resource Scarcity And Climate Change Could Produce A Global Explosion” http://www.countercurrents.org/klare230413.htm, chm)

Brace yourself. You may not be able to tell yet, but according to
AND
and mobilize new investments, tensions over water may erupt into more open confrontations
Independently, industrial ag will cause extinction
Johan Rockström et al 9 is a Environmental Professor in natural resource management at Stockholm University, and the Executive Director of the Stockholm Environment Institute and the Stockholm Resilience Centre, along with 27 other members of the SEI and SRC, A safe operating space for humanity, Nature 461, 472-475 (24 September 2009), www.nature.com/nature/journal/v461/n7263/full/461472a.html
Crossing certain biophysical thresholds could have disastrous consequences for humanity Three of nine interlinked planetary
AND
components of Earth-system functioning. Here we describe these three processes.

1AC 2
Advantage two is multilateralism. 

Plan solves credibility and multilateralism—

1) Creates a new, non-contradictory image of American policy
The UN voted against it hella times
We have relations with similar nations (china, Saudi Arabia etc.)
this is all amplified by our cuban transition advantage
we solve even if cuba puts up internal barriers
Conditioning on Democracy is bad because it is imposes it which fails and looks terrible—trade is better for democracy
Cuba probably won’t reciprocate—it’s our fault
Embargo just legitimizes the failing regime
Embargo definitionally fails because it doesn’t have international support
Dickerson 10 – Lieutenant Colonel, US Army, paper submitted in fulfillment of a Master of Strategic Studies Degree at the US Army War College (Sergio M, “UNITED STATES SECURITY STRATEGY TOWARDS CUBA,” 1/14/10, http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a518053.pdf)//SJF

At the international political level, President Obama sees resuming relations with Cuba as a
AND
foregone diplomatic engagement and chosen coercive economic power as our only political tool.

2) Cuba is the key test case for multilateralism
historic ties
Allows north korea and iran to see the positive benefits of engagement
Human rights and democracy can’t be forced but the plan solves
Econ addon—4.84 billion dollars
Hinderdael, 11– M.A. candidate at SAIS Bologna Center (Klaas, “Breaking the Logjam: Obama's Cuba Policy and a Guideline for Improved Leadership”, http://bcjournal.org/volume-14/breaking-the-logjam.html?printerFriendly=true)//NG

Conclusion The two countries’ histories have long been intertwined, particularly after the Monroe Doctrine
AND
truly willing to extend his hand once America’s traditional adversaries unclench their fists.

3) Latin America is the key for transitioning to multilateralism
Unilat will fail because ideology, corporate and sectional interests and the political system hamper the ability to act
LA key because there are no threats and most countries agree with our end goal even if they don’t like the US and they like Obama
Plan solves Brazilian relations because of agriculture cooperation
Grandin 10 – teaches history at New York University and is a member of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences (Greg, “Empire's Senescence: U.S. Policy in Latin America,” New Labor Forum, 19:1, Winter 2010, pg. 14-23)SJF

Washington’s relations with Latin America—particularly in terms of the gap between what its
AND
embrace a new era of engagement based on mutual interest and mutual respect.”

Unilateralism fails and triggers every impact—Mulitlateralism is key
Economic collapse
Nuclear proliferation
Terrorism
Water,
 AIDS,
mass migration of people,
 desertification,
 poverty,
hunger,
disease
Montalván, 10 - a 17-year veteran of the U.S. Army including multiple combat tours in Iraq, master's of science from Columbia University's Graduate School of Journalism (Luis, “Multilateralism is Essential for Peace in the 21st Century” Huffington Post, 4/23, http://www.huffingtonpost.com/luis-carlos-montalvan/multilateralism-is-essent_b_550332.html)

Unilateralism is the wrong approach for American Diplomacy. There is nothing to suggest its
AND
us. Now is the time to create rather than divide common ground.

Cooperation solves extinction
Jervis 9—chaired prof of IR at Columbia. PhD (Robert, Unipolarity; A Structural Perspective, World Politics 61;1 Jan 2009)

To say that the system is unipolar is not to argue that the unipole can
AND
adversary but against the tasks at hand, they often fall short.54
Against terrorism, force is ineffective without excellent intelligence. Given the international nature of
AND
, and other states to play one Western country off against the others.
But in comparison with the cold war era, there are fewer incentives today for
AND
a decrease of threats that call for maintaining good relations with the superpower.
This does not mean that even in this particular unipolar system the superpower is like
AND
Iranian nuclear program and from Japan and the PRC in containing North Korea.
Nevertheless, many of the American goals depend on persuading others, not coercing them
AND
vision and believe that its leadership is benign. End Page 211

our impact is reverse causal—failing multilateralism causes global instability that goes nuclear
Scientific advances magnify the impact
solves global problems
first steps like the plan are necessary
it’s key to space colonization
Masciulli 11—Professor of Political Science at St Thomas University (Joseph, “The Governance Challenge for Global Political and Technoscientific Leaders in an Era of Globalization and Globalizing Technologies,” Bulletin of Science, Technology and Society February 2011 vol. 31 no. 1 pg. 3-5)NG
What is most to be feared is enhanced global disorder resulting from the combination of
AND
survival and security to their longer term agendas. Pg. 4-5

1AC Plan

Plan: The United States federal government should normalize its trade relations with Cuba. 

1AC 3
Advantage three is Cuba transition instability—plan solves
1) Investment and threat re-assessment
Allows access to jobs and capital for Cuban workers
Eases anti-american tensions
Lopez-Levy 11 – PhD candidate at Josef Korbel School of International Studies, coauthor of “Raul Castro and the New Cuba” (Arturo, New America Foundation, May 2011, http://newamerica.net/sites/newamerica.net/files/policydocs/naf_all_cuba_reform_final.pdf)//EK

If the goal is to promote marketization and political liberalization in Cuba, economic sanctions
AND
of the current situation, but a failure of the reforms now underway.

2) Diplomacy prevents escalation
Lopez-Levy 11 – PhD candidate at Josef Korbel School of International Studies, coauthor of “Raul Castro and the New Cuba” (Arturo, New America Foundation, May 2011, http://newamerica.net/sites/newamerica.net/files/policydocs/naf_all_cuba_reform_final.pdf)//EK

Diplomacy, not sanctions, must be the primary tool for resolving differences with Havana
AND
civil society. The United States should support such a course in Cuba.

3) Now is key—governmental transition and liberalization coming
Ashby 13, Senior Research Fellow at the Council on Hemispheric Affairs. He served in the U.S. Commerce Department's International Trade Administration as Director of the Office of Mexico and the Caribbean and acting Deputy Assistant Secretary of Commerce for the Western Hemisphere(Timothy, "Preserving Stability in Cuba After Normalizing Relations with the United States – The Importance of Trading with State-Owned Enterprises" 3/29/13, Council on Hemispheric Affairs, http://www.coha.org/preserving-stability-in-cuba-timothy-ashby/)//AD

Cuba under Raúl Castro has entered a new period of economic, social, and
AND
-way trade must include both Cuba’s private sector as well as SOEs.

Causes civil war ensuring multiple conflicts
Exiles return to try and claim authority
Dissidents try to claim power
US policy encourages anarchy
Also encourages criminal enterprises—floods the US with drugs
Extremist groups use cuba as a base—it’s close enough for an attack to succeed
Regional instability causes state failure throughout the region because it collapses economic growth—causes draw in
Draw in causes worse anti-americanism because it’s perceived as imperialism
Detracts focus—causes instability in the following regions: Iran, North Korea, China/Taiwan, Africa, the Caucuses,  
Gorrell, 5 - Lieutenant Colonel, US Army, paper submitted for the USAWC STRATEGY RESEARCH PROJECT (Tim, “CUBA: THE NEXT UNANTICIPATED ANTICIPATED STRATEGIC CRISIS?” http://www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?AD=ADA433074  GWOT=Global War on Terrorism

Regardless of the succession, under the current U.S. policy, Cuba’s
AND
in an effort to facilitate a manageable transition to post-Castro Cuba?

All of those conflicts escalate conflicts escalate
Bosco 6
David Bosco (David Bosco is an assistant professor at American University's School of International Service  and a senior editor at Foreign Policy magazine) July 2006 “Forum: Keeping an eye peeled for World War III” http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/06211/709477-109.stm_

The understanding that small but violent acts can spark global conflagration is etched into the
AND
not even a hint that France, Russia or China would respond militarily.

Lifting the embargo independently checks escalation
Dickerson 10 – Lieutenant Colonel, US Army, paper submitted in fulfillment of a Master of Strategic Studies Degree at the US Army War College (Sergio M, “UNITED STATES SECURITY STRATEGY TOWARDS CUBA,” 1/14/10, http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a518053.pdf)//SJF

Conclusion Today, 20 years have passed since the fall of the Berlin Wall –
AND
decline in the greater global order bringing true peace for years to come.

Tournament: Glenbrooks | Round: 5 | Opponent: Stratford OS | Judge: Grant Peretz
The Embargo on Cuba is one of the last vestiges of the American imperial project—this form of economic terrorism means colonialism is an ever present fact in the lives of Cubans—the justifications of ending communism and dictatorship are shoddy and excuses for endless intervention and violence
Lamrani 2003—Doctor of Iberian and Latin American Studies at the University Paris-Sorbonne Paris-IV He is a member of the Center for Interdisciplinary Research on Contemporary Iberian worlds (CRIMIC) from the University of Paris-Sorbonne Paris IV , and the Interdisciplinary Group on Hispanic Caribbean and Latin America (GRIAHAL) at the University of Cergy Pontoise. (Salim, U.S. Economic sanctions against Cuba: objectives of an imperialist policy, http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Caribbean/USEconomicSanctions_Cuba.html, chm) Note: the date was derived from a chart this fine French fellow had in this article, the last date of which was 2003, and it said “votes until now” or something—charlie 

The economic sanctions imposed on Cuba by the United States are unique in view of
AND
to the same voluble and outdated arguments that its representatives keep on repeating.

These attempts to dominate a target nation is based in a  form of power over that is a violent approach to the world that must be rejected
Sjoberg 2k—Associate Professor of Political Science and affiliate faculty in Women's Studies at the University of Florida. She has previously taught and researched at the Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University, Duke University, Boston College, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Brandeis University, and Merrimack College. She holds a Ph.D. in International Relations and Gender Studies from the University of Southern California, and a law degree from Boston College.  Chair of the International Studies Association Committee on the Status of Women (Laura, TOWARDS A FEMINIST THEORY OF SANCTIONS, http://www.laurasjoberg.com/BA.pdf, chm)

Critical Redefinition of Power in the International Arena The critical redefinition of power that would
AND
program kept them there, just dangling a carrot just out of reach. 

These sanctions aren’t neutral but rather upheld by securitization
Sjoberg 2k—Associate Professor of Political Science and affiliate faculty in Women's Studies at the University of Florida. She has previously taught and researched at the Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University, Duke University, Boston College, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Brandeis University, and Merrimack College. She holds a Ph.D. in International Relations and Gender Studies from the University of Southern California, and a law degree from Boston College.  Chair of the International Studies Association Committee on the Status of Women (Laura, TOWARDS A FEMINIST THEORY OF SANCTIONS, http://www.laurasjoberg.com/BA.pdf, chm)

The United States’ policy determination to keep sanctions in its arsenal of policy choices brings
AND
that Iraq could resort to “use of chemical or biological terrorism.”44

The embargo upholds an approach to international relations based on hypocrisy and enemy creation—it sacrifices the population on the altar of revolution
Blum 11/8—Foreign Policy Journal, author, historian, and renowned critic of U.S. foreign policy. He is the author of numerous books, including "Killing Hope: U.S. Military and CIA Interventions Since World War II" and "Rogue State: A Guide to the World’s Only Superpower". (William, 2013, The United Nations Vote on the Cuba Embargo – 22 Years In a Row, chm)ellipses in original

For years American political leaders and media were fond of labeling Cuba an “international
AND
year, the Eisenhower administration instituted the suffocating embargo against its everlasting enemy.

That necessarily requires an endless recreation of existential threats
Ruži? 13—researcher and author for the Central and Eastern European Online Library (Maja, Securitization Outside the Liberal Political Context: Did Cuba Matter in the Cuban Missile Crisis?, http://www.sintezis.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/Securitization-Outside-the-Liberal-Context.pdf, chm)

 After 1990s the international relations scholarship, once dominated by the traditional notion of
AND
is presented as an existential threat that requires the implementation of emergency measures. 

It’s try or die---orthodox IR’s approach to global problems makes extinction inevitable
Ahmed 12 Dr. Nafeez Mosaddeq Ahmed is Executive Director of the Institute for Policy Research and Development (IPRD), an independent think tank focused on the study of violent conflict, he has taught at the Department of International Relations, University of Sussex "The international relations of crisis and the crisis of international relations: from the securitisation of scarcity to the militarisation of society" Global Change, Peace and Security Volume 23, Issue 3, 2011 Taylor Francis
3. From securitisation to militarisation 3.1 Complicity
This analysis thus calls for a broader approach to environmental security based on retrieving the
AND
for crisis onto a newly constructed 'outsider' group vindicating various forms of violence.

The embargo causes unnecessary suffering of the Cuban people in the name of Security
Kovalik 13—labor and human rights attorney, and teaches International Human Rights at the University of Pittsburgh School of Law. Senior Associate General Counsel of the United Steelworkers, eceived the David W. Mills Mentoring Fellowship from Stanford University School of Law and was the recipient of the Project Censored Award for his article exposing the unprecedented killing of trade unionists in Colombia.  He has written extensively on the issue of international human rights and U.S. foreign policy for the Huffington Post and Counterpunch and has lectured throughout the world on these subjects. (Daniel, The Unrelenting Economic War on Cuba, June 28th, http://www.counterpunch.org/2013/06/28/the-unrelenting-economic-war-on-cuba/, chm)ellipsis in original
If it weren’t bad enough that the U.S. has imposed an illegal
AND
be lobbied to end the legal regime which keeps the embargo in place.

The lens through which we view the world is important—you should orient your knowledge production around stopping structural violence
Sjoberg, PhD, 13—Associate Professor of Political Science and affiliate faculty in Women's Studies at the University of Florida. She has previously taught and researched at the Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University, Duke University, Boston College, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Brandeis University, and Merrimack College. She holds a Ph.D. in International Relations and Gender Studies from the University of Southern California, and a law degree from Boston College.  Chair of the International Studies Association Committee on the Status of Women (Laura, “Viewing Peace Through Gender Lenses” http://journals.cambridge.org/action/displayAbstract?fromPage=onlineandaid=8930621, chm)

Looking Forward: Feminism, the United States, and Peace in the Twenty-
AND
increasingly important, and the costs of ignoring these insights may be rising.
Sanctions are counter to an ethical approach to the world—the advocacy is the first step to changing US Policy
Sjoberg 2k—Associate Professor of Political Science and affiliate faculty in Women's Studies at the University of Florida. She has previously taught and researched at the Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University, Duke University, Boston College, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Brandeis University, and Merrimack College. She holds a Ph.D. in International Relations and Gender Studies from the University of Southern California, and a law degree from Boston College.  Chair of the International Studies Association Committee on the Status of Women (Laura, TOWARDS A FEMINIST THEORY OF SANCTIONS, http://www.laurasjoberg.com/BA.pdf, chm)

The United States’ power-over mindset is not just evident in its direct relationship
AND
towards changing the unequal power dynamic between the United States and those nations. 

Basing policy on fear and insecurity guarantees lash-out and policy failure
Rothkopf 13— visiting scholar at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace where he chairs the Carnegie Economic Strategy Roundtable. He was formerly chief executive of Intellibridge Corporation, managing director of Kissinger Associates and U.S. Deputy Under Secretary of Commerce for International Trade Policy.¶ Rothkopf has also taught international affairs and national security studies at Columbia University's School of International and Public Affairs and Georgetown's School of Foreign Service, (David, Scared Tactics
Why America will be paying for decades for a foreign policy based on fear. June 18th, http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2013/06/18/scared_tactics_america_foreign_policy_fear,chm)
please note the use of the phrase “frenemies”

Behind closed doors but with language and intonation that ensured his remarks would be heard
AND
that have lost confidence in important aspects of themselves remains to be seen.

The way we approach Cuba has an profound impact through the international sphere
Chelala 11/4—MD, PhD, is a co-winner of an Overseas Press Club of America award. He is also the foreign correspondent for Middle East Times International (Australia). (Cesar, 2013, The Folly of the Embargo on Cuba, http://thewip.net/talk/2013/11/the_folly_of_the_embargo_on_cu.html, chm)

At a time when relations between Iran and the West have the potential to improve
AND
with Vietnam, the reasoning goes, why not have them with Cuba?

The United States federal government should lift its trade sanctions on the Republic of Cuba.

Human nature means peace is possible
Barash 9/29—evolutionary biologist and professor of psychology at the University of Washington (David, 2013, Are We Hard-Wired for War? http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/29/opinion/sunday/are-we-hard-wired-for-war.html?_r=0, chm)

WAR is in the air. Sad to say, there’s nothing new about this
AND
her grandfather who wins. His answer: “The one you feed.”

Knowledge is controlled by neoconservatives and hacks—it allows the US to render unspeakable violence
Lamrani and Estrade 13—is professor of Spanish and Latin American Studies at the University of Paris-Sorbonne (Paris IV) and an associate professor at the University of la Réunion. Lamrani is a member of the Center for Arts and Historical Research of Indian Ocean, University of la Réunion; the Center for Interdisciplinary Research on Contemporary Iberian Worlds (CRIMIC), University of Paris-Sorbonne; and the Interdisciplinary Research Group on the Hispanic Caribbean and Latin America (GRIAHAL), University of Cergy Pontoise. He is also a member of the French Society of Hispanists (SHF) and the scientific council of the Revista Latina de Communicaci ó n Social, of the Universidad de la Laguna, Tenerife, Canary Islands. P AUL E STRADE is professor emeritus at the University of Paris VIII and a recognized expert on contemporary Hispanic Caribbean history. He is considered the most knowledgeable French scholar of the works of José Martí, the Cuban national hero, and Ramon Emeterio Betances, the principal figure in the Puerto Rican independence movement against the Spanish Empire. Estrade is the author of many works, including José Martí (1853–1895) ou des fondements de la démocratie en Amérique latine (1970), which has become a standard reference work, José Martí en su siglo y en el nuestro (2008), and Iniciación a Betances (2008). He is a member of the Interdisciplinary Research Group on the Hispanic Caribbean and Latin America (GRIAHAL), University of Cergy Pontoise. (Salim and Paul, The Economic War Against Cuba: A Historical and Legal Perspective on the U.S. Blockade” this card is the introduction, chm)
This book presents a little-known reality, equivocal, even consciously obscured,
AND
of siege, struggle against it, and contribute to its unconditional end

Tournament: Greenhill Round Robin | Round: 5 | Opponent: Lexington KF | Judge: Toby Wisenhunt, Christina Tallungan
the embargo is based in a cold war mindset—makes terrorism, econ, and Russia impacts inevitable
Lloyd 11—American writer based in London. Her work has appeared in The International Herald Tribune, The Financial Times and The Guardian Weekly (Delia, Ten Reasons to Lift the Cuba Embargo, http://www.politicsdaily.com/2010/08/24/ten-reasons-to-lift-the-cuba-embargo/, chm)

4. It's out of date. To argue that U.S.-Cuban
AND
for understanding that bilateral relationship, much less the Cuban-American one.

there’s no impact and decline is inevitable
Brooks 8/28— Law professor at Georgetown University and a Schwartz senior fellow at the New America Foundation. She served as a counselor to the U.S. defense undersecretary for policy from 2009 to 2011 and previously served as a senior advisor at the U.S. State Department. (Rosa, “Wounded Giant” 2013,http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2013/08/29/wounded_giant_united_states_syria?page=0,1, chm)ellipsis in original 

Pity poor President Obama. These days, he can't win. Do nothing as
AND
nation once again: a nation that inspires not resentment, but hope.

the plan restores international credibility—it spills over and solves real threats and undermines the pink tide
Sweig, PhD, 9—Nelson and David Rockefeller Senior Fellow for Latin America Studies and Director for Latin America Studies, member of the Council of Foreign Relations. She holds a BA from the University of California and an MA and PhD from the Johns Hopkins University School of Advanced International Studies. (Julia,  “Memo to President Obama” http://www.cfr.org/cuba/memo-president-obama/p18746, chm)

In the first six months of your presidency, you should launch an initiative to
AND
confronting real, rather than manufactured and domestically driven, national security challenges.

No risk of war
Sarwar 12 (Beena Sarwar, International The News, April 23, 2012, “All for peace”, http://www.thenews.com.pk/Todays-News-14-104612-All-for-peace, dyang)

“Trade for peace” is the new catchphrase defining the emerging relationship between India
AND
. Countries that engage in mutual trade and investment don’t go to war.

No escalation
Phadke 3—Senior Fellow, Institute for Defence Studies and Analyses. Air Commodore in the Indian Air Force.  (Ramesh, Power and Escalation Control, http://www.stimson.org/southasia/pdf/phadkefinal.pdf, AG) 

India, in contrast, has repeatedly declared its commitment to NFU and has stated
AND
executed can achieve the desired results without coming anywhere near Pakistan’s nuclear threshold.

Tournament: Greenhill Round Robin | Round: 5 | Opponent: Lexington KF | Judge: Toby Wisenhunt, Christina Tallungan
Cuba says no and kills credibility
Piccone 9 (Ted Piccone is the acting vice president and director for the Foreign Policy program. Piccone specializes in global democracy and human rights policies; U.S.-Latin American relations; and multilateral affairs. Piccone serves as an advisor to the Club of Madrid and has served on the National Security Council, at the State Department and Pentagon, “The United Nations Denounces the U.S. Embargo on Cuba … Again”, October 2009, http://www.brookings.edu/blogs/up-front/posts/2009/10/27-cuba-un-vote-piccone)//moxley
While a tit-for-tat approach may assuage the shrinking number of hard
AND
vote, very little will have changed, in Havana or in Washington.

Tournament: Greenhill | Round: 4 | Opponent: Pine Crest LM | Judge: Katie Klante
Chinese steel industry low now – decreasing demand and steel overcapacity
China Daily, 7/13 – is an English language daily newspaper published in the People's Republic of China (China Daily, “China steel industry downturn to continue in H2”, Steel-Prices China, 7/13/12, http://www.steelprices-china.com/news/index/2012/07/13/MzY0MTA3D/China_steel_industry_downturn_to_continue_in_H2.html | AK)
China Daily quoted according to a leading industry expert that China steel industry, already
AND
of 17.51 the lowest level in the past 10 months.

plan stops china war
Benjamin-Alvarado ‘10
Jonathan Benjamin-Alvarado, PhD of Political Science, University of Nebraska, 2010, “Cuba’s Energy Future: Strategic Approaches to Cooperation,” a Brookings Publication –obtained as an ebook through MSU Electronic Resources – page 9-11

Those involved in managing the security interests of the United States need to understand the
AND
after the United States and Japan— to access oil and gas resources.

No impact to Chinese economy
Blackwill 9 – former associate dean of the Kennedy School of Government and Deputy Assistant to the President and Deputy National Security Advisor for Strategic Planning (Robert, RAND, “The Geopolitical Consequences of the World Economic Recession—A Caution”, http://www.rand.org/pubs/occasional_papers/2009/RAND_OP275.pdf)

Next, China. Again, five years from today. Did the recession undermine
AND
. Did it cause the essence of Asian security to transform? No.

Chinese growth is terrible—and latin America isn’t key
Daremblum 8/23—Director of the Center for Latin American Studies at the Hudson Institute. (Jaime, 2013, How China's Slowdown Will Impact Latin America, http://www.realclearworld.com/articles/2013/08/23/how_chinas_slowdown_will_impact_latin_america_105397-2.html, chm)

It is the end of an era for China, and also for Latin America
AND
also highlight the growing divide between the economic reformers and the economic protectionists.

Tournament: Greenhill Round Robin | Round: 5 | Opponent: Lexington KF | Judge: Toby Wisenhunt, Christina Tallungan
Obama has resumed push for gun control
Rucker, 9/17 (Philip, 9/17/2013, “Obama calls for gun control in wake of Navy Yard shooting,” http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-politics/wp/2013/09/17/obama-calls-for-gun-control-in-wake-of-navy-yard-shooting/))

President Obama called on Congress on Tuesday to revisit gun control legislation, saying in the wake of Monday's deadly mass shooting at the Washington  Navy Yard that lawmakers should take what he considers "basic actions" to toughen the nation's gun laws.
In an interview with the Spanish-language television network Telemundo, Obama said the
AND
public to see if we can change how they do business up there."

no focus link—Russia—and Obama will veto
Fox News 9/19 (2013, Boehner blasts Obama for bargaining with Putin, not Congress ahead of budget vote http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/09/19/white-house-threatens-to-veto-de-fund-obamacare-bill/#ixzz2fRNJkOud, chm)

House Speaker John Boehner ripped President Obama for negotiating with Vladimir Putin while giving congressional
AND
. "I expect my Senate colleagues to be up for the battle." 

GOP will inevitably cave
? Public pressure
? Know it will give Dems more leverage on debt ceiling
Bolton, 9/14 (Alexander, 9/14/2013, “Confident Dems want separate showdowns on fiscal battles,” http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/322247-confident-democrats-want-separate-showdowns-on-shutdown-and-debt-limit))
“If push comes to shove on debt ceiling, I’m virtually certain they’ll blink
AND
, when it gets tough, do not do it,” he said.

Navy shooting should have triggered the link
Reuters 9/16 (“Senate cancels session, locked down after Navy Yard shooting” Sep 16, 2013, nkj)

The Senate canceled its Monday session and it and its adjacent office buildings were put
AND
. The Senate canceled its Monday session because of the Navy Yard shooting.

engagement now disproves the link
CJ 9/17—Caribbean Journal (2013, Direct Mail From the US to Cuba?, http://www.caribjournal.com/2013/09/17/direct-mail-from-the-us-to-cuba/, chm)

It’s been 50 years since there was direct mail service between the United States and
AND
,” with both sides agreeing to continue talks in the months to come.

Shutdown will give Obama leverage to resolve debt ceiling—kills the economy
Sanghoee, 9/12 -~-- has worked at leading investment banks as well as at a multi-billion dollar hedge fund (9/12/2013, Sanjay, “Why Obama Should Let the Government Shut Down,” http://www.huffingtonpost.com/sanjay-sanghoee/why-obama-should-let-the-_b_3916099.html))
While the debate over Syria may have overshadowed the expected battle in Washington over budget
AND
he needs to act proactively here, and really force the GOP's hand.
By not being afraid to shut down Washington.

GOP backlashing now over carbon limits—no focus
Shear 9/20
(Michael, 9-20-13, “Administration to Press Ahead With Carbon Limits
”,http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/21/us/politics/obama-administration-carbon-limits.html?_r=0, twm)

The Obama administration on Friday announced that it was not backing down from a confrontation
AND
industry as part of what they call the president’s “war on coal.”

Tournament: Greenhill Round Robin | Round: 2 | Opponent: Niles West | Judge: Kirk Gibson, Paul Johnson
raul solves and instability is inevitable without US opening
Sweig, PhD, 9—Nelson and David Rockefeller Senior Fellow for Latin America Studies and Director for Latin America Studies, member of the Council of Foreign Relations. She holds a BA from the University of California and an MA and PhD from the Johns Hopkins University School of Advanced International Studies. (Julia,  “Memo to President Obama” http://www.cfr.org/cuba/memo-president-obama/p18746, chm)

Raúl Castro's First Year The second major issue or caveat relates to what is happening
AND
could prompt a mass refugee exodus. The time to talk is now.

the transition won’t be swift
Sweig, PhD, 13—Nelson and David Rockefeller Senior Fellow for Latin America Studies and Director for Latin America Studies, member of the Council of Foreign Relations. She holds a BA from the University of California and an MA and PhD from the Johns Hopkins University School of Advanced International Studies. (Julia, Cuba After Communism The Economic Reforms That Are Transforming the Island, August, http://www.cfr.org/cuba/cuba-after-communism/p3099, chm)

At first glance, Cuba's basic political and economic structures appear as durable as the
AND
, the features of which defy easy classification or comparison to transitions elsewhere.

reforms can’t succeed because of the embargo—collapse is inevitable
Sweig, PhD, 13—Nelson and David Rockefeller Senior Fellow for Latin America Studies and Director for Latin America Studies, member of the Council of Foreign Relations. She holds a BA from the University of California and an MA and PhD from the Johns Hopkins University School of Advanced International Studies. (Julia, Cuba After Communism The Economic Reforms That Are Transforming the Island, August, http://www.cfr.org/cuba/cuba-after-communism/p3099, chm)

Cuba's reforms might appear frustratingly slow, inconsistent, and insufficient to address its citizens'
AND
U.S. law could have a profound impact on the island.

Raul solves the impact—can moderate the transition
Sweig, PhD, 13—Nelson and David Rockefeller Senior Fellow for Latin America Studies and Director for Latin America Studies, member of the Council of Foreign Relations. She holds a BA from the University of California and an MA and PhD from the Johns Hopkins University School of Advanced International Studies. (Julia, Cuba After Communism The Economic Reforms That Are Transforming the Island, August, http://www.cfr.org/cuba/cuba-after-communism/p3099, chm)

The best way to change such attitudes, however, would be for Washington to
AND
leeway and increasing support on the island for greater economic and political liberalization.

reforms guarantee collapse if the embargo isn’t removed
Ashby 13, Senior Research Fellow at the Council on Hemispheric Affairs. He served in the U.S. Commerce Department's International Trade Administration as Director of the Office of Mexico and the Caribbean and acting Deputy Assistant Secretary of Commerce for the Western Hemisphere(Timothy, "Preserving Stability in Cuba After Normalizing Relations with the United States – The Importance of Trading with State-Owned Enterprises" 3/29/13, Council on Hemispheric Affairs, http://www.coha.org/preserving-stability-in-cuba-timothy-ashby/)//AD

Cuba under Raúl Castro has entered a new period of economic, social, and
AND
-way trade must include both Cuba’s private sector as well as SOEs.

Tournament: Greenhill | Round: 6 | Opponent: Carollton | Judge: Shunta Jordan
Thumpers – Guns, health care, food stamps
Epstein 9/21
Jennifer, “Obama vows to continue gun-law push”, http://www.politico.com/story/2013/09/obama-vows-to-continue-gun-law-push-97162.html#ixzz2fdmCaK1y, CMR

President Barack Obama vowed Saturday to keep pushing ahead on his domestic agenda, fighting
AND
. 1, and to raise the debt ceiling by later this fall.

Obama has no political capital -~-- can’t take a leadership role
Rogers, 9/17 (Ed, 9/17/2013, Washington Post.com, “The Insiders: Stubborn facts and bothersome polls,” Factiva))

It seems like it has been 10 years, but in reality it has been
AND
Americans disapprove of Obamacare, "the highest level since it was signed."\

their link doesn’t assume presidential spin
Dickerson 10 – Lieutenant Colonel, US Army, paper submitted in fulfillment of a Master of Strategic Studies Degree at the US Army War College (Sergio M, “UNITED STATES SECURITY STRATEGY TOWARDS CUBA,” 1/14/10, http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a518053.pdf)//SJF

Achieving Congressional approval will be difficult although not impossible in the present economic recession.
AND
these to the American public before the media or his opposition defines these.

Econ resilient—empirics
Zakaria, 9—, PhD in pol sci Editor of Newsweek, BA from Yale, PhD in pol sci, Harvard. He serves on the board of Yale University, The Council on Foreign Relations, The Trilateral Commission, and Shakespeare and Company. Named "one of the 21 most important people of the 21st Century" (Fareed, The Secrets of Stability, 12 December 2009, http://www.fareedzakaria.com/articles/articles.html, AMiles)

One year ago, the world seemed as if it might be coming apart.
AND
. The current global economic system is inherently more resilient than we think. 

GOP conditions ruin a deal – they won’t budge
Cowan 9/18
Richard, “What happens in a U.S. government shutdown?”, http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/09/18/us-usa-fiscal-idUSBRE98G0YI20130918, CMR

(Reuters) - Republicans in the House of Representatives set in motion on Wednesday
AND
following recent disagreements over Syria and Obama's choice to head the Federal Reserve.

PC backfires – hardens GOP opposition and ruins compromise on fiscal issues
Shaw 9/16
John, “Obama's Hard Line Remarks May Further Complicate Fiscal Talks”, https://mninews.marketnews.com/index.php/obamas-hard-line-remarks-may-further-complicate-fiscal-talks?q=content/obamas-hard-line-remarks-may-further-complicate-fiscal-talks, CMR

WASHINGTON (MNI) - For reasons that are not easy to discern, President
AND
. Obama has said he will not negotiate over statutory debt ceiling legislation.

No escalation
Ferguson 9, Professor of History @ Harvard, 2/23 (Niall, http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20090223.wferguson0223/BNStory/crashandrecovery/home/?pageRequested=all, CMR)

Niall Ferguson: “There will be blood, in the sense that a crisis
AND
I wouldn't be surprised to see some of that in the year ahead.
It's just that I don't see it producing anything comparable with 1914 or 1939. It's kind of hard to envisage a world war. Even when most pessimistic, I struggle to see how that would work, because the U.S., for all its difficulties in the financial world, is so overwhelmingly dominant in the military world.

Debt ceiling doesn’t collapse the economy-~--empirics
Michael Tanner 11, National Review, “No Surrender on Debt Ceiling”, Jan 19, http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/257433/no-surrender-debt-ceiling-michael-tanner
Of course the Obama administration is already warning of Armageddon if Congress doesn’t raise the
AND
country. Our economy will not long survive government spending at those levels.
Cuba lobby is powerless
LeoGrande 13—professor in the department of government at American University's School of Public Affairs in Washington, D.C. and a specialist in Latin American politics and U.S. foreign policy toward Latin America, Professor LeoGrande has been a frequent adviser to government and private sector agencies. Council on Foreign Relations International Affairs Fellow, and a Pew Faculty Fellow in International Affairs. Dean LeoGrande holds a B.A., an M.A., and a Ph.D, all from Syracuse University.(William, “The Cuba Lobby”, April 11, http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2013/04/11/the_cuba_lobby_jay_z, chm)

The irrationality of U.S. policy does not stem just from concerns about
AND
checkered legacy. Will Barack Obama have the courage to go to Havana?

Engagement now disproves the link
Cadenagramonte 9/21
 Sept. 21
(9-21-13, http://www.cadenagramonte.cu/english/index.php/show/articles/15456:cuba-usa-coordinate-search-and-rescue-operations, “Cuba, USA Coordinate Search and Rescue Operations”, twm)

Experts of Cuba and the United States analyzed common actions for search and rescue,
AND
and Rescue and the International Agreement of Civil Aviation. (Prensa Latina)

Tournament: The Glenbrooks | Round: Doubles | Opponent: Kinkaid BR | Judge: Buntin, Garrett, Weil
They are fundamentally wrong—gendered binaries don’t organize the world
Hooper 1 Charlotte (University of Bristol research associate in politics), Manly States: Masculinities, International Relations, and Gender Politics pp 45-46. 

Spike Peterson and Anne Sisson Runyan (1993), in their discussion of  gendered dichotomies
AND
it as performing only an ideological or propagandistic role is also too simplistic.  

No impact
Goldstein 1—Professor of International Relations at American University, 2001 (Joshua S., War and Gender: How Gender Shapes the War System and Vice Versa, pp.411-412)

I began this book hoping to contribute in some way to a deeper understanding of
AND
on injustice as the main cause of war seems to be empirically inadequate.

Sanctions are gendered
Sjoberg 2k—Associate Professor of Political Science and affiliate faculty in Women's Studies at the University of Florida. She has previously taught and researched at the Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University, Duke University, Boston College, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Brandeis University, and Merrimack College. She holds a Ph.D. in International Relations and Gender Studies from the University of Southern California, and a law degree from Boston College.  Chair of the International Studies Association Committee on the Status of Women (Laura, TOWARDS A FEMINIST THEORY OF SANCTIONS, http://www.laurasjoberg.com/BA.pdf, chm)

So, this brings up the question, if it is almost impossible to make
AND
concerns, it would reject the humanitarian harms of sanctions on civilian wymyn. 

Violence and domination are inevitable
Thayer 4 – Thayer has been a Fellow at the Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs at the Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University and has taught at Dartmouth College and the University of Minnesota Darwin and International Relations: On the Evolutionary Origins of War and Ethnic Conflict, University of Kentucky Press, 2004, pg. 75-76 adi

The central issue here is what causes states to behave as offensive realists predict.
AND
their family's or tribes need for food, shelter, or other resources). 

Death reps cause an empathic shift---this is especially crucial in the context of policy debates and advocacy simulations
Recuber 11 Timothy Recuber is a doctoral candidate in sociology at the Graduate Center of the City. University of New York. He has taught at Hunter College in Manhattan "CONSUMING CATASTROPHE: AUTHENTICITY AND EMOTION IN MASS-MEDIATED DISASTER" gradworks.umi.com/3477831.pdf
Perhaps, then, what distant consumers express when they sit glued to the television
AND
and compassion that is woefully  unfulfilled by American life under normal conditions today.  
 In the end, the consumption of disaster doesn’t make us unable or unwilling
AND
we must advocate on a daily basis, not only when disaster strikes.  

The alt doesn’t change reality and reproduces gender stereotypes
Witworth, 94 prof of political science and female studies @ York U, (Feminism and International Relations, pg 20, 1994)

Even when not concerned with mothering as such, much of the politics that emerge
AND
suggest, this in itself should give feminists pause to reconsider this position.

\

Vote aff because the embargo is terrible
Kovalik 13—labor and human rights attorney, and teaches International Human Rights at the University of Pittsburgh School of Law. Senior Associate General Counsel of the United Steelworkers, eceived the David W. Mills Mentoring Fellowship from Stanford University School of Law and was the recipient of the Project Censored Award for his article exposing the unprecedented killing of trade unionists in Colombia.  He has written extensively on the issue of international human rights and U.S. foreign policy for the Huffington Post and Counterpunch and has lectured throughout the world on these subjects. (Daniel, The Unrelenting Economic War on Cuba, June 28th, http://www.counterpunch.org/2013/06/28/the-unrelenting-economic-war-on-cuba/, chm)ellipsis in original

If it weren’t bad enough that the U.S. has imposed an illegal
AND
be lobbied to end the legal regime which keeps the embargo in place.

Epistemology and ontology not first
Owen 2—Reader of Political Theory, U Southampton (David, Millennium Vol 31 No 3 2002 p. 655-7)

Commenting on the ‘philosophical turn’ in IR, Wæver remarks that ‘a
AND
the first and second dangers, and so a potentially vicious circle arises.

discussion of the embargo is key to break down misconceptions
Orban 10—Hungarian entrepreneur, visionary, and analyst of the global high technology landscape. He was born in Budapest in 1965. Currently, Orban is Chief Executive Officer of Dotsub,1 a US-based technology platform and services company that powers captions and translations as subtitles in any language in online videos to remove barriers to multi-cultural communications.234 Orban was a founder and previously Chief Evangelist of WideTag, Inc., the OpenSpime technology company, providing the infrastructure for an open Internet of Things.56 Active in virtual worlds as well, he was the founder of Vulcano, one of the first and most active Italian communities in Second Life.78 Together with Tim O'Reilly, Lawrence Lessig, and others, Orban is one of the founders of the Open Government Working Group, which developed a set of principles of open government data in December 2007. Orban spoke at the Italian Parliament9 about open government data policies in December 2008, calling for a wider adoption of transparent policies, and accountability, criticizing current legislation about freedom of information. He is also an Advisor and member of the Faculty of the Singularity University,1011 the founder and director of the Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence Europe, and former Chairman, and a Director of Humanity+.12 (David, “Participate In the Conversation, http://www.scribd.com/doc/40399402/Reconciliation-78-Reasons-to-End-the-US-Embargo-of-Cuba-Free-Sampler, chm)

The book you are reading presents ideas that may be highly controversial to the American
AND
thoughts, and additional thoughts and references will be greatly appreci-ated. 

We shouldn’t have to defend our reps—that makes aff ground impossible—the plan is the focus of the debate--Ideological consistency prevents gear switching — key to compromise and democratic deliberation.
van Zuylen-Wood 12 — Simon van Zuylen-Wood, Writer for Philadelphia Magazine, former writer for the New Republic and the Washington Monthly, 2012 (“In Defense of Flip-Flopping,” Political Animal—a Washington Monthly blog, October 28th, Available Online at http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/political-animal-a/2012_10/in_defense_of_flipflopping040786.php, Accessed 07-22-2013)
There’s another reason the strategy is a foolish one. Hypocrisy in politics is not
AND
rather than doctrinaire policy-making, praised hypocrisy in a recent column.
In politics, turncoats make sensible compromises possible. If Democrats and Republicans are sharply divided on a question of economic policy, and no one is willing to break ranks, an agreement might be unachievable… Turncoats also break down echo chambers. If conservatives or liberals are listening only to those on their side, they tend to become more confident, more unified and more extreme.
Nixon went to China, Clinton enacted welfare reform, Roberts upheld Obamacare, as
AND
not always the best policy in even the most democratic of political contexts.”
There’s something not only political unfeasible, but morally worrisome about demanding complete ideological coherence f

rom our candidates. The capacity to switch gears reflects the ability to make clear
AND
center than hang back with the ideologically pure Tea Party puritans, right?

the alt fails and reproduces social hierarchies
Bryant 12 - Professor of Philosophy at Collin College (Levi R., Author of a number of articles on Deleuze, Badiou, Zizek, Lacan, and political theory, November 11th, 2012, http://larvalsubjects.wordpress.com/2012/11/11/underpants-gnomes-a-critique-of-the-academic-left/) DON’T ENDORSE GENDERED LANGUAGE
Unfortunately, the academic left falls prey to its own form of abstraction. It’s
AND
to make a truly revolutionary contribution, this is where you should start. 

Why should anyone even bother listening to you if you aren’t proposing real plans?
AND
. Instead we prefer to shout and denounce. Good luck with that.

Tournament: Greenhill Round Robin | Round: 3 | Opponent: Greenhill MR | Judge: Martin Osborne, Gabe Murillo
their morality is incoherent—all property is theft
Lele, 96 – undergraduate student at McGill University (Amod, “When Theft is Moral”, 1996, http://web.archive.org/web/20010807111819/http://www.geocities.com/SoHo/2842/theft.htm)//eek

What is theft, after all? Theft is taking money without the consent of
AND
because they "initiated" the force. Excuse me while I retch.
their model of society fails and causes mass suffering
Partridge 04, Research Associate of Philosophy at the University of California-Riverside, specialist in Applied and Environment Ethics(Ernest, "A Dim View of Libertarianism" 2004 No Specific Date, The Online Gadfly, http://gadfly.igc.org/libertarian/7-conclusion.htm)//AD

However, "master morality" predates Nietzsche and the libertarians, and in fact
AND
individual self-fulfillment through self-sacrifice and other-directed concern.

Tournament: Greenhill Round Robin | Round: 3 | Opponent: Greenhill MR | Judge: Martin Osborne, Gabe Murillo
it’s impossible to predict oil prices and a host of issues make fluctuations inevitable
Lynch 9/13—Forbes energy analysit (Michael, 2013, Why Are Oil Prices High? Part I, http://www.forbes.com/sites/michaellynch/2013/09/13/why-are-oil-prices-high-part-i/, chm)

Academics sometimes explain that oil prices are stochastic (a fancy word for ‘random’
AND
explain the discrepancy. That will be the topic of my next post.

Drilling is inevitable
Gonzalez 13
Ivet González has been the correspondent for IPS Cuba since 2011.“Cuba Diversifies – But Energy Focus Still on Oil” – Inter-Press Service News Agency – ¶ http://www.ipsnews.net/2013/03/cuba-diversifies-but-energy-focus-still-on-oil/

In January 2012, the Scarabeo 9 drilling rig was brought to Cuba from Asia
AND
supply is increasingly seen as a priority in Cuba’s current economic reform process.

no oil
Pinon ‘13
(Progreso Weekly talked with energy affairs researcher Jorge Piñón, a Cuban-American who left the island during Operation Peter Pan and these many years later continues to talk in first-person-singular when referring to Cuba. Piñón has worked in the oil industry and was president for Latin America of AMOCO Oil Co. At present, he is a researcher for the Center for Energy and Environmental Resources of the University of Texas at Austin. The interview was held at the Meliá Habana Hotel in Cuba. The portion quoted in this card are the portions where Pinon is speaking – ¶ Progreso Weekly – May 7th – http://www.havanatimes.org/?p=92634)
That is the process we have conducted for the past 10 years in Cuba,
AND
deep waters such as we’ve seen in the past two or three years.

Econ Resilient
Jacob Nell, 6/19/2013 (staff writer, “Resilient Consumers Will Save Russia,” http://www.themoscowtimes.com/opinion/article/resilient-consumers-will-save-russia/481981.html, Accessed 7/19/2013, rwg)

The recent slowdown to 1.6 percent growth in the first quarter of 2013
AND
thanks to robust wage growth, supported by consumer borrowing and falling savings.

Tournament: Greenhill | Round: 6 | Opponent: Carollton | Judge: Shunta Jordan
CI engagement is unconditional
Smith 5 — Karen E. Smith, Professor of International Relations and Director of the European Foreign Policy Unit at the London School of Economics, 2005 (“Engagement and conditionality: incompatible or mutually reinforcing?,” Global Europe: New Terms of Engagement, May, Available Online at http://fpc.org.uk/fsblob/484.pdf, Accessed 07-25-2013, p. 23)
First, a few definitions. ‘Engagement’ is a foreign policy strategy of building
AND
change in another country, conditionality more of a top-down strategy.

Tournament: Greenhill | Round: Octas | Opponent: CPS FP | Judge: Collin Quinn, Stephen Pipkin, Misael Gonzalez
Plan texts lifts the embargo, starts negotiating a trade agreement
French, 9 – editor of and a frequent contributor to The Havana Note. She has led more than two dozen research trips to Cuba (Anya, “Options for Engagement A Resource Guide for Reforming U.S. Policy toward Cuba” http://www.lexingtoninstitute.org/library/resources/documents/Cuba/USPolicy/options-for-engagement.pdf)

the path to “normal” trade relations If the United States were to lift
AND
years, as both countries would need to adopt statutory and regulatory changes. 

That’s the core of the topic
Resnick 1 – Dr. Evan Resnick, Ph.D. in Political Science from Columbia University, Assistant Professor of Political Science at Yeshiva University, “Defining Engagement”, Journal of International Affairs, Spring, 54(2), Ebsco

A REFINED DEFINITION OF ENGAGEMENT In order to establish a more effective framework for dealing
AND
be shown below, permits the elucidation of multiple types of positive sanctions.

Tournament: Greenhill | Round: 4 | Opponent: Pine Crest LM | Judge: Katie Klante
Small countries are leaving
Prestowitz 12 (Clyde, founder and president of the Economic Strategy Institute, advisor to a number of global corporations including Intel and FedEx, former counselor to the secretary of commerce during the Reagan administration, MBA from the Wharton Graduate School of Business, Foreign Policy, April 27, 2012, “ Is the Trans-Pacific Partnership foundering?,” http://prestowitz.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2012/04/27/is_the_trans_pacific_partnership_foundering, alp)

U.S. Trade Representative Ron Kirk was here in Singapore yesterday and told
AND
see about the TPP, but things are not getting easier for it.

) Buy America provisions – midterms prove – China ensures it’s not effective even if it works
Moody 12 (Glyn, technology writer and author, writer for the Guardian, the Daily Telegraph, the New Scientist, the Economist, and the Financial Times, TechDirt, May 7th, 2012, “After SOPA And ACTA, Now TPP Starts To Fall Apart,” http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120504/03424318777/after-sopa-acta-now-tpp-starts-to-fall-apart.shtml, alp)

Foreign Policy magazine, for example, has a feature entitled Is the Trans-
AND
for copyright and patent maximalism that a year ago would have seemed impossible.

No impact—the alliance empirically fails
DiFilippo, sociology prof, 2 – Prof Sociology, Lincoln (Anthony, The Challenges of the U.S.-Japan Military Arrangement, p 13)

One thing that has not changed about the U.S.-Japan security alliance
AND
was capable of neutralizing the threats it perceives from the other nuclear powers.

No Asia War
Vannarith 10—Executive Director of the Cambodian Institute for Cooperation and Peace. PhD in Asia Pacific Studies, Ritsumeikan Asia Pacific U (Chheang, Asia Pacific Security Issues: Challenges and Adaptive Mechanism, http://www.cicp.org.kh/download/CICP20Policy20brief/CICP20Policy20brief20No203.pdf, AMiles)

Some people look to China for economic and strategic interests while others still stick to
AND
the region and those elements are present and being improved in this region.

Tournament: Greenhill | Round: 4 | Opponent: Pine Crest LM | Judge: Katie Klante
conceded transition causes central asia war—goes nuclear
Starr, IR prof, 1 (He is a research professor at the Paul H. Nitze School of Advanced International Studies at Johns Hopkins University, Frederick, December 13, Chair of Central Asia-Caucasus Institute at John Hopkins University (Frederick, The War Against Terrorism and U.S. Bilateral Relations with the Nations of Central Asia, http://www.cacianalyst.org/Publications/Starr_Testimony.htm, AG)

However, this does not mean that US actions are without risk to the Central
AND
terrifying threats to world peace that the U.S. cannot ignore.

Tournament: Grapevine | Round: Quarters | Opponent: Austin SFA Estradas | Judge: Eric Forslund, Matt Carswell, Sam Shore
plan stops china war
Benjamin-Alvarado ‘10
Jonathan Benjamin-Alvarado, PhD of Political Science, University of Nebraska, 2010, “Cuba’s Energy Future: Strategic Approaches to Cooperation,” a Brookings Publication –obtained as an ebook through MSU Electronic Resources – page 9-11

Those involved in managing the security interests of the United States need to understand the
AND
after the United States and Japan— to access oil and gas resources.

Goes nuclear
Lowther ‘13
Note: when this card has a line that reads “it says”, it is referencing a 42-page report by the Washington DC-based Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS). Ask your lab leaders about the CSIS and the PONI (Project on Nuclear Issues) – several of them have worked for that organization and will have unique insights. The study at hand was prepared by the CSIS’ Project on Nuclear Issues. The Tapiei Time article was written by William Lowther, who is the Washington DC staff writer for that organization and he is citing a report by the Center for Strategic and International Studies, 3-16-2013, “Taiwan could spark nuclear war: report,” Taipei Times, http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/taiwan/archives/2013/03/16/2003557211

“Although Beijing and Washington have agreed to a range of crisis management mechanisms,
AND
arsenals, such a conflict would be tremendously dangerous and quite possibly devastating.”

Tournament: Various Debates | Round: Quads | Opponent: All | Judge: Many
chmarshall14@gmail.com

Tournament: Greenhill Round Robin | Round: 3 | Opponent: Greenhill MR | Judge: Martin Osborne, Gabe Murillo
But, we’ll concede that ethics come first—we have an ethical obligation to remove the embargo
O’Brian 13’ (Bendan O’Brian, The Guardian, “End Cuba Embargo,” http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jul/18/end-cuba-embargo-us , AKY)
Javier Corrales, an American academic based in Massachusetts, apparently considers himself an expert
AND
academic institutions and, very much, the government of our own country.

Tournament: Various Debates | Round: Quads | Opponent: All | Judge: Many
Plan Texts: 

The United States federal government should lift its economic embargo on Cuba.

Plan: The United States federal government should normalize its trade relations with Cuba. 

The United States federal government should normalize its economic relations with the Republic of Cuba.

The United States federal government should begin the process of normalizing its trade relations with the Republic of Cuba.

Advantages:
Russia
OFAC (Iran, North Korea)
Relations (Terrorism, Warming)
Transition (China, Africa)
Agriculture (Resource wars, enviro, sometimes warming)
Multilateralism (Multilat solves war)

Tournament: Alta | Round: 6 | Opponent: Notre Dame PL | Judge: Dana Randal
They’re not topical—economic engagement is increasing foreign aid or a trade agreement in multiple-areas to influence the political behavior of a state
Resnick 1 – Dr. Evan Resnick, Ph.D. in Political Science from Columbia University, Assistant Professor of Political Science at Yeshiva University, “Defining Engagement”, Journal of International Affairs, Spring, 54(2), Ebsco
A REFINED DEFINITION OF ENGAGEMENT
In order to establish a more effective framework for dealing with unsavory regimes, I propose that we define engagement as the attempt to influence the political behavior of a target state through the comprehensive establishment and enhancement of contacts with that state across multiple issue-areas (i.e. diplomatic, military, economic, cultural). The following is a brief list of the specific forms that such contacts might include:
DIPLOMATIC CONTACTS
Extension of diplomatic recognition; normalization of diplomatic relations
Promotion of target-state membership in international institutions and regimes
Summit meetings and other visits by the head of state and other senior government officials of sender state to target state and vice-versa
MILITARY CONTACTS
Visits of senior military officials of the sender state to the target state and vice-versa
Arms transfers
Military aid and cooperation
Military exchange and training programs
Confidence and security-building measures
Intelligence sharing
ECONOMIC CONTACTS
Trade agreements and promotion
Foreign economic and humanitarian aid in the form of loans and/or grants
CULTURAL CONTACTS
Cultural treaties
Inauguration of travel and tourism links
Sport, artistic and academic exchanges (n25)
Engagement is an iterated process in which the sender and target state develop a relationship of increasing interdependence, culminating in the endpoint of "normalized relations" characterized by a high level of interactions across multiple domains. Engagement is a quintessential exchange relationship: the target state wants the prestige and material resources that would accrue to it from increased contacts with the sender state, while the sender state seeks to modify the domestic and/or foreign policy behavior of the target state. This deductive logic could adopt a number of different forms or strategies when deployed in practice.(n26) For instance, individual contacts can be established by the sender state at either a low or a high level of conditionality.(n27) Additionally, the sender state can achieve its objectives using engagement through any one of the following causal processes: by directly modifying the behavior of the target regime; by manipulating or reinforcing the target states' domestic balance of political power between competing factions that advocate divergent policies; or by shifting preferences at the grassroots level in the hope that this will precipitate political change from below within the target state.
This definition implies that three necessary conditions must hold for engagement to constitute an effective foreign policy instrument. First, the overall magnitude of contacts between the sender and target states must initially be low. If two states are already bound by dense contacts in multiple domains (i.e., are already in a highly interdependent relationship), engagement loses its impact as an effective policy tool. Hence, one could not reasonably invoke the possibility of the US engaging Canada or Japan in order to effect a change in either country's political behavior. Second, the material or prestige needs of the target state must be significant, as engagement derives its power from the promise that it can fulfill those needs. The greater the needs of the target state, the more amenable to engagement it is likely to be. For example, North Korea's receptivity to engagement by the US dramatically increased in the wake of the demise of its chief patron, the Soviet Union, and the near-total collapse of its national economy.(n28)
Third, the target state must perceive the engager and the international order it represents as a potential source of the material or prestige resources it desires. This means that autarkic, revolutionary and unlimited regimes which eschew the norms and institutions of the prevailing order, such as Stalin's Soviet Union or Hitler's Germany, will not be seduced by the potential benefits of engagement.
This reformulated conceptualization avoids the pitfalls of prevailing scholarly conceptions of engagement. It considers the policy as a set of means rather than ends, does not delimit the types of states that can either engage or be engaged, explicitly encompasses contacts in multiple issue-areas, allows for the existence of multiple objectives in any given instance of engagement and, as will be shown below, permits the elucidation of multiple types of positive sanctions.

doubling engagement in three years is a substantial increase
Indo-US Business 9 Indo-US Business, bimonthly publication by New Media Communication Pvt. Ltd. and the Indo-American Chamber of Commerce, “Report: Target $320 bn by 2018: Mission Possible,” May-June 2009, http://www.newmediacomm.com/publication/indo_us/mayjun09/report.html
This report has been prepared in the context of new governments in both countries and examines the potential of bilateral economic engagement in the next 10 years.¶ The report says: “Considering that India, a country with a GDP of around $1 trillion, accounts for a mere 1.3 percent of US trade, there is substantial potential to increase bilateral trade. The two countries should set a target of doubling bilateral trade every three years, which would mean a trade level of $320 billion by 2018, an eight-time increase over nine years. It is also recommended to set in place a Comprehensive Economic Cooperation Agreement covering both goods and services.”¶ The report emphasizes that Indo-US economic relations in the next years can attain the following dimensions:¶ • Strategic shift from high-technology trade to frontier technology India and USA can be close partners in expanding knowledge frontiers in science and technology, including space, robotics, nuclear energy, defense, etc. and their business applications. India can play a key role in signature multi-country projects in space, oceanography, polar exploration, etc.¶ • Robust trade in mass-market and niche products Comprehensive Economic Cooperation Agreement, including goods, to be set in place to take advantage of complementary competitiveness. Set a target of $320 billion in ten years, with robust bilateral investments leading the way for high volume turnover. Quality and safety would be the basis for exchange.¶ • High interface in services trade Strong bilateral engagement across diverse services sectors. This would involve significant liberalization of the Indian services economy on the one hand, and easy movement of personnel across borders on the other.¶ • Preferred investment destinations Scale up mutual investments massively. An investment treaty should be rapidly negotiated. US investors should have a leading role in the economic transformation of India. US companies can emerge as key partners for Indian business.¶ • Building infrastructure in India India needs over $475 billion in investments over the next five years to sustain a high growth rate of 8-9 percent. The US private sector can find a big opportunity in the next decade in India's need for capacity building in infrastructure. Collaboration in this regard would prove to be a mutually beneficial partnership.¶ • Collaboration on clean energy and climate change India's rapid development makes it one of the fastest-growing energy users and carbon emitters. US is the largest energy user and highest carbon emitter after China. Both countries can collaborate closely on energy security, emissions, efficiency, and renewable energy as well as on global discussions on mitigating climate change.¶ • Collaboration in healthcare: US and India to collaborate in making healthcare more affordable and accessible worldwide. Healthcare market in India was nearly at $ 38 billion in 2007, expected to grow at 15 percent per annum to reach $ 79 billion by 2012. Tremendous opportunities can be found in providing healthcare services, building healthcare infrastructure and developing related technologies.¶ • Seamless cross-continental cooperation in knowledge economy sectors India and the US to be anchors for global interaction in sectors such as biotechnology, nanotechnology, drug development, renewable energy, green products, etc. RandD, innovation, and academic collaborations to be close and continuous, rooted in strong IP protection.¶ • Strong cooperation in education and academia Participation in each other's higher education and research sectors. Centers of educational excellence should open campuses in the other country to offer students the best of education in their place of residence. This would also enable high-level continuous exchange of professors, researchers and academics, and cross-cultural educational interchange.¶ • It is crucial to engage the private sectors of both countries in a strong partnership at all enterprise and sector levels. Governments can guide and aid private sector partnerships.¶ Though India-US economic relations have moved into a new phase of intensive interaction since 2000, the recent Indo-US nuclear agreement can act as a springboard for a new trajectory of bilateral economic engagement.¶ Global Economic Crisis and Opportunities¶ The global economic crisis, which has hit the US hard, creates a new opportunity for both sides to not only leverage each other's advantages, but also provide mutually support. While the US seeks markets for its industry products, India needs technology and expertise for faster development and global integration. In the medium term, protectionist measures must be avoided. Over the longer term of 10 years, India and the US can become much more significant economic partners.¶ To ensure that the synergies of both countries complement each other, the governments need to address internal barriers to trade and investment. India needs to undertake pending reforms to open up sectors of interest to US businesses and improve the investment climate. Similarly, the US must work towards reducing barriers for trade and investments from India and facilitate freer movement of professionals between the countries. The US must view India as a strategic partner and rank it high in its economic priorities.¶ Following Measures Are Needed:¶ • A Comprehensive Economic Cooperation Agreement to cover goods and services¶ • A Bilateral Investment Treaty¶ • Opening up of key sectors such as retail and higher education in India to FDI¶ • Freer movement of people under H1-B visa scheme¶ • The private sectors of both sides must be an integral part of the new engagement. Industry associations on both sides must take the lead in overcoming the information barrier, building brand relevance, and forging new business ventures.¶ • Cooperation must shift to interaction between regions, industry sectors, and enterprises of all sizes.¶ Though India has felt the impact of the global meltdown in terms of falling production and exports, the situation is not alarmingly dire so far due to high savings and investment rates, consistent internal demand, low exports in relation to GDP, and strong measures to counteract the crisis. Recovery in India is expected to be faster and steeper than the global norm.¶ In the US, mitigation and containment is the immediate urgency. Indicators are expected to show positive signs from the third quarter of 2009. A crisis of demand, following on the heels of financial and confidence seizure, will be the key factor to be resolved, going forward. Within this scenario, US companies may consider it profitable to examine opportunities in India's infrastructure and consumer durables sectors.¶ It is important that the US and India do not indulge in protectionist measures and lower each other's market access. Proposals that limit H1-B visas, create non-tariff barriers to trade, mandate use of local products, etc should not dominate for a protracted period. Business should be left unfettered to re-energize respective economies.¶ It may be reiterated that substantial increase in economic engagement would require intensive policy measures on both sides. More particularly, India would need to progress much faster on overall trade and economic liberalization and reforms to facilitate greater participation of overseas businesses in its economy. Areas that need to be addressed include agriculture, infrastructure, direct and indirect taxes, investment facilitation, administrative procedures, financial sector, services including retail trade, mining, etc

It’s the aff’s burden to provide evidence to prove they are topical – The alternative would be judge intervention
Johnson 2, J.D. Baylor, 2 (David, Associate at Winstead Sechrest and Minick, J.D. from Baylor University – Magna Cum Laude, “Exploring the Expert Report of 4590i,” Baylor Law Review, Spring, 54 Baylor L. Rev. 359)
The motion for grace period fairly equates to an affirmative defense. Therefore, the burden of proof (i.e., burden of production and persuasion) initially rests with the plaintiff who invokes it. n197 Only after the plaintiff provides some evidence of accident or mistake does the burden of production shift to the defendant to present contradictory evidence. Further, a conclusory statement such as "the failure to file was an accident or mistake and due to conscious indifference," does not suffice without an explanation. The court will not consider an attorney's unsworn factual statements as evidence. n198 If the plaintiff fails to produce some evidence of accident or mistake, then the burden never shifts to the defendant. Thus, the trial court should deny the plaintiff's motion for a grace period and grant the defendant's motion to dismiss. n199 Further, a plaintiff must present evidence of an accident or mistake as to each defendant unless it is the same for all. n200 If the plaintiff produces some evidence of accident or mistake, then the burden shifts to the defendant to produce some evidence of conscious indifference. n201 Unless the defendant specifically controverts the plaintiff's evidence of accident or mistake, the plaintiff should prevail  *394  on his motion for a grace period. n202 A fact issue arises when the defendant files some controverting evidence and the trial court then sits as a fact finder in determining whether the evidence preponderates in favor of accident and mistake or in favor of conscious indifference. n203 In making this determination, the burden of persuasion remains on the plaintiff at all times as he has the ultimate burden of proof on the "affirmative defense" of accident or mistake. n204

Default to competing interpretations—objective and limiting—enforceable brightline key—no new 1ar answers to a card
Resnick 1 – Dr. Evan Resnick, Ph.D. in Political Science from Columbia University, Assistant Professor of Political Science at Yeshiva University, “Defining Engagement”, Journal of International Affairs, Spring, 54(2), Ebsco

CONCLUSION
In matters of national security, establishing a clear definition of terms is a precondition for effective policymaking. Decisionmakers who invoke critical terms in an erratic, ad hoc fashion risk alienating their constituencies. They also risk exacerbating misperceptions and hostility among those the policies target. Scholars who commit the same error undercut their ability to conduct valuable empirical research. Hence, if scholars and policymakers fail rigorously to define "engagement," they undermine the ability to build an effective foreign policy.

Tournament: Greenhill Round Robin | Round: 5 | Opponent: Lexington KF | Judge: Toby Wisenhunt, Christina Tallungan
the embargo undermines the war on terror
Dickerson 10 – Lieutenant Colonel, US Army, paper submitted in fulfillment of a Master of Strategic Studies Degree at the US Army War College (Sergio M, “UNITED STATES SECURITY STRATEGY TOWARDS CUBA,” 1/14/10, http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a518053.pdf)//SJF

Several embargo refinements over the years like the Libertad Act have further tightened restrictions on
AND
, our efforts to impose embargo restrictions are unacceptable tradeoffs for homeland security.

Extinction
Wright 7 – New America Foundation senior fellow (Robert, 4/28, Planet Of The Apes, http://select.nytimes.com/2007/04/28/opinion/28wright.html, AG)

(3) Terrorism. Alas, the negative-feedback loop -- bad outcomes
AND
And the catalyst would be terrorism, along with our mishandling of it.

Tournament: Greenhill | Round: Octas | Opponent: CPS FP | Judge: Collin Quinn, Stephen Pipkin, Misael Gonzalez
plan stops a trade war
Morley and McGillion 05 associate professor of politics and international relations at Macquarie University, Sydney, Australia and senior lecturer in journalism, Charles Sturt University, Bathurst, Australia. Morris Morley and Chris McGillion, Cuba, the United States, and the Post-Cold War World: The International Dimensions of the Washington-Havana Relationship, pg 9
Second is the contradiction between Americaand#39;s professed commitment to free trade and its Cuba policy
AND
the WTO and raising the possibility of a cross-Atlantic trade war.

Trade wars go nuclear
Miller and Elwood, 98 (Vincent and James, Founder and Vice-President of the International Society for Individual Liberty, “Free Trade or Proectionism? The Case Against Trade Restrictions,” www.isil.org/resources/lit/free-trade-protectionism.html)

WHEN GOODS DONand#39;T CROSS BORDERS, ARMIES OFTEN DO History is not lacking in examples
AND
devaluation, etc. The philosophy of protectionism is a philosophy of war.and#34;