WFI 13
Pre Camp
1
Cuba Neg
Cuba Neg
Cuba Neg ......................................................................................................................................... 1
AT: Economy Advantage.............................................................................................................. 2
1NC – AT: Economy Advantage ............................................................................................... 3
2NC – Economy – U.S. Economy Strong Now.......................................................................... 6
2NC – Economy – Economic Decline Doesn’t Cause War ....................................................... 8
2NC – Economy – Trade Sustains Regime ............................................................................... 9
AT: Oil Spills Advantage ............................................................................................................. 10
1NC – AT: Oil Spills Advantage .............................................................................................. 11
2NC – Oil Spills – No Biodiversity Impact .............................................................................. 16
2NC – Oil Spills – Impact Inevitable ....................................................................................... 17
2NC – Oil Spills – No New Drilling .......................................................................................... 19
2NC – Oil Spills – No Risk of Spills .......................................................................................... 20
AT: Democracy Promotion Advantage ...................................................................................... 21
1NC – AT: Democracy Promotion Advantage ........................................................................ 22
2NC – Democracy Promotion – No Terror Impact ................................................................ 25
2NC – Democracy Promotion – No Nuke Terrorism ............................................................. 26
2NC – Democracy Promotion – Democracy Inevitable ......................................................... 28
2NC – Democracy Promotion – Lifting Embargo Hurts Demoracy ........................................ 30
AT: Hemispheric Relations Advantage ...................................................................................... 32
1NC – AT: Hemispheric Relations Advantage ........................................................................ 33
2NC – Hemispheric Relations – Organized Crime Inevitable................................................. 36
2NC – Hemispheric Relations – Lifting Embargo Doesn’t solve Relations............................. 37
AT: Solvency .............................................................................................................................. 39
1NC – Solvency ...................................................................................................................... 40
2NC – Solvency – Don’t Lift the Embargo .............................................................................. 42
Health Care Turn ....................................................................................................................... 44
1NC – Health Care Turn ......................................................................................................... 45
2NC – Health Care Turn – Uniqueness – Strong Now ........................................................... 47
2NC – Health Care Turn – Lifting Embargo = Brain Drain ...................................................... 49
2NC – Health Care Turn – Doctors K2 Cuban Economy......................................................... 51
2NC – Health Care Turn – Solves Disease .............................................................................. 52
WFI 13
Pre Camp
2
Cuba Neg
AT: Economy Advantage
WFI 13
Pre Camp
3
Cuba Neg
1NC – AT: Economy Advantage
U.S. economy strong—economists predicting healthy growth now
Schwartz, 6-15-13
[Nelson, has covered the economy and economics for the business section of The New York
Times since August 2012, Even Pessimists Feel Optimistic About the American Economy,
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/16/business/economy/even-pessimists-feel-optimistic-overeconomy.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0] /Wyo-MB
But could the New Normal, as this long economic slog has been called, be growing old?¶ That is
the surprising new view of a number of economists in academia and on Wall Street, who are
now predicting something the United States has not experienced in years: healthier, more
lasting growth.¶ The improving outlook is one reason the stock market has risen so sharply this
year, even if street-level evidence for a turnaround, like strong job growth and income gains, has
been scant so far.
Economy is resilient and decline doesn’t cause war
Zakaria 9
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, December 12,
2009, “The Secrets of Stability: Why terrorism and economic turmoil won't keep the world down for
long” Newsweek, http://www.newsweek.com/2009/12/11/the-secrets-of-stability.print.html)
One year ago, the world seemed as if it might be coming apart. The global financial system ,
which had fueled a great expansion of capitalism and trade across the world, was crumbling. All the certainties
of the age of globalization—about the virtues of free markets, trade, and technology—were being called
into question. Faith in the American model had collapsed. The financial industry had
crumbled. Once-roaring emerging markets like China, India, and Brazil were sinking. Worldwide trade was shrinking
to a degree not seen since the 1930s. Pundits whose bearishness had been vindicated predicted we were doomed to a
long, painful bust, with cascading failures in sector after sector, country after country. In a widely cited essay that
appeared in The Atlantic this May, Simon Johnson, former chief economist of the International Monetary Fund, wrote:
"The conventional wisdom among the elite is still that the current slump 'cannot be as bad as the Great Depression.' This
view is wrong. What we face now could, in fact, be worse than the Great Depression." Others predicted that these
economic shocks would lead to political instability and violence in the worst-hit countries.
At his confirmation hearing in February, the new U.S. director of national intelligence, Adm. Dennis Blair, cautioned the
Senate that "the financial crisis and global recession are likely to produce a wave of economic crises in emerging-market
nations over the next year." Hillary Clinton endorsed this grim view. And she was hardly alone. Foreign Policy ran a cover
story predicting serious unrest in several emerging markets. Of one thing everyone was sure: nothing would ever be the
same again. Not the financial industry, not capitalism, not globalization. One year later, how much has the world
really changed? Well, Wall Street is home to two fewer investment banks (three, if you count Merrill Lynch). Some
regional banks have gone bust. There was some turmoil in Moldova and (entirely unrelated to the financial crisis) in Iran.
Severe problems remain, like high unemployment in the West, and we face new problems
caused by responses to the crisis—soaring debt and fears of inflation. But overall, things
look nothing like they did in the 1930s. The predictions of economic and political collapse
have not materialized at all. A key measure of fear and fragility is the ability of poor and unstable countries to
borrow money on the debt markets. So consider this: the sovereign bonds of tottering Pakistan have returned 168 percent
so far this year. All this doesn't add up to a recovery yet, but it does reflect a return to some level of normalcy. And that
rebound has been so rapid that even the shrewdest observers remain puzzled. "The question I have at the back of my head
is 'Is that it?' “says Charles Kaye, the co-head of Warburg Pincus. "We had this huge crisis, and now we're back to business
as usual?" This revival did not happen because markets managed to stabilize themselves on
their own. Rather, governments, having learned the lessons of the Great Depression, were
determined not to repeat the same mistakes once this crisis hit. By massively expanding
state support for the economy—through central banks and national treasuries—they
buffered the worst of the damage. (Whether they made new mistakes in the process remains to be seen.) The
WFI 13
Pre Camp
4
Cuba Neg
extensive social safety nets that have been established across the industrialized world also
cushioned the pain felt by many. Times are still tough, but things are nowhere near as bad as in the 1930s,
when governments played a tiny role in national economies. It's true that the massive state interventions of the past year
may be fueling some new bubbles: the cheap cash and government guarantees provided to banks, companies, and
consumers have fueled some irrational exuberance in stock and bond markets. Yet these rallies also demonstrate the
return of confidence, and confidence is a very powerful economic force. When John Maynard Keynes described his own
prescriptions for economic growth, he believed government action could provide only a temporary fix until the real motor
of the economy started cranking again—the animal spirits of investors, consumers, and companies seeking risk and profit.
Beyond all this, though, I believe there's a fundamental reason why we have not faced global
collapse in the last year. It is the same reason that we weathered the stock-market crash of
1987, the recession of 1992, the Asian crisis of 1997, the Russian default of 1998, and the
tech-bubble collapse of 2000. The current global economic system is inherently more
resilient than we think. The world today is characterized by three major forces for stability, each reinforcing the
other and each historical in nature.
Economic Decline doesn’t cause war
Barnett 9 (Thomas, senior managing director of Enterra Solutions LLC, contributing editor/online columnist for
Esquire, “The New Rules: Security Remains Stable Amid Financial Crisis,” Aprodex, Asset Protection Index, August 25,
http://www.aprodex.com/the-new-rules--security-remains-stable-amid-financial-crisis-398-bl.aspx)
When the global financial crisis struck roughly a year ago, the blogosphere was ablaze with all sorts of scary predictions of,
and commentary regarding, ensuing conflict and wars -- a rerun of the Great Depression leading to world war, as it were. Now,
as global economic news brightens and recovery -- surprisingly led by China and emerging markets -- is the
talk of the day, it's interesting to look back over the past year and realize how globalization's first truly
worldwide recession has had virtually no impact whatsoever on the international
security landscape. None of the more than three-dozen ongoing conflicts listed by
GlobalSecurity.org can be clearly attributed to the global recession. Indeed, the last new entry
(civil conflict between Hamas and Fatah in the Palestine) predates the economic crisis by a year, and
three quarters of the chronic struggles began in the last century. Ditto for the 15 low-intensity
conflicts listed by Wikipedia (where the latest entry is the Mexican "drug war" begun in 2006). Certainly, the Russia-Georgia
conflict last August was specifically timed, but by most accounts the opening ceremony of the Beijing Olympics was the most
important external trigger (followed by the U.S. presidential campaign) for that sudden spike in an almost two-decade long
struggle between Georgia and its two breakaway regions. Looking over the various databases, then, we see a most familiar
picture: the usual mix of civil conflicts, insurgencies, and liberation-themed terrorist movements. Besides the recent RussiaGeorgia dust-up, the
only two potential state-on-state wars (North v. South Korea, Israel v. Iran) are
both tied to one side acquiring a nuclear weapon capacity -- a process wholly
unrelated to global economic trends. And with the United States effectively tied down
by its two ongoing major interventions (Iraq and Afghanistan-bleeding-into-Pakistan), our
involvement elsewhere around the planet has been quite modest, both leading up to
and following the onset of the economic crisis: e.g., the usual counter-drug efforts in Latin America, the
usual military exercises with allies across Asia, mixing it up with pirates off Somalia's coast). Everywhere else we
find serious instability we pretty much let it burn, occasionally pressing the Chinese -- unsuccessfully -to do something. Our new Africa Command, for example, hasn't led us to anything beyond advising and training local forces.
Even if the embargo gives business opportunities—it would only marginally
boost the economy
McElvaine, 2011
[Robert, 9-8-11, Los Angeles Times, Lift the U.S. trade embargo on Cuba,
http://articles.latimes.com/2011/sep/08/opinion/la-oe-mcelvaine-cuba-20110908] /Wyo-MB
Lifting the embargo would not turn the U.S. economy around. But it would be of marginal
assistance to the overall economy and could be of substantial help to businesses and
employment in industries that would have significant exports to the island.¶ Cuba is, of course,
well known as a living museum of the golden age of the Detroit automotive industry. There is a
vast fleet of U.S.-made automobiles on the road here, but none more recent than 1959. In
addition to the common Russian-built Ladas, the newer models include Mercedes, BMWs,
WFI 13
Pre Camp
5
Cuba Neg
Nissans, Hyundais — just about every car make except those made in the U.S. And even the old
American cars here often have new Japanese-made engines in them. An end to the embargo
would give U.S. manufacturers an opportunity to compete for business in Cuba.¶
Other countries trade for goods cheaper than the US and will crowd out
economic gains
AP, 11-10-12
[Associate press, Floundering US Exports to Cuba Buck Optimism,
http://latino.foxnews.com/latino/news/2012/11/10/floundering-us-exports-to-cuba-buckoptimism/] /Wyo-MB
But cold numbers belie the enthusiasm on the convention center floor. Cuban purchases of U.S.
goods have plunged as the island increasingly turns to countries like China, Brazil, Vietnam
and Venezuela, which offer cheaper deals, long-term credits and less hassle over payment and
shipping.¶ "The pattern that we see is it's just continuing to either be lower each year, or if it
does increase, it's just not a lot at all," said John Kavulich, senior policy adviser to the New Yorkbased U.S.-Cuba Trade and Economic Council. "No executives should be going to a travel agent
and buying a ticket to go down to Havana thinking that there's going to be a change."
Financing from tourism and lifting embargo just sustains the regime in Cuba
Bustillo, 2013
[Mitchell, International Policy Digest, Time to Strengthen the Cuban Embargo, 5-9-13,
http://www.internationalpolicydigest.org/2013/05/09/time-to-strengthen-the-cubanembargo/] /Wyo-MB
Still there is the idea that further increasing American tourism to this nearby Caribbean island
will at least aid their impoverished citizens in some manner, but this is neither a straightforward nor easy solution. From the annual throng of American visitors, U.S. Senator Marco
Rubio declared at a 2011 Western Hemisphere Subcommittee Hearing that an estimated, “$4
billion a year flow directly to the Cuban government from remittances and travel by Cuban
Americans, which is perhaps the single largest source of revenue to the most repressive
government in the region.” These remittances are sent by Americans to help their Cuban
families, not support the Cuban government. It is also a common belief that the Cuban
embargo is a leading cause of poverty among the Cuban citizens and that lifting the embargo
would go a long way toward improving the Cuban standard of living. However, no amount of
money can increase the living standards there as long as their current regime stands. “After all,
the authorities were already skimming 20 percent of the remittances from Cuban-Americans
and 90 percent of the salary paid to Cubans by non-American foreign investors,” states Alvaro
Vargas Llosa, Senior Fellow of The Center on Global Prosperity at The Independent Institute.
However unfortunate it may be, Cuba, in its current state, is a nation consisting only of a
wealthy and powerful few and an impoverished and oppressed proletariat, who possess little to
no means to escape or even improve their fate. Lifting the trade embargo will not increase the
general prosperity of the Cuban people, but it will increase the prosperity of the government.
Ergo, the poverty and dire situation of the Cuban people cannot be blamed on the United
States or the embargo.
WFI 13
Pre Camp
6
Cuba Neg
2NC – Economy – U.S. Economy Strong Now
Technological growth and cheaper services signal economic growth in the U.S.
Schwartz, 6-15-13
[Nelson, has covered the economy and economics for the business section of The New York
Times since August 2012, Even Pessimists Feel Optimistic About the American Economy,
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/16/business/economy/even-pessimists-feel-optimistic-overeconomy.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0] /Wyo-MB
A prominent convert to this emerging belief is Tyler Cowen, an economics professor at George
Mason University near Washington and author of “The Great Stagnation,” a 2011 best seller,
who has gone from doomsayer to a decidedly more optimistic perspective.¶ He is not
predicting an imminent resurgence. Like most academic economists, Mr. Cowen focuses on the
next quarter-century rather than the next quarter. But new technologies like artificial
intelligence and online education, increased domestic energy production and slowing growth
in the cost of health care have prompted Mr. Cowen to reappraise the country’s prospects.¶
“It’s better than it looked,” Mr. Cowen said. “Technological progress comes in batches and it’s
just a little more rapid than it looked two years ago.” His next book, “Average Is Over:
Powering America Beyond the Age of the Great Stagnation,” is due out in September.
Multiple experts predict largest economic growth in years
Schwartz, 6-15-13
[Nelson, has covered the economy and economics for the business section of The New York
Times since August 2012, Even Pessimists Feel Optimistic About the American Economy,
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/16/business/economy/even-pessimists-feel-optimistic-overeconomy.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0] /Wyo-MB
Whatever the Fed’s conclusion, many analysts insist the more upbeat view is justified this
time.¶ In particular, Mr. Behravesh and other economists said, the economy has shown greater
resilience than expected in the face of tax increases and spending cuts in Washington. As the
impact from this fiscal tightening eases, the overall growth rate should pick up.¶ Mr. Behravesh
now expects the annual growth rate to rise to 2.9 percent in 2014 and 3.5 percent in 2015. If
he’s right, it would mark the fastest annual growth since 2005, when the economy expanded
by 3.1 percent. It is also well above the 2 percent rise in output the economy has averaged
over the last three years.¶ The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office also sees relatively
fast growth of 3.4 percent next year, and 3.6 percent between 2015 and 2018.¶ A few other
private economists are even more bullish. Jim Glassman, senior economist at JP Morgan
Chase’s commercial bank, estimates the economy could expand by 4 percent in both 2014 and
2015. If that were to come to pass, it would be the strongest back-to-back annual growth since
the late 1990s.¶ “I think 2014 will be the real deal,” Mr. Glassman said. “If we get to that level,
which I feel pretty confident about, economists will say it’s about time.”
Multiple signals for short and long term economic growth in the U.S.
Schwartz, 6-15-13
[Nelson, has covered the economy and economics for the business section of The New York
Times since August 2012, Even Pessimists Feel Optimistic About the American Economy,
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/16/business/economy/even-pessimists-feel-optimistic-overeconomy.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0] /Wyo-MB
WFI 13
Pre Camp
7
Cuba Neg
Mr. Cowen, who is also an occasional contributor to the Sunday Business section of The New
York Times, is more skeptical about a short-term takeoff, focusing instead on what he sees as a
brightening, longer-term picture of the United States economy.¶ The recent surge in domestic
oil and gas production signals “the start of a new era of cheap energy,” he said, while less
expensive online education programs could open the door to millions of people who have
been priced out of more traditional academics.¶ At the same time, Mr. Cowen said, he now
expects subtler improvements in the country’s economic well-being that will not necessarily be
reflected in statistics like gross domestic product, but will be significant nonetheless.¶ For
example, slower growth in the cost of health care will be a boon for the government and
businesses, but will actually subtract from reported economic activity. “It’s like the music
industry,” he said. “Revenues are lower at record companies but the experience for listeners is
better.Ӧ Martin Neil Baily, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution and a former chairman
of the Council of Economic Advisers under President Clinton, said he has always been skeptical
of Professor Gordon’s long-term view but has recently become more hopeful about the shortterm as well.
WFI 13
Pre Camp
8
Cuba Neg
2NC – Economy – Economic Decline Doesn’t Cause War
History proves economic decline doesn’t cause war
Ferguson 6
(Niall, MA, D.Phil., is the Laurence A. Tisch Professor of History at Harvard University. He is a resident
faculty member of the Minda de Gunzburg Center for European Studies. He is also a Senior Reseach
Fellow of Jesus College, Oxford University, and a Senior Fellow of the Hoover Institution, Stanford
University, Foreign Affairs, Sept/Oct)
Nor can economic crises explain the bloodshed. What may be the most familiar causal chain in
modern historiography links the Great Depression to the rise of fascism and the outbreak of World
War II. But that simple story leaves too much out. Nazi Germany started the war in Europe only after its
economy had recovered. Not all the countries affected by the Great Depression were taken over by
fascist regimes, nor did all such regimes start wars of aggression. In fact, no general relationship
between economics and conflict is discernible for the century as a whole. Some wars came after
periods of growth, others were the causes rather than the consequences of economic
catastrophe, and some severe economic crises were not followed by wars.
Decline doesn’t cause war
Miller 00 (Morris, Professor of Administration @ the University of Ottawa, ‘2K (Interdisciplinary Science Review, v 25
n4 2000 p ingenta connect)
The question may be reformulated. Do wars spring
from a popular reaction to a sudden
economic crisis that exacerbates poverty and growing disparities in wealth and incomes? Perhaps one could argue, as
some scholars do, that it is some dramatic event or sequence of such events leading to the exacerbation of poverty that, in turn,
leads to this deplorable denouement. This exogenous factor might act as a catalyst for a violent reaction on the part of the
people or on the part of the political leadership who would then possibly be tempted to seek a diversion by finding or, if need
be, fabricating an enemy and setting in train the process leading to war. According
to a study under- taken by
Minxin Pei and Ariel Adesnik of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace,
there would not appear to be any merit in this hypothesis. After studying ninetythree episodes of economic crisis in twenty-two countries in Latin America and Asia in the years
since the Second World War they concluded that:19 Much of the conventional wisdom about
the political impact of economic crises may be wrong ... The severity of economic
crisis – as measured in terms of inflation and negative growth – bore no relationship to the collapse of
regimes ... (or, in democratic states, rarely) to an outbreak of violence ... In the cases of dictatorships and
semi-democracies, the ruling elites responded to crises by increasing repression (thereby using one form of violence to abort
another).
WFI 13
Pre Camp
9
Cuba Neg
2NC – Economy – Trade Sustains Regime
Lifting the embargo provides resources to Cuba to sustain the regime
Bustillo, 2013
[Mitchell, International Policy Digest, Time to Strengthen the Cuban Embargo, 5-9-13,
http://www.internationalpolicydigest.org/2013/05/09/time-to-strengthen-the-cubanembargo/] /Wyo-MB
According to U.S. Senator Robert Menendez, “Tourism to Cuba is a natural resource, akin to
providing refined petroleum products to Iran. It’s reported that 2.5 million tourists visit Cuba –
1.5 million from North America…1 million Canadians…More than 170,000 from England…More
than 400,000 from Spain, Italy, Germany, and France combined – All bringing in $1.9 billion in
revenue to the Castro regime.” This behavior undermines the embargo, which is why the U.S.
should urge other nations to adopt similar policies toward Cuba. A strong and unyielding
embargo, supported by the U.S. and its allies, is necessary to incite political change.
Furthermore, Sen. Menendez argues, “Those who lament our dependence on foreign oil
because it enriches regimes in terrorist states like Iran, should not have a double standard
when it comes to enriching a brutal dictatorship like Cuba right here in our own backyard.” If
the policy of the U.S. is to challenge these behaviors, then it must also stand up to Cuba. It
would be a disservice to squander the progress of the past 50 years when opportunity is
looming.
WFI 13
Pre Camp
10
Cuba Neg
AT: Oil Spills Advantage
WFI 13
Pre Camp
11
Cuba Neg
1NC – AT: Oil Spills Advantage
No risk of oil spills—no drilling in Cuba
Gibson, 4-14-13
[William, Washington Bureau Sun Sentinel, Companies abandon search for oil in Cuba's deep
waters, http://articles.sun-sentinel.com/2013-04-14/news/fl-cuban-oil-drilling-retreat20130414_1_jorge-pi-north-coast-cuban-officials] /Wyo-MB
WASHINGTON — After spending nearly $700 million during a decade, energy companies from
around the world have all but abandoned their search for oil in deep waters off the north
coast of Cuba near Florida, a blow to the Castro regime but a relief to environmentalists
worried about a major oil spill.¶ Decisions by Spain-based Repsol and other companies to drill
elsewhere greatly reduce the chances that a giant slick along the Cuban coast would ride
ocean currents to South Florida, threatening its beaches, inlets, mangroves, reefs and
multibillion-dollar tourism industry.
Cuba won’t spill---they’ll be safe and U.S. involvement isn’t key
Richard Sadowski 11, J.D., Hofstra University School of Law, Fall 2011, “IN THIS ISSUE:
NATURAL RESOURCE CONFLICT: CUBAN OFFSHORE DRILLING: PREPARATION AND PREVENTION
WITHIN THE FRAMEWORK OF THE UNITED STATES' EMBARGO,” Sustainable Development Law &
Policy, 12 Sustainable Dev. L. & Pol'y 37, p. lexis
Fears that Cuban offshore drilling poses serious environmental threats because of the
proximity to the United States and the prohibition on U.S. technology transfer are overblown.
Cuba has at least as much incentive to ensure safe-drilling practices as does the United States,
and reports indicate that Cuba is taking safety seriously. n64 Lee Hunt, President of the
Houston-based International Association of Drilling Contractors, said, "[t]he Cuban oil industry
has put a lot of research, study and thought into what will be required to safely drill," and that
"they are very knowledgeable of international industry practices and have incorporated many
of these principles into their safety and regulatory planning and requirements." n65 Thus,
while the economic embargo of Cuba restricts American technology from being utilized,
foreign sources have provided supplemental alternatives. n66
No impact to biodiversity
Sagoff et al 97 Mark, Senior Research Scholar – Institute for Philosophy and Public policy in School
of Public Affairs – U. Maryland, William and Mary Law Review, “INSTITUTE OF BILL OF RIGHTS LAW
SYMPOSIUM DEFINING TAKINGS: PRIVATE PROPERTY AND THE FUTURE OF GOVERNMENT
REGULATION: MUDDLE OR MUDDLE THROUGH? TAKINGS JURISPRUDENCE MEETS THE
ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT”, 38 Wm and Mary L. Rev. 825, March, L/N
Note – Colin Tudge - Research Fellow at the Centre for Philosophy at the London School of
Economics. Frmr Zoological Society of London: Scientific Fellow and tons of other positions. PhD.
Read zoology at Cambridge.
Simon Levin = Moffet Professor of Biology, Princeton. 2007 American Institute of Biological Sciences
Distinguished Scientist Award 2008 Istituto Veneto di Scienze Lettere ed Arti 2009 Honorary
Doctorate of Science, Michigan State University 2010 Eminent Ecologist Award, Ecological Society of
America 2010 Margalef Prize in Ecology, etc… PhD
Although one may agree with ecologists such as Ehrlich and Raven that the earth stands on the brink
of an episode of massive extinction, it may not follow from this grim fact that human beings will
suffer as a result. On the contrary, skeptics such as science writer Colin Tudge have challenged
biologists to explain why we need more than a tenth of the 10 to 100 million species that
WFI 13
Pre Camp
grace the earth. Noting that "cultivated systems often out-produce wild systems by
100-fold or more," Tudge declared that "the argument that humans need the
variety of other species is, when you think about it, a theological one." n343 Tudge observed
that "the elimination of all but a tiny minorityof our fellow creatures does not affect the
material well-being of humans one iota." n344 This skeptic challenged ecologists to list more than
10,000 species (other than unthreatened microbes) that are essential to ecosystem productivity or functioning.
n345 "The human species could survive just as well if 99.9% of our fellow creatures went
extinct, provided only that we retained the appropriate 0.1% that we
need." n346 [*906] The monumental Global Biodiversity Assessment ("the Assessment") identified two
positions with respect to redundancy of species. "At one extreme is the idea that each species is unique and
important, such that its removal or loss will have demonstrable consequences to the functioning of the
community or ecosystem." n347 The authors of the Assessment, a panel of eminent ecologists, endorsed this
position, saying it is "unlikely that there is much, if any, ecological redundancy in communities over time scales of
decades to centuries, the time period over which environmental policy should operate." n348 These eminent
ecologists rejected the opposing view, "the notion that species overlap in function to a sufficient degree that
removal or loss of a species will be compensated by others, with negligible overall consequences to the
community or ecosystem." n349 Other biologists
believe, however, that species are so fabulously
redundant in the ecological functions they perform that the life-support systems and processes
of the planet and ecological processesin general will function perfectly well with fewer of
them, certainly fewer than the millions and millions we can expect to remain even
ifevery threatened organism becomes extinct. n350 Even the kind of sparse and miserable world
depicted in the movie Blade Runner could provide a "sustainable" context for the human economy as long as
people forgot their aesthetic and moral commitment to the glory and beauty of the natural world. n351 The
Assessment makes this point. "Although any ecosystem contains hundreds to thousands of species interacting
among themselves and their physical environment, the emerging consensus is that the system is driven by a small
number of . . . biotic variables on whose interactions the balance of species are, in a sense, carried along."
n352 [*907] To make up your mind on the question of the functional redundancy of species, consider an
endangered species of bird, plant, or insect and ask how the ecosystem would fare in its absence. The fact that the
creature is endangered suggests an answer: it is already in limbo as far as ecosystem processes are
concerned. What
crucial ecological services does the black-capped vireo, for example,
serve? Are any of the species threatened with extinction necessary to the provision
of any ecosystem service on which humans depend? If so, which ones are
they? Ecosystems and the species that compose them have changed, dramatically, continually, and totally in
virtually every part of the United States. There is little ecological similarity, for example,
between New England today and the land where the Pilgrims died. n353 In view of
the constant reconfiguration of the biota, one may wonder why Americans have not
suffered more as a result of ecological catastrophes. The cast of species in nearly every environment
changes constantly-local extinction is commonplace in nature-but the crops still grow. Somehow, it seems,
property values keep going up on Martha's Vineyard in spite of the tragic disappearance of the heath hen. One
might argue thatthe sheer number
and variety of creatures available to any ecosystem
buffers that system against stress. Accordingly, we should be concerned if the "library" of creatures
ready, willing, and able to colonize ecosystems gets too small. (Advances in genetic engineering may well permit
us to write a large number of additions to that "library.") In the United States
as in many other
parts of the world, however, the number of species has been increasing dramatically , not
decreasing, as a result of human activity. This is because the hordes of exotic
species coming into ecosystems in the United States far exceed the number of
species that are becoming extinct. Indeed, introductions may outnumber extinctions by more than
ten to one, so that the United States is becoming more and more species-rich all the time largely as a result of
human action. n354 [*908] Peter Vitousek and colleagues estimate that over 1000 non-native plants grow in
California alone; in Hawaii there are 861; in Florida, 1210. n355 In Florida more than 1000 non-native insects, 23
species of mammals, and about 11 exotic birds have established themselves. n356 Anyone who waters a lawn or
hoes a garden knows how many weeds desire to grow there, how many birds and bugs visit the yard, and how
many fungi, creepy-crawlies, and other odd life forms show forth when it rains. All belong to nature, from
wherever they might hail, but not many homeowners would claim that there are too few of them. Now, not all
exotic species provide ecosystem services; indeed, some may be disruptive or have no instrumental value. n357
This also may be true, of course, of native species as well, especially because all exotics are native somewhere.
Certain exotic species, however, such as Kentucky blue grass, establish an area's sense of identity and place;
others, such as the green crabs showing up around Martha's Vineyard, are nuisances. n358 Consider an analogy
12
Cuba Neg
WFI 13
Pre Camp
13
Cuba Neg
[*909] with human migration. Everyone knows that after a generation or two, immigrants to this country are hard
to distinguish from everyone else. The vast majority of Americans did not evolve here, as it were, from hominids;
most of us "came over" at one time or another. This is true of many of our fellow species as well, and they may fit
in here just as well as we do. It is possible to distinguish exotic species from native ones for a period of time, just
as we can distinguish immigrants from native-born Americans, but as the centuries roll by, species, like people, fit
into the landscape or the society, changing and often enriching it. Shall we have a rule that a species had to come
over on the Mayflower, as so many did, to count as "truly" American? Plainly not. When, then, is the cutoff date?
Insofar as we are concerned with the absolute numbers of "rivets" holding ecosystems together, extinction seems
not to pose a general problem because a far greater number of kinds of mammals, insects, fish, plants, and other
creatures thrive on land and in water in America today than in prelapsarian times. n359 The
Ecological
Society of America has urged managers to maintain biological diversity as a critical
component in strengthening ecosystems against disturbance. n360 Yet as Simon Levin
observed, "much of the detail about species composition will be irrelevant in terms
of influences on ecosystem properties." n361 [*910] He added: "For net primary productivity, as is
likely to be the case for any system property, biodiversity matters only up to a point; above a
certain level, increasing biodiversity is likely to make little difference." n362 What
about the use of plants and animals in agriculture? There is no scarcity
foreseeable. "Of an estimated 80,000 types of plants [we] know to be edible," a U.S.
Department of the Interior document says, "only about 150 are extensively cultivated." n363
About twenty species, not one of which is endangered, provide ninety percent of the food the world takes from
plants. n364 Any new food has to take "shelf space" or "market share" from one that is now produced.
Corporations also find it difficult to create demand for a new product; for example, people are not inclined to eat
paw-paws, even though they are delicious. It is hard enough to get people to eat their broccoli and lima beans. It is
harder still to develop consumer demand for new foods. This may be the reason the Kraft Corporation does not
prospect in remote places for rare and unusual plants and animals to add to the world's diet. Of the roughly
235,000 flowering plants and 325,000 nonflowering plants (including mosses, lichens, and seaweeds) available,
farmers ignore virtually all of them in favor of a very few that are profitable. n365 To be sure, any of the more
than 600,000 species of plants could have an application in agriculture, but would they be preferable to the
species that are now dominant? Has
anyone found any consumer demand for any of these
half-million or more plants to replace rice or wheat in the human diet? There are
reasons that farmers cultivate rice, wheat, and corn rather than, say, Furbish's lousewort. There are many kinds of
louseworts, so named because these weeds were thought to cause lice in sheep. How many does agriculture really
require? [*911] The
species on which agriculture relies are domesticated, not naturally
occurring; they are developed by artificial not natural selection; they might not be
able to survive in the wild. n366 This argument is not intended to deny the religious, aesthetic, cultural,
and moral reasons that command us to respect and protect the natural world. These spiritual and ethical values
should evoke action, of course, but we should also recognize that they are spiritual and ethical values. We should
recognize that ecosystems and all that dwell therein compel our moral respect, our aesthetic appreciation, and
our spiritual veneration; we should clearly seek to achieve the goals of the ESA. There is no reason to assume,
however, that these goals have anything to do with human well-being or welfare as economists understand that
term. These are ethical goals, in other words, not economic ones. Protecting the marsh may be the right thing to
do for moral, cultural, and spiritual reasons. We should do it-but someone will have to pay the costs. In the
narrow sense of promoting human welfare, protecting nature often represents
a net "cost," not
a net "benefit." It is largely for moral, not economic, reasons-ethical, not
prudential, reasons- that we care about all our fellow creatures. They are valuable as
objects of love not as objects of use. What is good for [*912] the marsh may be good in itself even if it is not, in
the economic sense, good for mankind. The most valuable things are quite useless .
Species adapt and migrate
Ian Thompson et al., Canadian Forest Service, Brendan Mackey, The Australian National
University, The Fenner School of Environment and Society, College of Medicine, Biology and
Environment, Steven McNulty, USDA Forest Service, Alex Mosseler, Canadian Forest Service, 20 09,
Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity “Forest Resilience, Biodiversity, and Climate
Change” Convention on Biological Diversity
While resilience can be attributed to many levels of organization of biodiversity, the genetic composition of
species is the most fundamental. Molecular genetic diversity within a species, species diversity
within a forested community, and community or ecosystem diversity across a landscape
WFI 13
Pre Camp
14
Cuba Neg
and bioregion represent expressions of biological diversity at different scales. The basis of all
expressions of biological diversity is the genotypic variation found in populations. The individuals that comprise
populations at each level of ecological organization are subject to natural se- lection and contribute to the
adaptive capacityor re- silienceof tree species and forest ecosystems (Mull- er-Starck et al. 2005). Diversity at
each of these levels has fostered natural (and artificial) regeneration of forest ecosystems and facilitated
their adaptation to dramatic climate changes that occurred during the quaternary period (review by: DeHayes et al. 2000); this
diversity must be maintained in the face of antici- pated changes from anthropogenic climate warming. Genetic
diversity
is important because it is the basis for the natural
selection of genotypes within popu- lations and species as they respond or adapt to en- vironmental
changes (Fisher 1930, Pitelka 1988, Pease et al. 1989, Burger and Lynch 1995, Burdon and Thrall, 2001, Etterson 2004,
Reusch et al. 2005, Schaberg et al. 2008). The potential for evolutionary change has been demonstrated in
numerous long- term programmes based on artificial selection (Fal- coner 1989),and genetic strategies
for reforestation in the presence of rapid climate change must focus on maintaining species diversity and
genetic diversi- ty within species (Ledig and Kitzmiller 1992). In the face of rapid environmental change, it is
important to understand that the genetic diversity and adap- tive capacity of forested
ecosystems depends largely on in situ genetic variation within each population of a species (Bradshaw
(e.g., additive genetic variance) within a species
1991). Populations exposed to a rate of environmental change exceeding the rate at which populations can adapt, or disperse,
may be doomed to extinction (Lynch and Lande 1993, Burger and Lynch 1995). Genetic diversity deter- mines the range of
fundamental eco-physiological tolerances of a species. It governs inter-specific competitive interactions, which, together with
dispersal mechanisms, constitute the fundamental de- terminants of potential species responses to change (Pease et al. 1989,
Halpin 1997). In the past, plants have
responded to dramatic changes in climate both through
adaptation and migration (Davis and Shaw 2001). The capacity for long-distance migration of plants by seed
dispersal is particularly important in the event of rapid environmental change. Most, and probably all, species are
capable of long-distance seed disper- sal, despite morphological dispersal syndromes that would indicate
morphological adaptations primarily for short-distance dispersal (Cwyner and MacDon- ald 1986, Higgins et al. 2003).
Assessments of mean migration rates found no significant differences be- tween wind and animal dispersed plants (Wilkinson
1997, Higgins et al. 2003). Long-distance migration can also be strongly influenced by habitat suitabil- ity (Higgins and
Richardson 1999) suggesting that rapid migration may become more frequent and vis- ible with rapid changes in habitat
suitability under scenarios of rapid climate change. The discrepancy between estimated and observed migration rates during
re-colonization of northern temperate forests following the retreat of glaciers can be accounted for by the underestimation of
long-distance disper- sal rates and events (Brunet and von Oheimb 1998, Clark 1998, Cain et al. 1998, 2000). Nevertheless,
concerns persist that potential migration and ad- aptation rates of many tree species may not be able to keep pace with
projected global warming (Davis 1989, Huntley 1991, Dyer 1995, Collingham et al. 1996, Malcolm et al. 2002). However, these
models refer to fundamental niches and generally ignore the ecological interactions that also govern species dis- tributions.
Overfishing makes marine biodiversity and ecosystem destruction inevitable
Nuttall, 2004
[Nick, Head of Media Services, United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), Nairobi, Kenya,
Overfishing: a threat to marine biodiversity,
http://www.un.org/events/tenstories/06/story.asp?storyID=800] /Wyo-MB
Despite its crucial importance for the survival of humanity, marine biodiversity is in evergreater danger, with the depletion of fisheries among biggest concerns. Fishing is central to the
livelihood and food security of 200 million people, especially in the developing world, while one
of five people on this planet depends on fish as the primary source of protein. According to UN
agencies, aquaculture - the farming and stocking of aquatic organisms including fish, molluscs,
crustaceans and aquatic plants - is growing more rapidly than all other animal food producing
sectors. But amid facts and figures about aquaculture's soaring worldwide production rates,
other, more sobering, statistics reveal that global main marine fish stocks are in jeopardy,
increasingly pressured by overfishing and environmental degradation.¶ “Overfishing cannot
continue,” warned Nitin Desai, Secretary General of the 2002 World Summit on Sustainable
Development, which took place in Johannesburg. “The depletion of fisheries poses a major
threat to the food supply of millions of people.” The Johannesburg Plan of Implementation
calls for the establishment of Marine Protected Areas (MPAs), which many experts believe may
WFI 13
Pre Camp
15
Cuba Neg
hold the key to conserving and boosting fish stocks. Yet, according to the UN Environment
Programme’s (UNEP) World Conservation Monitoring Centre, in Cambridge, UK, less than one
per cent of the world’s oceans and seas are currently in MPAs.¶ The magnitude of the problem
of overfishing is often overlooked, given the competing claims of deforestation,
desertification, energy resource exploitation and other biodiversity depletion dilemmas. The
rapid growth in demand for fish and fish products is leading to fish prices increasing faster
than prices of meat. As a result, fisheries investments have become more attractive to both
entrepreneurs and governments, much to the detriment of small-scale fishing and fishing
communities all over the world. In the last decade, in the north Atlantic region, commercial fish
populations of cod, hake, haddock and flounder have fallen by as much as 95%, prompting calls
for urgent measures. Some are even recommending zero catches to allow for regeneration of
stocks, much to the ire of the fishing industry.¶ According to a Food and Agriculture Organization
(FAO) estimate, over 70% of the world’s fish species are either fully exploited or depleted. The
dramatic increase of destructive fishing techniques worldwide destroys marine mammals and
entire ecosystems. FAO reports that illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing worldwide
appears to be increasing as fishermen seek to avoid stricter rules in many places in response
to shrinking catches and declining fish stocks. Few, if any, developing countries and only a
limited number of developed ones are on track to put into effect by this year the International
Plan of Action to Prevent, Deter and Eliminate Unreported and Unregulated Fishing. Despite
that fact that each region has its Regional Sea Conventions, and some 108 governments and the
European Commission have adopted the UNEP Global Programme of Action for the Protection
of the Marine Environment from Land based Activities, oceans are cleared at twice the rate of
forests.
WFI 13
Pre Camp
16
Cuba Neg
2NC – Oil Spills – No Biodiversity Impact
We Can Increase Biodiversity with Biotechnology
Fuentes 11
[Marcelino Fuentes, Professor of Ecology, Universidade da Coruña, Human Ecology Conservation Biology, “Economic growth and biodiversity”, 30 July 2011, Springer
Science+Business Media B.V. 2011, \\wyo-bb]
Some authors have argued that biodiversity loss is effectively irreversible because speciation is very slow
(Asafu-Adjaye 2003; Dietz and Adger 2003). While the loss of certain biological variants is effectively
irreversible, some components of biodiversity can increase quite rapidly. Biodiversity is not
only about global species richness, but includes diversity within species and between ecosystems
and landscapes. Humans can maintain and produce biological diversity just as we can
maintain and produce other goods. We add new biological variants to ecosystems via selective breeding, genetic
engineering, hybridization and ecological management. We thus contribute to the biodiversity of the biosphere, while making it less
‘pristine’. An
example of human preferences directly or indirectly enhancing biodiversity and
contributing to the size and growth of the economy is the biotechnology industry. The
biotechnology industry produces new biodiversity that has value for us. Reflecting this value,
the worldwide revenues of the biotechnology industry were about $89 billion in 2008, up from
$63 billion in 2005 and $8 billion in 1992 (Ernst & Young 2006, 2009). Other examples include the traditional
breeding of domestic organisms (Darwin 1868; Helms and Brugmann 2007)—with dogs now displaying as much morphological
diversity as does the whole class Carnivora according to Drake and Klingenberg (2010)—or the creation of new ecological
communities and landscapes for food and fiber production and recreation (Rosenzweig 2003; Palmer et al. 2004; Hobbs et al. 2006;
Ellis and Ramankutty 2008).
In all these instances human activities create new biodiversity that is
valuable to humans, and the act of value creation adds to the size of the economy.
Biodiversity loss won’t cause extinction
Easterbrook 3 (Gregg, senior fellow at the New Republic, “We're All Gonna Die!”,
http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/11.07/doomsday.html?pg=1&topic=&topic_set=)
If we're talking about doomsday - the end of human civilization - many scenarios
simply don't measure up. A single nuclear bomb ignited by terrorists, for example, would be awful beyond words,
but life would go on. People and machines might converge in ways that you and I would find ghastly, but from the standpoint
of the future, they would probably represent an adaptation. Environmental collapse
might make parts of
the globe unpleasant, but considering that the biosphere has survived ice ages, it
wouldn't be the final curtain. Depression, which has become 10 times more prevalent in Western nations in the
postwar era, might grow so widespread that vast numbers of people would refuse to get out of bed, a possibility that Petranek
suggested in a doomsday talk at the Technology Entertainment Design conference in 2002. But Marcel Proust, as miserable as
he was, wrote Remembrance of Things Past while lying in bed.
WFI 13
Pre Camp
17
Cuba Neg
2NC – Oil Spills – Impact Inevitable
Global warming makes marine biodiversity loss inevitable
Coroncoto, 2011
[Genalyn, International Business Times, Study: Global Warming and Predation Could Result to
Widespread Marine Biodiversity Loss, 11-30-11,
http://au.ibtimes.com/articles/258255/20111130/study-global-warming-predation-resultwidespread-marine.htm#.Ub9LEvb72P4] /Wyo-MB
A new study shows that the combined effects of warming and predation could lead to more
widespread marine biodiversity loss than are currently predicted, as animals or plants are
unable to shift their habitat ranges. The study by University of Columbia zoologist Christopher
Harley, examined the response of barnacles and mussels to the warming and predation by sea
stars.¶ "Rocky intertidal communities are ideal test-beds for studying the effects of climatic
warming," says Harley, an associate professor of zoology at UBC and author of the study. "Many
intertidal organisms, like mussels, already live very close to their thermal tolerance limits, so
the impacts can be easily studied."¶ The study found that at cooler locations, mussels and rocky
shore barnacles were able to live high on the shore, beyond the range of their predators. But
with higher temperature, these creatures were forced to live at lower shore levels, at the
same level as predatory sea stars.¶ In the last 60 years, summer temperatures increased by
almost 3.5 degrees Celsius, causing the upper limits of barnacle and mussels habitats to retreat
by 50 centimeters down the shore, contrary to its effect on predators which has remained
constant.¶ "That loss represents 51 per cent of the mussel bed. Some mussels have even gone
extinct locally at three of the sites I surveyed," says Harley. On the other hand, when pressure
from sea star predation was reduced using exclusion cages, these were able to move to warmer
sites and the species richness at the sites more than doubled.¶ "Warming is not just having
direct effects on individual species," says Harley. "This study shows that climate change can
also alter interactions between species, and produce unexpected changes in where species
can live, their community structure, and their diversity."
Population growth makes ocean biodiversity loss irreversible.
The Advertiser 99
[March 23, 1999 (Lexis)]
By far the greatest pressure on biodiversity is the demand the growing human population
places on the oceans. Marine ecosystems have been modified and biodiversity lost through the
clearing of native vegetation, the introduction of exotic species, pollution and climate change. For
example, 5000 million litres of Sydney sewage which has only received primary treatment is
discharged into the ocean each day. This is the equivalent of 2000 Olympic swimming pools
full of sewage being pumped into the ocean 365 days of the year.
Coastal eutrophication kills marine biodiversity
Bioscience 00
[ December 1, 2000 (No. 12, Vol. 50, p. 1108]
Diaz and Rosenberg (1995) list at least 23 areas documented in the scientific literature as suffering increasingly
from severe oxygen stress resulting from coastal eutrophication. Areas periodically oxygen-stressed are
often quite large, covering hundreds to thousands of square kilometers (e.g., 250 [km.sup.2] in the Gulf of
Trieste, approximately 3000 [km.sup.2] in the Kattegat between Denmark and Sweden, and 8000-9500 [km.sup.2] on the
Louisiana shelf). Many of these areas appear to be near a threshold at which further oxygen depletion will yield
catastrophic benthic mortality, loss of seafloor biodiversity (Figure 1), and alteration of food webs leading
from the sediments to crustacean and finfish fisheries above the SWI (de Jonge et al. 1994). It is important to note that because
WFI 13
Pre Camp
18
Cuba Neg
Diaz and Rosenberg (1995) have focused on oxygen-stressed sites reported in scientific journals, their list clearly
represents the tip of the hypoxic/anoxic iceberg. To quote these authors: "There is no other environmental
param eter of such ecological importance to coastal marine ecosystems that has changed so drastically in such a short period
of time as dissolved oxygen.... If we do not move quickly to reduce or stop the primary cause of low oxygen, the decomposition
of excess primary production associated with eutrophication, then the productivity structure of our major estuarine and
coastal areas will be permanently altered."
Deforestation makes biodiversity loss inevitable
Cardillo, 06 (Marcel, Division of Biology, Imperial College London, 2006, “Disappearing
forests and biodiversity loss: which areas should we protect?,” International Forestry Review
Volume 8, Issue 2, http://www.tempoandmode.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/07/intforestry-review-june-2006-cardillo.pdf,)
The destruction of forests and other habitats is the single most important cause of
biodiversity loss (IUCN 2004), and it is inevitable that the massive loss of forests that will occur
over the next few decades will result in widespread extinctions . The magnitude of this impending
extinction event can be estimated, roughly, using the species-area relationship. The species-area
relationship describes the increase in species richness (S) with area of habitat (A), which can usually be modelled as a power
function of the form S = cAz, the value of z indicating the slope of the increase. The expected loss of species from time t to t+1
can therefore be estimated as a function of habitat loss, using the equation St+1/St = (At+1/At)z. Using this method it has
been predicted, for example, that endemic mammal species richness in the Brazilian Amazon
could be reduced by 518% under different modelled scenarios of forest loss to 2020 (Grelle
2005).
WFI 13
Pre Camp
19
Cuba Neg
2NC – Oil Spills – No New Drilling
Drilling in Cuba is over—too expensive and risky
Gibson, 4-14-13
[William, Washington Bureau Sun Sentinel, Companies abandon search for oil in Cuba's deep
waters, http://articles.sun-sentinel.com/2013-04-14/news/fl-cuban-oil-drilling-retreat20130414_1_jorge-pi-north-coast-cuban-officials] /Wyo-MB
But though some oil has been found offshore, exploratory drilling in deep waters near
currents that rush toward Florida has failed to reveal big deposits that would be commercially
viable to extract, discouraging companies from pouring more money into the search.¶ "Those
companies are saying, 'We cannot spend any more capital on this high-risk exploration. We'd
rather go to Brazil; we'd rather go to Angola; we'd rather go to other places in the world where
the technological and geological challenges are less,'" said Jorge Piñon, an oil-industry analyst at
the University of Texas who consults with U.S. and Cuban officials as well as energy companies.¶
"I don't foresee any time in the future exploration in Cuba's deep-water north coast. It is, for
all practical purposes, over."¶
WFI 13
Pre Camp
20
Cuba Neg
2NC – Oil Spills – No Risk of Spills
Companies investing in Cuba have extensive offshore experience---no risk of
spills
Nerurkar & Sullivan 10 – Neelesh Nerurkar, Specialist in Energy Policy at the Congressional
Research Service, and Mark P. Sullivan, Specialist in Latin American Affairs at the Congressional
Research Service, November 29, 2010, “Cuba’s Offshore Oil Development: Background and U.S.
Policy Considerations,” online: http://assets.opencrs.com/rpts/R41522_20101129.pdf
It is difficult to assess the likelihood of a spill. According to Saipem, Scarabeo-9 is
built to Norwegian standards, including extra equipment to shut off
blown-out wells beyond what is required in the United States.30 Repsol has
significant offshore experience, including projects in the U.S. Gulf of Mexico. It has had issues with oil spills,
which is not abnormal for an oil company.31 Among other Cuban lease holders, Petrobras and Statoil have
extensive offshore experience, including projects in the U.S. Gulf of Mexico, and are generally seen
as accomplished offshore operators. Petronas, ONGC, and PetroVietnam also have offshore experience.
PdVSA does not, but its offshore project appears the furthest from seeing drilling activity among existing licenses.
WFI 13
Pre Camp
21
Cuba Neg
AT: Democracy Promotion Advantage
WFI 13
Pre Camp
22
Cuba Neg
1NC – AT: Democracy Promotion Advantage
No impact to terrorism – too hard to pull off post 9/11, not enough
personnel to carry out an attack, too much pressure because of security
restrictions
Schneier 10
(Bruce, a security technologist and author of "Beyond Fear: Thinking Sensibly About Security in
an Uncertain World.", “Opinion: Where Are All the Terrorist Attacks?”, March 2010,
http://www.aolnews.com/opinion/article/opinion-why-arent-there-more-times-square-styleterrorist-attacks/19463843)
Hard to Pull Off Terrorism sounds easy, but the actual attack is the easiest part. Putting
together the people, the plot and the materials is hard. It's hard to sneak terrorists into the
U.S. It's hard to grow your own inside the U.S. It's hard to operate; the general population,
even the Muslim population, is against you. Movies and television make terrorist plots look
easier than they are. It's hard to hold conspiracies together. It's easy to make a mistake. Even
9/11, which was planned before the climate of fear that event engendered, just barely
succeeded. Today, it's much harder to pull something like that off without slipping up and
getting arrested. Few Terrorists But even more important than the difficulty of executing a
terrorist attack, there aren't a lot of terrorists out there. Al-Qaida isn't a well-organized
global organization with movie-plot-villain capabilities; it's a loose collection of people using the
same name. Despite the post-9/11 rhetoric, there isn't a terrorist cell in every major city. If
you think about the major terrorist plots we've foiled in the U.S. -- the JFK bombers, the
Fort Dix plotters -- they were mostly amateur terrorist wannabes with no connection to
any sort of al-Qaida central command, and mostly no ability to effectively carry out the
attacks they planned. The successful terrorist attacks -- the Fort Hood shooter, the guy who
flew his plane into the Austin IRS office, the anthrax mailer -- were largely nut cases operating
alone. Even the unsuccessful shoe bomber, and the equally unsuccessful Christmas Day
underwear bomber, had minimal organized help -- and that help originated outside the U.S.
Terrorism doesn't occur without terrorists, and they are far rarer than popular opinion
would have it.
Democracy doesn’t solve war
Mueller 9—pol sci prof and IR, Ohio State.Widely-recognized expert on terrorism threats in foreign
policy. AB from U Chicago, MA in pol sci from UCLA and PhD in pol sci from UCLA (John, Faulty
Correlation, Foolish Consistency, Fatal Consequence: Democracy, Peace, and Theory in the Middle
East, 15 June 2007, http://psweb.sbs.ohio-state.edu/faculty/jmueller/KENT2.PDF)
there has been aburgeoning and intriguing discussion about the
connection between democracy and war aversion.7 Most notable has been the empirical observation that
democracies have never, or almost never, gotten into a war with each other. This
relationship seems more correlative than causal,however. Like many important ideas over the last few
In the last couple of decades
centuries, the idea that war is undesirable and inefficacious and the idea that democracy is a good form of government have largely followed the same
trajectory: they were embraced first in northern Europe and North America and then gradually, with a number of traumatic setbacks, became more
accepted elsewhere. In this view, the rise of democracy not only is associated with the rise of war aversion, but also with the decline of slavery, religion,
capital punishment, and cigarette smoking, and with the growing acceptance of capitalism, scientific methodology, women's rights, environmentalism,
While democracy and war aversion have taken much the
sametrajectory, however, they have been substantially out of synchronization with each
other: the movement toward democracy began about 200 years ago,but the
movement against war really began only about 100 years ago (Mueller 1989, 2004). Critics of the
abortion, and rock music.8
democracy/peace connection often cite examples of wars or near-wars between democracies. Most of these took place before World War I--that is,
before war aversion had caught on.9 A necessary, logical connection between democracy and war aversion, accordingly, is far from clear. Thus,
often asserted that democracies are peaceful because they apply their domestic
penchant for peaceful compromise (something, obviously, that broke down in the United States in 1861) to the
it is
WFI 13
Pre Camp
23
Cuba Neg
international arena or because the structure of democracy requires decision-makers to obtain domestic approval.10 But
authoritarian regimes must also necessarily develop skills at compromisein order to survive, and they all have
domestic constituencies that must be serviced such as the church, the landed gentry, potential urban rioters, the nomenklatura, the aristocracy, party
members, the military, prominent business interests, the police or secret police, lenders of money to the exchequer, potential rivals for the throne, the
sullen peasantry.11 Since World War I, the democracies in the developed world have been in the lead in rejecting war as a methodology. Some
proponents of the democracy-peace connection suggest that this is because the democratic norm of non-violent conflict resolution has been
developed democracies have not necessarily adopted a
pacifist approach, particularly after a version of that approach failed so spectacularly to
prevent World War II from being forced upon them. In addition, they were willing actively to subvertor to
threatenand sometimes apply military force when threats appeared to loom during the
Cold War contest. At times this approach was used even against regimes that had some democratic credentials such as in Iran in 1953,
externalized to the international arena. However,
Guatemala in 1954, Chile in 1973, and perhaps Nicaragua in the 1980s (Rosato 2003, 590-91). And, they have also sometimes used military force in
their intermittent efforts to police the post-Cold War world (Mueller 2004, chs. 7, 8). It is true that they have warred little or not at all against each
other--and, since there were few democracies outside the developed world until the last quarter of the twentieth century, it is this statistical regularity
developed democracies
hardly needed democracy to decide that war among them was a bad idea.12 In addition,
that most prominently informs the supposed connection between democracy and peace. However, the
they also adopted a live-and-let-live approach toward a huge number of dictatorships and other non-democracies that did not seem threatening during
the Cold War--in fact, they often aided and embraced such regimes if they seemed to be on the right side in the conflict with Communism. Moreover, the
supposed penchant for peaceful compromise of democracies has not always served them well when confronted with civil war situations, particularly
ones involving secessionist demands. The process broke down into civil warfare in democratic Switzerland in 1847 and savagely so in the United States
in 1861. Democracies have also fought a considerable number of wars to retain colonial possessions--six by France alone since World War II--and these,
as James Fearon and David Laitin suggest, can in many respects be considered essentially to be civil wars (2003, 76). To be sure, democracies have often
managed to deal with colonial problems peacefully, mostly by letting the colonies go. But authoritarian governments have also done so: the Soviet
Thus, while
democracy and war aversion have often been promoted by the same advocates,
the relationship does not seem to be a causal one . And when the two trends are substantially out of step today,
democracies will fight one another. Thus, it is not at all clear that telling the elected hawks in the Jordanian parliament that
Israel is a democracy will dampen their hostility in the slightest. And various warlike sentiments could be found in
the elected parliaments in the former Yugoslavia in the early 1990s or in India and then-democratic Pakistan
Union, for example, withdrew from his empire in Eastern Europe and then dissolved itself, all almost entirely without violence.
when these two countries engaged in armed conflict in 1999. If Argentina had been a democracy in 1982 when it seized the Falkland Islands (a very
The important
consideration," observes Miriam Fendius Elman after surveying the literature on the subject, does not seem to be
"whether a country is democratic or not, but whether its ruling coalition is committed
to peaceful methods of conflict resolution." As she further points out, the countries of Latin America and most of
Africa have engaged in very few international wars even without the benefit of being democratic (for a
popular undertaking), it is unlikely that British opposition to the venture would have been much less severe. "
century before its 1982 adventure, Argentina, for example, fought none at all) (1997, 484, 496). (Interestingly, although there has also been scarcely any
warfare between Latin American states for over 100 years or among Arab ones or European ones for more that 50--in all cases whether democratic or
not--this impressive phenomenon has inspired remarkably few calls for worldwide Arab colonialism or for the systematic transplant of remaining
the long peace enjoyed by developed countries
since World War II includes not only the one that has prevailed between democracies, but also the even
more important one between the authoritarian east and the democratic west. Even if there is some connection,
warlike states to Latin America or Europe.) And, of course,
whether causal or atmospheric, between democracy and peace, it cannot explain this latter phenomenon. Democracy and the democratic peace become
mystiques: the role of philosophers and divines Democracy has been a matter of debate for several millennia as philosophers and divines have
Associated with these speculations has been
a tendency to emboss the grubby gimmick with something of a mystique. Of particular
speculated about what it is, what it might become, and what it ought to be.
interest for present purposes is the fanciful notion that democracy does not simply express and aggregate preferences, but actually somehow creates
the (rough) correlation between democracy and war aversion has
also been elevated into a causal relationship.
(or should create) them. In addition,
Lifting embargo hurts the spread democracy and it doesn’t support the Cuban
people
Bustillo, 2013
[Mitchell, International Policy Digest, Time to Strengthen the Cuban Embargo, 5-9-13,
http://www.internationalpolicydigest.org/2013/05/09/time-to-strengthen-the-cubanembargo/] /Wyo-MB
Washington’s goal in its dealings with Havana is clear: facilitate the introduction and growth of
democracy while increasing personal freedoms. There are many who argue that the best way
to spread democracy is by lifting the embargo and travel restrictions. U.S. Rep. Michael Honda
WFI 13
Pre Camp
24
Cuba Neg
argues that an influx of politically enlightened U.S. travelers to Cuba would put Havana in a
difficult place, leading to their own people calling for change. However, this is erroneous. Due
to the fractured and weakened state of the embargo, over 400,000 U.S. travelers visited Cuba
in 2011, making the United States the second-largest source of foreign visitors after Canada,
according to NPR’s Nick Miroff. Obviously, this influx of what has been theorized to be libertyprofessing tourists has not resulted in an influx of such democratic ideals into this
overwhelmingly federally controlled country. One example is the case of Alan Gross, an
American citizen working for USAID. He was arrested in Cuba in 2009 under the allegations of
Acts against the Independence and Territorial Integrity of the State while distributing computers
and technological equipment to Jewish communities in Cuba. He is currently serving the fourth
of his fifteen-year conviction, is in poor health, and receiving little to no aid from the U.S.,
according to the Gross Family website. In light of this, it is hard to believe that the U.S. would
be able to protect a large number of tourists in a hostile nation, especially when they plan to
‘profess’ political freedom. This view is further promoted by the Ladies in White, a Cuban
dissident group that supports the embargo. They fear ending it would only serve to strengthen
the current dictatorial regime because the real blockade, they claim, is within Cuba. Allowing
American travelers to visit Cuba does not help propel the cause of Cuban democracy; it
hampers it.
WFI 13
Pre Camp
25
Cuba Neg
2NC – Democracy Promotion – No Terror Impact
Best statistical analysis proves the risk of terrorism is low
Zenko ‘12
[Micah, Fellow in the Center for Preventive Action at the Council on Foreign Relations, and
author of Between Threats and War: U.S. Discrete Military Operations in the Post-Cold War
World, “Americans Are as Likely to Be Killed by Their Own Furniture as by Terrorism,”
http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2012/06/americans-are-as-likely-to-bekilled-by-their-own-furniture-as-by-terrorism/258156/]
Today, the National Counter Terrorism Center (NCTC) released its 2011 Report on Terrorism. The
report offers the U.S. government's best statistical analysis of terrorism trends through its
Worldwide Incidents Tracking System (WITS), which compiles and vets open-source information
about terrorism--defined by U.S. law as "premeditated, politically motivated violence perpetrated against noncombatant
targets by subnational groups or clandestine agents." Although I invite you to read the entire thirty-one page report, there are a few
points worth highlighting that notably contrast with the conventional narrative of the terrorist threat: "The
total number of
worldwide attacks in 2011, however, dropped by almost 12 percent from 2010 and nearly 29
percent from 2007." (9) "Attacks by AQ and its affiliates increased by 8 percent from 2010 to 2011. A significant increase in
attacks by al-Shabaab, from 401 in 2010 to 544 in 2011, offset a sharp decline in attacks by al-Qa'ida in Iraq (AQI) and a smaller
decline in attacks by al-Qa'ida in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP) and al-Qa'ida in the Islamic Maghreb (AQIM)." (11) "In cases where
the religious affiliation of terrorism casualties could be determined, Muslims suffered between 82 and 97 percent of terrorismrelated fatalities over the past five years." (14) Of 978 terrorism-related kidnapping last year, only three hostages were private U.S.
citizens, or .003 percent. A private citizen is defined as 'any U.S. citizen not acting in an official capacity on behalf of the U.S.
government.' (13, 17) Of the
13,288 people killed by terrorist attacks last year, seventeen were
private U.S. citizens, or .001 percent. (17) According to the report, the number of U.S. citizens
who died in terrorist attacks increased by two between 2010 and 2011; overall, a comparable
number of Americans are crushed to death by their televisions or furniture each year . This is not
to diminish the real--albeit shrinking--threat of terrorism, or to minimize the loss and suffering of the 13,000 killed and over 45,000
injured around the world. For Americans, however, it should emphasize that
an irrational fear of terrorism is both
unwarranted and a poor basis for public policy decisions.
The impact is exaggerated – more likely to be killed in a natural disaster
or accident
Mueller and Stewart 10
(John, Professor of Political Science at Ohio State University, Mark, writer for Foreign Affairs, “Hardly
Existential: Thinking Rationally about Terrorism”, April 2, 2010,
http://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/66186/john-mueller-and-mark-g-stewart/hardlyexistential?page=show)
As can be seen, annual terrorism fatality risks, particularly for areas outside of war zones, are
less than one in one million and therefore generally lie within the range regulators deem
safe or acceptable, requiring no further regulations, particularly those likely to be
expensive. They are similar to the risks of using home appliances (200 deaths per year in the
United States) or of commercial aviation (103 deaths per year). Compared with dying at the
hands of a terrorist, Americans are twice as likely to perish in a natural disaster and nearly
a thousand times more likely to be killed in some type of accident. The same general
conclusion holds when the full damage inflicted by terrorists -- not only the loss of life but
direct and indirect economic costs -- is aggregated. As a hazard, terrorism, at least outside of
war zones, does not inflict enough damage to justify substantially increasing expenditures to deal
with it.
WFI 13
Pre Camp
26
Cuba Neg
2NC – Democracy Promotion – No Nuke Terrorism
Terrorists aren’t pursuing nukes
Wolfe 12 – Alan Wolfe is Professor of Political Science at Boston College. He is also a Senior Fellow
with the World Policy Institute at the New School University in New York. A contributing editor of
The New Republic, The Wilson Quarterly, Commonwealth Magazine, and In Character, Professor
Wolfe writes often for those publications as well as for Commonweal, The New York Times, Harper's,
The Atlantic Monthly, The Washington Post, and other magazines and newspapers. March 27, 2012,
"Fixated by “Nuclear Terror” or Just Paranoia?" http://www.hlswatch.com/2012/03/27/fixated-by“nuclear-terror”-or-just-paranoia-2/
If one were to read the
most recent unclassified report to Congress on the acquisition of
technology relating to weapons of mass destruction and advanced conventional
munitions, it does have a section on CBRN terrorism (note, not WMD terrorism).
The intelligence community has a very toned down statement that says “several
terrorist groups … probably remain interested in [CBRN] capabilities, but not necessarily in all
four of those capabilities. … mostly focusing on low-level chemicals and toxins.” They’re talking about
terrorists getting industrial chemicals and making ricin toxin, not nuclear weapons. And yes, Ms.
Squassoni, it is primarily al Qaeda that the U.S. government worries about, no one else. The trend of
worldwide terrorism continues to remain in the realm of conventional attacks. In
2010, there were more than 11,500 terrorist attacks, affecting about 50,000 victims including
almost 13,200 deaths. None of them were caused by CBRN hazards. Of the 11,000 terrorist
attacks in 2009, none were caused by CBRN hazards. Of the 11,800 terrorist attacks in 2008, none were caused by
CBRN hazards.
No successful detonation
Schneidmiller 9(Chris, Experts Debate Threat of Nuclear, Biological Terrorism, 13 January 2009,
http://www.globalsecuritynewswire.org/gsn/nw_20090113_7105.php)
There is an "almost vanishinglysmall" likelihood that terrorists would ever be able to acquire
and detonate a nuclear weapon, one expert said here yesterday (see GSN, Dec. 2, 2008). In even the most likely scenario of nuclear terrorism,
there are 20 barriers between extremists and a successful nuclear strike on a major city, said John
Mueller, a political science professor at Ohio State University. The process itself is seemingly straightforward but
exceedingly difficult -- buy or steal highly enriched uranium, manufacture a weapon, take the bomb to
the target site and blow itup. Meanwhile, variables strewn across the path to an attack would increase the complexity of the effort, Mueller argued.
Terrorists would have to bribe officials in a state nuclear program to acquire the material, while avoiding a sting by
authorities or a scam by the sellers. The material itself could also turn out to be bad. "Once the purloined material is purloined, [police are] going to be
chasing after you. They are also going to put on a high reward, extremely high reward, on getting the weapon back or getting the fissile material back," Mueller said
during a panel discussion at a two-day Cato Institute conference on counterterrorism issues facing the incoming Obama administration. Smuggling the material out
of a country would mean relying on criminals who "are very good at extortion" and might have to be killed to avoid a double-cross, Mueller said. The
terrorists would then have to find scientists and engineers willing to giveup their normal lives to
manufacture a bomb, which would require an expensive and sophisticated machine shop. Finally, further technological expertise would be needed to sneak the
weapon across national borders to its destination point and conduct a successful detonation, Mueller said. Every obstacle is "difficult but not impossible" to
likelihood of successfully passing
through each obstacle, in sequence, would be roughly one in 3 1/2 billion, he said, but for argument's
overcome, Mueller said, putting the chance of success at no less than one in three for each. The
sake dropped it to 3 1/2 million. "It's a total gamble. This is a very expensive and difficult thing to do," said Mueller, who addresses the issue at greater length in an
upcoming book, Atomic Obsession. "So unlike buying a ticket to the lottery ... you're basically putting everything, including your life, at stake for a gamble that's
Other scenarios are even less probable, Mueller said. A nucleararmed state is "exceedingly unlikely" to hand a weapon to a terrorist group, he argued: "States
just simply won't give it to somebody they can't control." Terrorists are also not likely tobe
able to steala whole weapon, Mueller asserted, dismissingthe idea of "loose nukes." Even Pakistan, which today is
maybe one in 3 1/2 million or 3 1/2 billion."
perhaps the nation of greatest concern regarding nuclear security, keeps its bombs in two segments that are stored at different locations, he said (see GSN, Jan. 12).
Fear of an "extremely improbable event" such as nuclear terrorism produces support for a wide range of homeland security activities, Mueller said. He argued that
there has been a major and costly overreaction to the terrorism threat -- noting that the Sept. 11 attacks helped to precipitate the invasion of Iraq, which has led to
academic and
governmental discussions of acts of nuclear or biological terrorism have tended to focus on "worstfar more deaths than the original event. Panel moderator Benjamin Friedman, a research fellow at the Cato Institute, said
WFI 13
Pre Camp
27
Cuba Neg
case assumptions about terrorists' ability to use these weapons to kill us." There is need for consideration for what is probable rather than simply
what is possible, he said. Friedman took issue withthe finding late last year of an experts' report that an act of WMD
terrorism would "more likely than not" occurin the next half decade unless the international community takes greater action.
"I would say that the report, if you read it, actually offers no analysis to justify that claim, which seems to
have been made to change policy by generating alarm in headlines." One panel speaker offered a partial
rebuttal to Mueller's presentation. Jim Walsh, principal research scientist for the Security Studies Program at the Massachusetts Institute
of Technology, said he agreed that nations would almost certainly not give anuclear weapon to a
nonstate group, that most terrorist organizations have no interest in seeking out the bomb, and that it
would be difficult to build a weaponor use one that has been stolen.
WFI 13
Pre Camp
28
Cuba Neg
2NC – Democracy Promotion – Democracy Inevitable
Global democracy inevitable
Tow 10—Director of the Future Planet Research Centre (David, Future Society- The Future of
Democracy, 26 August 2010,
http://www.australia.to/2010/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=4280:futuresociety-the-future-of-democracy&catid=76:david-tow&Itemid=230)
Democracy, as with all other processes engineered by human civilisation, is evolving at a rapid rate. A number of indicators
are pointing to a major leap forward, encompassing a more public participatory form of democratic
model and the harnessing of the expert intelligence of the Web. By the middle of the 21st century, such a global version of
the democratic process will be largely in place.Democracy has a long evolutionary history. The concept of democracy - the notion that men and
women have the right to govern themselves, was practised at around 2,500 BP in Athens. The Athenian polity or political body, granted all citizens the right to be heard and to participate in the major
decisions affecting their rights and well-being. The City State demanded services and loyalty from the individual in return. There is evidence however that the role of popular assembly actually arose
earlier in some Phoenician cities such as Sidon and Babylon in the ancient assemblies of Syria- Mesopotamia, as an organ of local government and justice. As demonstrated in these early periods,
democracy, although imperfect, offered each individual a stake in the nation’s collective decision-making processes. It therefore provided a greater incentive for each individual to cooperate to increase
group productivity. Through a more open decision process, improved innovation and consequently additional wealth was generated and distributed more equitably. An increase in overall economic
According to the
Freedom House Report, an independent survey of political and civil liberties around the globe, the world has made great strides
towards democracyin the 20th and 21st centuries. In 1900 there were 25 restricted democracies in existence covering an eighth of the world’s
population, but none that could be judged as based on universal suffrage. The US and Britain denied voting rights to women and in the case of the US, also to African Americans. But at the end
of the 20th century 119 of the world’s 192 nations were declared electoral democracies. In
the current century, democracy continues to spread through Africa and Asia andsignificantly also the
MiddleEast,withover 130 states invarious stages of democratic evolution.Dictatorships or quasi democratic one party states still
wellbeing in turn generated more possibilities and potential to acquire knowledge, education and employment, coupled with greater individual choice and freedom.
exist in Africa, Asia and the middle east with regimes such as China, North Korea, Zimbabwe, Burma, the Sudan, Belarus and Saudi Arabia, seeking to maintain total control over their populations.
two thirds of sub-Saharan countries have staged elections in the past ten years, with
coups becoming less common and internal wars gradually waning. African nations are also
starting to police human rights in their own region. African Union peacekeepers are now deployed in Darfur and are working with UN peacekeepers in the
However
Democratic Republic of the Congo. The evolution of democracy can also be seen in terms of improved human rights. The United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights and several ensuing legal
treaties, define political, cultural and economic rights as well as the rights of women, children, ethnic groups and religions. This declaration is intended to create a global safety net of rights applicable to
all peoples everywhere, with no exceptions. It also recognises the principle of the subordination of national sovereignty to the universality of human rights; the dignity and worth of human life beyond the
The global spread of democracy isnow alsoirreversibly linked to the new cooperative
globalisation model. The EU, despite its growing pains, provides a compelling template; complementing national decisions in the supra-national interest at the commercial,
financial, legal, health and research sharing level. The global spread of new technology and knowledge also provides
the opportunity for developing countries to gain a quantum leap in material wellbeing; an
essential prerequisite for a stable democracy. The current cyber-based advances therefore presage a
much more interactive public form of democracy and mark the next phase in its ongoing
evolution. Web 2.0’s social networking, blogging, messaging and video services have already significantly changed the way people discuss political issues and exchange ideas beyond national
jurisdiction of any State.
boundaries. In addition a number of popular sites exist as forums to actively harness individual opinions and encourage debate about contentious topics, funnelling them to political processes. These are
allowing the public to deliver requests to Government and receive a
committed response. In addition there are a plethora of specialized smart search engines and analytical tools aimed at locating and interpreting information about divisive and
often coupled to online petitions,
complex topics such as global warming and medical stem cell advances. These are increasingly linked to Argumentation frameworks and Game theory, aimed at supporting the logical basis of arguments,
negotiation and other structured forms of group decision-making. New logic and statistical tools can also provide inference and evaluation mechanisms to better assess the evidence for a particular
hypothesis. By 2030 it is likely that such ‘intelligence-based’ algorithms will be capable of automating the analysis and advice provided to politicians, at a similar level of quality and expertise as that
offered by the best human advisers. It might be argued that there is still a need for the role of politicians and leaders in assessing and prioritising such expert advice in the overriding national interest. But
a moment’s reflection leads to the opposite conclusion. Politicians have party allegiances and internal obligations that can and do create serious conflicts of interest and skew the best advice. History is
replete with such disastrous decisions based on false premises, driven by party political bias and populist fads predicated on flawed knowledge. One needs to look no further in recent times than the
patently inadequate evidential basis for the US’s war in Iraq which has cost at least half a million civilian lives and is still unresolved. However there remains a disjunction between the developed west
and those developing countries only now recovering from colonisation, the subsequent domination by dictators and fascist regimes and ongoing natural disasters. There is in fact a time gap of several
hundred years between the democratic trajectory of the west and east, which these countries are endeavouring to bridge within a generation; often creating serious short-term challenges and cultural
dislocations. A very powerful enabler for the spread of democracy as mentioned is the Internet/Web- today’s storehouse of the world’s information and expertise. By increasing the flow of essential
intelligence it facilitates transparency, reduces corruption, empowers dissidents and ensures governments are more responsive to their citizen’s needs. Ii is already providing the infrastructure for the
By
2040 more democratic outcomes for all populations on the planet will be the norm. Critical and urgent
emergence of a more democratic society; empowering all people to have direct input into critical decision processes affecting their lives, without the distortion of political intermediaries.
decisions relating to global warming, financial regulation, economic allocation of scarce resources such as food and water, humanitarian rights and refugee migration etc, will to be sifted through
Implementation of the democratic process itself
will continue to evolve with new forms of e-voting and governance supervision, which will
include the active participation of advocacy groups supported by a consensus of expert
knowledge via the Intelligent Web 4.0. Over time democracy as with all other social processes, will evolve to best suit
the needs of its human environment. It will emerge as a networked model- a non-hierarchical, resilient protocol, responsive to rapid social change. Such distributed
community knowledge, resulting in truly representative and equitable global governance.
forms of government will involve local communities, operating with the best expert advice from the ground up; the opposite of political party self-interested power and superficial focus-group decision-
WFI 13
Pre Camp
29
Cuba Neg
making, as implemented by many current political systems. These are frequently unresponsive to legitimate minority group needs and can be easily corrupted by powerful lobby groups, such as those
employed by the heavy carbon emitters in the global warming debate.
WFI 13
Pre Camp
30
Cuba Neg
2NC – Democracy Promotion – Lifting Embargo Hurts Demoracy
Embargo must be used as leverage for democratic reform, the aff puts the cart
before the horse
Walser, 2012
[Ray, Senior Policy Analyst specializing in Latin America at The Heritage Foundation, U.S. Policy
for Cuba: Libertad, 12-21-12, http://blog.heritage.org/2012/12/21/u-s-policy-for-cuba-libertad/]
/Wyo-MB
It is now 2012. The Obama Administration has opened the door for unrestricted travel by
Cuban-Americans, a largely unrestricted remittance flow, and more liberal travel for educational
and cultural groups. Yet official U.S.–Cuban relations remain stalemated because of the Castro
regime’s refusal to unclench its fist and take even the first steps toward true liberty.¶ Absence
of political change in Cuba, many argue, is an insufficient reason to retain the U.S. embargo.
Siege warfare against the embargo continues. Many Americans are on the tenterhooks of
conscience, suffering from acute symptoms of guilt, democracy fatigue, and loss of selfconfidence in American values. Others claim that South Florida Cuban–Americans are losing
their political grip. They are quick to assume that more trade, travel, and investment in Cuba will
soften the hearts of Cuba’s leaders, not just line their pockets.¶ It is much easier to apply
pressure on the Obama Administration for economic concessions that will ensure an ordered
succession from the reign of the Castro brothers to a new generation of still unknown
Communist leaders. While most hope a Gorbachev or Deng Xiaoping is waiting in the wings,
without democracy they might see a post-Castro hardliner emerge to take charge after Raul.¶ In
May 2008, in his Miami speech, candidate Obama said, “I will maintain the embargo. It provides
us with the leverage to present the regime with a clear choice: if you take significant steps
toward democracy…we will take steps to begin normalizing relations.”
Lifting the embargo is a mistake—harms democracy promotion
Williams, 2013
[Juan, Fox News political analyst. He is the author of several books, The US would be crazy to reestablish ties with Cuba, 2-5-13, http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2013/02/02/why-us-shouldnot-re-establish-ties-with-cuba/#ixzz2WDDSCAaQ] /Wyo-MB
With so many signs pointing in one direction – resumption of U.S. ties to Cuba – it is time to
call for a STOP sign.¶ For example, CELAC’s decision is tragically wrong given Cuba’s awful
history on human rights and democracy. Cuba continues to jail political opponents and
suppress free speech. That is a fact.¶ Independent observers can see it.¶ José Miguel Vivanco of
Human Rights Watch said Castro’s selection as CELAC president “sends a message [that Latin
governments] couldn’t care less about the poor human rights record and the lack of
fundamental freedoms in Cuba.Ӧ And it will be a mistake for President Obama to end any part
of the U.S. embargo without insisting on a full slate of democratic freedoms, human rights and
property rights in Cuba.¶ Writing in the Wall Street Journal last year, I expressed my
disagreement with those who have suggested cozying up to Latin American dictators like the
Castro brothers and Hugo Chavez in Venezuela. ¶ It is personal with me. My family fled Panama
in the early 1950’s to escape the poverty and open the door to education and opportunity.
Those doors were shut by a Latin strong man -- Panama’s Arnulfo Arias.¶ I wrote: “My life's
major turn away from poverty came thanks to my father's vision of his children escaping a
despot like Arias. That dream of a better life is alive throughout Latin America. To romanticize
WFI 13
Pre Camp
31
Cuba Neg
any dictator is to kill those dreams by condemning poor kids in Latin America, like me, to
tyrants and the burden of limited education and economic opportunity."
WFI 13
Pre Camp
32
Cuba Neg
AT: Hemispheric Relations Advantage
WFI 13
Pre Camp
33
Cuba Neg
1NC – AT: Hemispheric Relations Advantage
Ending sanctions doesn’t solve relations
Hanson associate director and coordinating editor at CFR.org 2009 Stephanie “US Cuba
Relations” Council on Foreign Relations 4/14 http://gees.org/documentos/Documen-03412.pdf
Given the range of issues dividing the two countries, experts say there is a long process that would precede
resumption of diplomatic relations. Daniel P. Erikson of the InterAmerican Dialogue says that though "you could have
the resumption of bilateral talks on issues related to counternarcotics or immigration, or a period of détente, you are probably
not going to see the full restoration of diplomatic relations" in the near term.
Many recent policy reports have recommended that the United States take some unilateral steps to roll back sanctions on Cuba.
The removal of sanctions, however, would be just one step in the process of normalizing
relations. Such a process is sure to be controversial, as indicated by the heated congressional debate spurred in
March 2009 by attempts to include provisions easing travel and trade restrictions in a large appropriations bill. These provisions
passed in a March 10 vote. "Whatever we call it--normalization, detente, rapproachement--I think it is clear that the
policy
process risks falling victim to the politics of the issue," says Sweig.
Lifting the embargo fuels anti-Americanism and emboldens Cuba to undermine
US leadership
Brookes, 2009
[Peter, Senior fellow national security affairs, Keep the Embargo, O, 4-16-9,
http://www.heritage.org/research/commentary/2009/04/keep-the-embargo-o] /Wyo-MB
We also don't need a pumped-up Cuba that could become a serious menace to US interests in
Latin America, the Caribbean -- or beyond. (The likes of China, Russia and Iran might also look
to partner with a revitalized Cuba.)¶ With an influx of resources, the Cuban regime would surely
team up with the rulers of nations like Venezuela, Nicaragua and Bolivia to advance socialism
and anti-Americanism in the Western Hemisphere.¶ The embargo has stifled Havana's
ambitions ever since the Castros lost their Soviet sponsorship in the early 1990s. Anyone
noticed the lack of trouble Cuba has caused internationally since then? Contrast that with the
1980s some time.¶ Regrettably, 110 years after independence from Spain (courtesy of Uncle
Sam), Cuba still isn't free. Instead of utopia, it has become a dystopia at the hands of the Castro
brothers.¶ The US embargo remains a matter of principle -- and an appropriate response to
Cuba's brutal repression of its people. Giving in to evil only begets more of it. Haven't we
learned that yet?¶ Until we see progress in loosing the Cuban people from the yoke of the
communist regime, we should hold firm onto the leverage the embargo provides.
No Latin American war
Cárdenas, ‘11
[Mauricio, senior fellow and director of the Latin America Initiative at the Brookings Institution
“Think Again Latin America,” Foreign Policy, 3.17.2011.
<http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2011/03/17/think_again_latin_america?page=full>//w
yo-hdm]
"Latin America is violent and dangerous." Yes, but not unstable. Latin American countries have among the world's
highest rates of crime, murder, and kidnapping. Pockets of abnormal levels of violence have emerged in countries such as Colombia - and more recently, in Mexico, Central America, and some large cities such as Caracas. With 140,000 homicides in 2010, it is
understandable how Latin America got this reputation. Each of the countries in Central America's "Northern Triangle" (Guatemala,
Honduras, and El Salvador) had more murders in 2010 than the entire European Union combined. Violence in Latin America is
strongly related to poverty and inequality. When combined with the insatiable international appetite for the illegal drugs produced
in the region, it's a noxious brew. As strongly argued by a number of prominent regional leaders -- including Brazil's former
WFI 13
Pre Camp
34
Cuba Neg
president, Fernando H. Cardoso, and Colombia's former president, Cesar Gaviria -- a strategy based on demand reduction, rather
than supply, is the only way to reduce crime in Latin America. Although
some fear the Mexican drug violence
could spill over into the southern United States, Latin America poses little to no threat to
international peace or stability. The major global security concerns today are the proliferation
of nuclear weapons and terrorism. No country in the region is in possession of nuclear
weapons -- nor has expressed an interest in having them. Latin American countries, on the whole,
do not have much history of engaging in cross-border wars. Despite the recent tensions on the
Venezuela-Colombia border, it should be pointed out that Venezuela has never taken part in
an international armed conflict. Ethnic and religious conflicts are very uncommon in Latin America.
Although the region has not been immune to radical jihadist attacks -- the 1994 attack on a Jewish Community Center in Buenos
Aires, for instance -- they have been rare. Terrorist attacks on the civilian population have been limited to a
large extent to the FARC organization in Colombia, a tactic which contributed in large part to the organization's loss of popular
support.
Organized crime inevitable-Globalization
Dr. Phil Williams is Professor of International Security in the Graduate School of Public and International Affairs at the
University of Pittsburgh 8-18-2006 http://www.oup.com/uk/orc/bin/9780199289783/baylis_chap09.pdf
Globalization has had paradoxical consequences for both transnational organized crime and
international terrorism, acting as both motivator and facilitator. This is not entirely surprising. Although
globalization has had many beneficial consequences, it has losers as well as winners—and the pain for the losers can be
enormous. Indeed, globalization
has had a disruptive impact on patterns of employment, on
traditional cultures, and on the capacity of states to deal with problems facing
citizens within their jurisdictions, as well as problems that span multiple jurisdictions. In some
instances, globalization has created massive economic dislocation that has pushed people from the legal economy to the illegal.
In other cases, globalization has been seen as merely a cover for Western and especially United States cultural and economic
domination—domination that has created enough resentment to help fuel what has become the global jihad movement. At the
same time, globalization has acted as a facilitator for a whole set of illicit activities ranging
from drugs and arms trafficking to the use of large-scale violence against innocent civilians. Many observers assumed that in
the post-cold war world, democracy, peace, stability and order could easily be exported from the advanced post-industrialized
states to areas of conflict and instability (Singer and Wildavsky 1993). In fact the opposite has occurred. Al-Qaeda was able to
attack the United States homeland while based in Afghanistan, thereby illustrating what Robert Keohane described as the
transformation of geography from a barrier to a connector (2002: 275). Indeed, one of the most important characteristics of a
globalized world is that the interconnections among different parts of the world are dense, communication is cheap and easy,
and transportation and transmission, whether of disease, crime, or violence, are impossible to stop. Transnational networks
link businessmen, families, scientists, and scholars; they also link members of terrorist networks and criminal organizations.
In some cases, networks are successfully integrated into the host societies. In other instances, however, migrants find
themselves in what Castells called ‘zones of social exclusion’ (1998: 72).Muslim immigration from North Africa and Pakistan to
Western Europe, for example, has resulted in marginalization and alienation that were evident in the widespread riots in
France in the late months of 2005 and that have also helped to fuel radical Islamic terrorism in Western Europe.Moreover, for
second and third generation immigrants who have limited opportunities in the licit economy, the illegal economy and either
petty crime or organized crime can appear as an attractive alternative. Ethnic networks of this kind can provide both cover
and recruitment opportunities for transnational criminal and terrorist organizations. In effect, therefore, globalization
has acted as a force multiplier for both criminal and terrorist organizations, providing them
with new resources and new opportunities.
-No jurisdiction, weak states, trade offs, too adaptable
Dr. Phil Williams is Professor of International Security in the Graduate School of Public and International Affairs at the
University of Pittsburgh 8-18-2006 http://www.oup.com/uk/orc/bin/9780199289783/baylis_chap09.pdf
There are several reasons for this. First, in
spite of growing international cooperation among national law
remains a national activity confined to a single territorial
jurisdiction, while organized crime is transnational in scope. In effect, law enforcement still
continues to operate in a bordered world, whereas organized crime operates in a borderless
enforcement agencies, law enforcement
WFI 13
Pre Camp
35
Cuba Neg
world. Second, although the United States placed a high priority on denying safe haven or sanctuary to international
criminals, many states have limited capacity to enforce laws against organized
crime.Consequently, transnational criminal organizations are able to operate from
safe havens, using a mix of corruption and violence to perpetuate the weakness of the states from
which they operate.Nowhere is this more evident than in Mexico, where a war for control of routes and markets on
the northern border has led to violence spilling over into the United States. Third, all too often attacking
transnational criminal organizations has been subordinated to other goals and
objectives. In spite of the emphasis on attacking smuggling and smugglers, for example, this is not something
which has been allowed to interfere with global trade. In effect, reaping the benefits of globalization, tacitly at least, has been
deemed more important than combating transnational organized crime.Not surprisingly, therefore, as Moises Naim has
pointed out, ‘there is simply nothing in the cards that points to an imminent reversal of fortune for the myriads of networks
active in illicit trade. It
is even difficult to find evidence of substantial progress in reversing or even just
containing the growth of these illicit markets’(2005: 221). Fourth, both transnational criminal
organizations and the illicit markets in which they operate are highly adaptable. Law
enforcement success against a particular organization, for example, tends simply to offer opportunities for its rivals to fill the
gap.Moreover, the
ability of organizations to move from one illicit product to another
makes them even more difficult to combat. In recent years, for example, Burmese warlords have moved
from opium to methamphetamine production and have become major suppliers to Asian markets for the drug.
WFI 13
Pre Camp
36
Cuba Neg
2NC – Hemispheric Relations – Organized Crime Inevitable
-Organization advantage
Dr. Phil Williams is Professor of International Security in the Graduate School of Public and International Affairs at the
University of Pittsburgh 8-18-2006 http://www.oup.com/uk/orc/bin/9780199289783/baylis_chap09.pdf
The bottom line on all this is that, even though
the United States has developed clear strategies for
combating both organized crime and terrorism, the implementation of these strategies is clearly
hindered by the dominance of governmental structures that were wellsuited to the cold war against
a slow, bureaucratic, ponderous adversary but are singularly ill-suited to combating agile transnational
adversaries. In the final analysis, fighting terrorism and transnational organized crime is not only about
strategy, it is also about appropriate organizational structures to implement strategy.And in that
respect, terrorists and criminals have the advantage. The result is that the efforts of the United States and
the international community to combat both crime and terrorism are unlikely to meet with unqualified
success.
-Too agile, bureaucratic inefficiency
Dr. Phil Williams is Professor of International Security in the Graduate School of Public and International Affairs at the
University of Pittsburgh 8-18-2006 http://www.oup.com/uk/orc/bin/9780199289783/baylis_chap09.pdf
In many respects, the threats posed to the United States and more broadly to the international community of states by
transnational organized crime and terrorism can be understood as an important manifestation of the new phase in world
politics in which some of the key interactions are between the state system and what James Rosenau (1990) termed the ‘multicentric system’, composed of ‘sovereignty-free actors’ . In this connection, it is notable that the first serious challenge to United
States hegemony in the post-cold war world came not from another state but from a terrorist network.Moreover, both
criminals and terrorists have certain advantages over states: they are agile, distributed,
highly dynamic organizations with a capacity to morph or transform themselves when
under pressure. States in contrast are slow, clumsy, hierarchical, and bureaucratic and,
although they have the capacity to bring lots of resources to bear on a problem, can rarely do this with speed and efficiency. As
discussed above, in the United States war on terror, the strategy for the war of ideas was very slow to develop, not least
because of inter-agency differences. The same has been true in the effort to combat terrorist finances. As the Government
Accountability Office (2005) has noted, ‘the U.S. government lacks an integrated strategy to coordinate the delivery of counterterrorism financing training and technical assistance to countries vulnerable to terrorist financing. Specifically, the effort does
not have key stakeholder acceptance of roles and procedures, a strategic alignment of resources with needs, or a process to
measure performance’. Differences of
perspective and approach between the Departments of
State and Treasury have also seriously bedevilled the effort to ‘enable weak states’, one of the
keys to the multilateral component of the administration’s strategy to combat terrorism. Similar problems have
been evident in efforts to combat organized crime and drug trafficking.A striking example is the
counter-drug intelligence architecture for the United States which has the Crime and Narcotics Center at CIA looking at the
international dimension of drug trafficking, the National Drug Intelligence Center responsible for domestic aspects of the
problem, the Treasury’s Financial Crimes Enforcement Network focusing on money laundering, and the El Paso Intelligence
Center responsible for tactical intelligence. Although this architecture provides clear roles and responsibilities, it also creates
bureaucratic seams in the effort to understand and assess what is clearly a seamless process of drug trafficking and money
laundering across borders. Although good information exchanges can ease this problem, the architecture is far from optimal.
WFI 13
Pre Camp
37
Cuba Neg
2NC – Hemispheric Relations – Lifting Embargo Doesn’t solve
Relations
Lifting the embargo doesn’t guarantee relations—even if were nice to them
they won’t be nice to us
Brookes, 2009
[Peter, Senior fellow national security affairs, Keep the Embargo, O, 4-16-9,
http://www.heritage.org/research/commentary/2009/04/keep-the-embargo-o] /Wyo-MB
So much for the theory that if we're nice to them, they'll be nice to us.¶ Many are concerned
that the lack of love from Havana will lead Washington to make even more unilateral
concessions to create an opening with Fidel and the gang.¶ Of course, the big empanada is the
US economic embargo against Cuba, in place since 1962, which undoubtedly is the thing
Havana most wants done away with -- without any concessions on Cuba's part, of course.¶
Lifting the embargo won't normalize relations, but instead legitimize -- and wave the white
flag to -- Fidel's 50-year fight against the Yanquis, further lionizing the dictator and
encouraging the Latin American Left.¶ Because the economy is nationalized, trade will pour
plenty of cash into the Cuban national coffers -- allowing Havana to suppress dissent at home
and bolster its communist agenda abroad.¶ The last thing we should do is to fill the pockets of
a regime that'll use those profits to keep a jackboot on the neck of the Cuban people. The
political and human-rights situation in Cuba is grim enough already.
Alt cause Guantanamo Bay
Hanson associate director and coordinating editor at CFR.org 2009 Stephanie “US Cuba
Relations” Council on Foreign Relations 4/14 http://gees.org/documentos/Documen-03412.pdf
Experts say the issues preventing normalization of U.S.-Cuba relations include the following:
• Human rights violations. In March 2003, the Cuban government arrested seventy-five dissidents and journalists, sentencing them
to prison terms of up to twenty-eight years on charges of conspiring with the United States to overthrow the state. The Cuban
Commission for Human Rights and National Reconciliation, a Havana-based nongovernmental group, reports that the government
has in recent years resorted to other tactics--such as firings from state jobs and intimidation on the street--besides prison to silence
opposition figures. A 2005 UN Human Rights Commission vote condemned Cuba's human rights record, but the country was elected
to the new UN Human Rights Council in 2006.
• Guantanamo
Bay. Cuba indicated after 9/11 that it would not object if the United States brought prisoners to Guantanamo
officials have since seized on the U.S. prison camp--where
hundreds of terror suspects have been detained without recourse to trial--as a "symbol of solidarity" with the rest
of the world against the United States. Obama has ordered a review of U.S. policy on Guanatanamo Bay.
Bay. However, experts such as Sweig say Cuban
Engagement with regime in Cuba doesn’t boost relations, should side with the
democratic aspirations of the people
Walser, 2012
[Ray, PHD and Senior Policy Analyst specializing in Latin America at The Heritage Foundation,
How To Achieve Real Political Reform in Cuba, 5-18-12,
http://www.heritage.org/research/commentary/2012/05/how-to-achieve-real-political-reformin-cuba] /Wyo-MB
But there’s another school of thought on how best to mark this day — one that encourages
“engagement” and leans more on diplomacy than accountability.¶ Today, thanks to the Obama
administration, as well as left-leaning think tanks in Washington and New York, an effort is
underway to steer an opposite course — one that moves, incredibly enough, closer to
WFI 13
Pre Camp
38
Cuba Neg
cooperation with the Castro regime. Tossed overboard are demands for human rights,
freedom and dignity for Cubans. In their place: the siren song of tourism partnerships and
exchanges of academics and musicians.¶ A fresh wave of Cubans is disembarking on and around
May 20 to participate in Cuba’s latest charm offensive. The capstone visit for this round features
Mariela Castro Espín, daughter of Raul Castro and an activist for gay and lesbian rights, at the
Latin American Studies Association in San Francisco. She will be received with acclaim as a voice
of progressive tolerance on issues of individual sexual preference.¶ The objective of these latest
Cuban visitors — salaried employees and privileged members of the regime — is to convince
ordinary Americans that Cuba is already on a course to better days. We’re to believe that
major economic change is underway, and that small portions of “democratic space,” as the
Obama administration fondly refers to it, are being carved out.¶ The ultimate goal of
spokespersons such as Mariela Castro is relatively simple: Win the coveted U.S. imprimatur of
acceptance for Cuban-style, post-Castro socialism, and smooth the way for full diplomatic
recognition. The eventual goal, of course, is to bring down the 1996 Helms-Burton Act and with
it the trade embargo. That way, the fabled Castro Revolution may continue on a course of
channeled change, with a succession of next-generation party apparatchiks, bureaucrats and
military leaders fully in control in the wheelhouse.¶ Yet, as the Bush administration knew, and
the Obama administration seems to forget, authentic change in Cuba requires far more than
institutional tinkering and piecemeal economic reform or the creation of manufactured
“democratic space.” It means taking these five fundamental steps toward authentic political
reform:¶ Recognition of the right to independent political parties to exist legally and operate
freely.¶ Free and fair elections.¶ Genuine freedom of expression, including unfiltered access to
the Internet.¶ Freedom of association for civil society, private enterprise and organized labor.¶
Nothing more — and nothing less — will do.¶ The first step to real solidarity with the Cuban
people is to correct an erroneous impression that the hired guns and apologists for the Castro
regime who ride in first class cabins speak for all Cubans. Time for truth in advertising! They
represent the Castro regime. They speak for the power elite in Havana. And they have clearly
in view a succession scenario, or “soft landing,” for the post-Castro era.¶ On May 20, those
interested in the future of U.S.-Cuba relations, and authentic liberty on the island, need to
remember that the authentic voices of change are far more likely to be found below decks in
Cuba’s permanent steerage class. Here you find the people barred from traveling. Here are the
ones with limited access to the outside world. Here are the ones constantly harassed and
threatened, left in jail and treated as enemies of the state.¶ It’s a difficult course to steer, but
it’s the only one that will effect change. Solidarity with Cuba’s people begins below decks, not
in luxury cabins with ocean views.
WFI 13
Pre Camp
39
Cuba Neg
AT: Solvency
WFI 13
Pre Camp
40
Cuba Neg
1NC – Solvency
Lifting embargo emboldens the regime—empirics prove won’t sustain
transition
Currie, 2010
[Duncan, National Review, 6/7/2010, Vol. 62 Issue 10, p28-30, 2p, 1 Color Photograph, Spare
Not The Stick, Accesed online via Ebscohost] /Wyo-MB
What does all that mean for U.S. sanctions against Cuba? “This is clearly the¶ wrong time to lift
the embargo, because the¶ regime is under pressure—not only in -¶ ternally, but
internationally,” says former¶ State Department official Susan Kaufman¶ Purcell, director of the
Center for Hemis -¶ pheric Policy at the University of Miami.¶ Moreover, the Castro government
has¶ made a habit of scuttling U.S. efforts to¶ improve bilateral relations. When Presi -¶ dent
Ford sought rapprochement, Cuba¶ dispatched a massive number of military¶ personnel to aid
Communist forces in the¶ Angolan civil war. When President Carter¶ established a U.S. mission in
Havana,¶ Fidel sent thousands of dangerous criminals and mental patients to Florida as part¶ of
the Mariel boatlift. When President¶ Clinton loosened the embargo, Cuban¶ aircraft shot down
two planes operated¶ by “Brothers to the Rescue,” a CubanAmerican group that assists
seaborne¶ refugees.¶ Similarly, President Obama initially¶ hoped to launch “a new beginning
with¶ Cuba.” In a gesture of goodwill, he eased¶ restrictions on family travel and remittances
to the island. But Havana once again¶ failed to reciprocate: In December, Cuban¶ security
agents arrested Alan Gross, a U.S.¶ Agency for International Development¶ (USAID)
contractor seeking to foster civil¶ society on the island. The regime has since¶ been holding him
on trumped-up spying¶ charges.¶ After the Gross detention, USAIDfunded trips aimed at
nurturing Cuban¶ democracy were temporarily suspended.¶ But on April 9, the Miami Herald
reported¶ that the agency had given its partner or -¶ ganizations the green light to resume¶ them.
Cuban officials are “really worried”¶ about the USAID programs, says Latell,¶ author of the
magisterial 2005 book After¶ Fidel. A 2006 Government Accounta -¶ bility Of fice study found that
those¶ programs are plagued by managerial dif -¶ ficulties and inadequate oversight, but it¶ also
noted that Cuban dissidents felt¶ USAID activi ties “provided moral sup- port and enhanced their
ability to continue¶ their pro-democracy work.”¶ In a statement on March 24, Obama¶ lamented
that “Cuban authorities continue¶ to respond to the aspirations of the Cuban¶ people with a
clenched fist.” Would scrapping the embargo help spur liberalization?¶ Peter Orr, who served
as USAID Cuba co -¶ ordinator under President Clinton, is doubtful. Foreign investment has
been pouring¶ into Cuba since the mid-1990s, as have foreign tourists. Both have
strengthened the¶ dictatorship. It is somewhat fanciful to¶ think that still more mojitosipping sunbathers would catalyze a transformation.
And, the embargo is a critical bargaining chip to force governmental change in
Cuba
Currie, 2010
[Duncan, National Review, 6/7/2010, Vol. 62 Issue 10, p28-30, 2p, 1 Color Photograph, Spare
Not The Stick, Accesed online via Ebscohost] /Wyo-MB
The broader U.S. embargo should be¶ used as a tool to incentivize Cuban liberalization. Latell
reckons that most senior¶ members of the military and Communist¶ bureaucracy—including Raúl
Castro—¶ favor Chinese-style economic reforms,¶ though they do not necessarily want Cuba¶ to
become what China is today. But Fidel¶ rejects the Deng Xiaoping model, and any¶ large-scale
WFI 13
Pre Camp
41
Cuba Neg
implementation of that model¶ presupposes his death. Latell suspects that¶ if Fidel died and Raúl
(who turns 79 on¶ June 3) were still in control as president,¶ Havana would adopt a more
pragmatic¶ approach to the United States, and might¶ even be willing to free political prisoners¶
in return for U.S. investment.¶ If America ditched sanctions tomorrow¶ without first obtaining
serious concessions, it would be rewarding the Cuban¶ government at a time when that
government appears increasingly vulnerable. The¶ embargo may seem a hopeless
anachronism. But it could prove a valuable bargaining chip, and it’s worth keeping at¶ least a
little while longer.
WFI 13
Pre Camp
42
Cuba Neg
2NC – Solvency – Don’t Lift the Embargo
Embargo should be strengthened—aff just supports Cuban squo government
Bustillo, 2013
[Mitchell, International Policy Digest, Time to Strengthen the Cuban Embargo, 5-9-13,
http://www.internationalpolicydigest.org/2013/05/09/time-to-strengthen-the-cubanembargo/] /Wyo-MB
Undoubtedly, Cuba is capitalizing on this weakness by using the embargo as a scapegoat for all
of its woes without any immediate fear of reinstated restrictions. Because the goal is to
promote Cuban democracy and freedom through non-violent and non-invasive means while
refraining from providing any support to the current oppressive Cuban government, the
current legislation regarding the embargo and travel ban against Cuba needs to be
modernized and strengthened. The need for an embargo has never been more important or
potentially effective, even considering the current human rights and economic arguments
against the embargo.
Now is key time to use embargo to force regime change, Venezuala regime
change means that Cuba can’t stand up to the embargo
Bustillo, 2013
[Mitchell, International Policy Digest, Time to Strengthen the Cuban Embargo, 5-9-13,
http://www.internationalpolicydigest.org/2013/05/09/time-to-strengthen-the-cubanembargo/] /Wyo-MB
No doubt, it has been a fruitless 50 years since the embargo was enacted. Little has changed
as far as democracy and human rights are concerned. To maintain control, Cuba has “managed
to offset much of the effects over the years in large part because the Soviets subsidized the
island for three decades, because the regime welcomed Canadian, Mexican and European
capital after the collapse of the Berlin Wall, and because Venezuela is its new patron,”
according to Llosa. However, Venezuela is now undergoing a political transition of its own with
the recent death of Hugo Chávez, its president for the past 14 years, and the controversial
election of Nicolás Maduro. Despite being Chávez’s handpicked successor, Maduro only won by
a narrow margin and will likely be forced to cut spending on social programs and foreign
assistance in an effort to stabilize Venezuela’s dire economic problems. Therefore, now is the
ideal time to take action. Without Venezuela’s support, the Cuban government will assuredly
face an economic crisis. Strengthening the embargo to limit U.S. dollars flowing into Cuba
would place further pressure on the Cuban government and has the potential to trigger an
economic collapse. A change in the Cuban political climate is within reach.
US policies can’t change Cuban governance
Powell, 2010
[Michael Orion, ember of the Young Leaders Program at the Heritage Foundation, Cuba: Change
Is Not One Sided, 4-3-10, http://blog.heritage.org/2010/04/03/cuba-change-is-not-one-sided/]
/Wyo-MB
Lacey’s post-embargo Cuba sure sounds wonderful, but it forgets about the actions that must
first be taken by Cuba. While engagement by the United States was useful, the Soviet Union
and China did not open thanks to American diplomacy alone. Actions taken by those
countries’ respective leadership were key. Gorbachev engaged in a policy of glasnost
WFI 13
Pre Camp
43
Cuba Neg
(“openness”) that played an invaluable role in the dissolution of the Soviet empire. Chinese
leader Deng Xiaoping opened his country to investment and the start of private competition
(with countries like Singapore as a model). There’s little sign of such a shift in Cuba. While
Cuban President Raul Castro has made signs of being willing to talk to the United States, those
moves have been interfered with by Raul’s brother Fidel. A freer Cuba would be beneficial to
everyone. It is important, however, to remember that this is a transformation that can only
happen through a change in Cuba’s policies, toward a more pluralist, democratic political
system and more open economy. It is not a transformation that can happen simply through a
change in our policies toward Cuba.
WFI 13
Pre Camp
44
Cuba Neg
Health Care Turn
WFI 13
Pre Camp
45
Cuba Neg
1NC – Health Care Turn
Cuban healthcare system flourishing now
Garett, 2010
[Laurie, LAURIE GARRETT is Senior Fellow for Global Health at the Council on Foreign Relations,
Castrocare in crisis: will lifting the embargo make things worse?, Foreign Affairs. 89.4 (JulyAugust 2010): p61, Accessed online via academic onefile] /Wyo-MB
Cuba is a Third World country that aspires to First World medicine and health. Its healthcare
system is not only a national public good but also a vital export commodity. Under the Castro
brothers' rule, Cubans' average life expectancy has increased from 58 years (in 1950) to 77
years (in 2009), giving Cuba the world's 55th-highest life expectancy ranking, only six places
behind the United States. According to the World Health Organization (WHO), Cuba has the
second-lowest child mortality rate in the Americas (the United States places third) and the
lowest per capita HIV/AIDS prevalence. Fifty years ago, the major causes of disease and death
in Cuba were tropical and mosquito-borne microbes. Today, Cuba's major health challenges
mirror those of the United States: cancer, cardiovascular disease, obesity, diabetes, and other
chronic ailments related to aging, tobacco use, and excessive fat consumption.
Lift embargo collapses health care system
Garett, 2010
[Laurie, LAURIE GARRETT is Senior Fellow for Global Health at the Council on Foreign Relations,
Castrocare in crisis: will lifting the embargo make things worse?, Foreign Affairs. 89.4 (JulyAugust 2010): p61, Accessed online via academic onefile] /Wyo-MB
According to Steven Ullmann of the University of Miami's Cuba Transition Project, if Washington
lifts its embargo, Cuba can expect a mass exodus of health-care workers and then the creation
of a domestic health system with two tiers, one private and one public. The system's lower,
public tier would be at risk of complete collapse. Ullmann therefore suggests "fostering this
[public] system through partnerships and enhanced compensation of personnel." He also argues
that officials in both governments should "limit out-migration of scientific brainpower from
the country." Properly handled, the transition could leave Cuba with a mixed health-care
economy--part public, part locally owned and private, and part outsourced and private--that
could compensate Cuban physicians, nurses, and other health-care workers enough to keep
them in the country and working at least part time in the public sector.¶ The only U.S. policy
currently in place, however, encourages Cuban physicians to immigrate to the United States.
In 2006, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security created a special parole program under
which health-care workers who defect from Cuba are granted legal residence in the United
States while they prepare for U.S. medical licensing examinations. An estimated 2,000
physicians have taken advantage of the program. Although few have managed to gain
accreditation as U.S. doctors, largely due to their poor English-language skills and the stark
differences between Cuban and U.S. medical training, many now work as nurses in Florida
hospitals.¶ The Castro government, meanwhile, is in a seemingly untenable position. The two
greatest achievements of the Cuban Revolution--100 percent literacy and quality universal
health care--depend on huge streams of government spending. If Washington does eventually
start to normalize relations, plugging just a few holes in the embargo wall would require vast
additional spending by the Cuban government. The government would have to pay higher
salaries to teachers, doctors, nurses, and technicians; strengthen the country's deteriorating
WFI 13
Pre Camp
46
Cuba Neg
infrastructure; and improve working conditions for common workers. To bolster its healthcare infrastructure and create incentives for Cuban doctors to stay in the system, Cuba will
have to find external support from donors, such as the United Nations and the U.S. Agency for
International Development. But few sources will support Havana with funding as long as the
regime restricts the travel of its citizens. In the long run, Cuba will need to develop a taxable
economic base to generate government revenues--which would mean inviting foreign
investment and generating serious employment opportunities. The onus is on the Castro
government to demonstrate how the regime could adapt to the easing or lifting of the U.S.
embargo. Certainly, Cuban leaders already know that their health triumphs would be at risk.
Cuban health care is key to solve disease
Garett, 2010
[Laurie, LAURIE GARRETT is Senior Fellow for Global Health at the Council on Foreign Relations,
Castrocare in crisis: will lifting the embargo make things worse?, Foreign Affairs. 89.4 (JulyAugust 2010): p61, Accessed online via academic onefile] /Wyo-MB
Cuba's five decades of public achievement in the health-care sector have resulted in a unique
cradle-to-grave community-based approach to preventing illness, disease, and death. No other
socialist society has ever equaled Cuba in improving the health of its people. Moreover, Cuba
has exported health care to poor nations the world over. In its purest form, Cuba offers an
inspiring, standard-setting vision of government responsibility for the health of its people. It
would be a shame if the normalization of relations between the United States and Cuba killed
that vision.
Disease causes extinction
John D. Steinbruner, Senior Fellow, Brookings Institution, “Biological Weapons: A Plague Upon
All Houses,” FOREIGN POLICY n. 109, Winter 1997/1998, pp. 85-96, ASP.
It is a considerable comfort and undoubtedly a key to our survival that, so far, the main lines of
defense against this threat have not depended on explicit policies or organized efforts. In the
long course of evolution, the human body has developed physical barriers and a biochemical
immune system whose sophistication and effectiveness exceed anything we could design or as
yet even fully understand. But evolution is a sword that cuts both ways: New diseases emerge,
while old diseases mutate and adapt. Throughout history, there have been epidemics during
which human immunity has broken down on an epic scale. An infectious agent believed to
have been the plague bacterium killed an estimated 20 million people over a four-year period in
the fourteenth century, including nearly one-quarter of Western Europe's population at the
time. Since its recognized appearance in 1981, some 20 variations of the HIVvirus have infected
an estimated 29.4 million worldwide, with 1.5 million people currently dying of aids each year.
Malaria, tuberculosis, and cholera-once thought to be under control-are now making a
comeback. As we enter the twenty-first century, changing conditions have enhanced the
potential for widespread contagion. The rapid growth rate of the total world population, the
unprecedented freedom of movement across international borders, and scientific advances
that expand the capability for the deliberate manipulation of pathogens are all cause for worry
that the problem might be greater in the future than it has ever been in the past. The threat of
infectious pathogens is not just an issue of public health, but a fundamental security problem
for the species as a whole.
WFI 13
Pre Camp
47
Cuba Neg
2NC – Health Care Turn – Uniqueness – Strong Now
Cuban health care good now – trends and focus on preventative care
Drain School of Medicine, Stanford University & Barry Member of the Social Sciences
Research Council Cuban Working Group of the American Council of Learned Societies 2010 Paul
& Michele “Fifty Years of U.S. Embargo: Cuba's Health Outcomes and Lessons” Science Magazine
April http://www.sciencemag.org/content/328/5978/572.full
However, impacts of sanctions on Cuba's financial systems, medical supplies, and aggregate health measures appear to be
attenuated by their successes in other aspects of health care. Despite
the embargo, Cuba has produced better
health outcomes than most Latin American countries, and they are comparable to those of
most developed countries. Cuba has the highest average life expectancy (78.6 years) and density
of physicians per capita (59 physicians per 10,000 people), and the lowest infant (5.0/1000 live births) and
child (7.0/1000 live births) mortality rates among 33 Latin American and Caribbean countries (11, 26).
In 2006, the Cuban government spent about $355 per capita on health, 7.1% of total Gross Domestic Product (GDP) (11, 26). The
annual cost of health care for an American was $6714, 15.3% of total U.S. GDP. Cuba also spent less on health than most European
countries. But low health
care costs alone may not fully explain Cuba's successes (27), which may
relate more to their emphasis on disease prevention and primary health care, which have
been cultivated during the U.S. trade embargo.
Cuba has one of the most proactive primary health care systems in the world. By educating
their population about disease prevention and health promotion, the Cubans rely less on medical
supplies to maintain a healthy population. The converse is the United States, which relies heavily on medical
supplies and technologies to maintain a healthy population, but at a very high cost.
Cuban health care doing good – lots of doctors and focus on prevention
Campion M.D. & Morrissey Ph.D. 2013 Edward & Stephen “A Different Model — Medical
Care in Cuba” New England Journal of Medicine
http://www.sld.cu/galerias/pdf/sitios/santiagodecuba/nejmp1215226_1.pdf
Internet access is virtually nonexistent. And the Cuban health care system also seems unreal. There are too
many doctors. Everybody has a family physician. Everything is free, totally free — and not after prior
approval or some copay. The whole system seems turned upside down. It is tightly organized, and the first priority
is prevention. Although Cuba has limited economic resources, its health care system has
solved some problems that ours has not yet managed to address.1,2
Family physicians, along with their nurses and other health workers, are responsible for delivering primary
care and preventive services to their panel of patients — about 1000 patients per physician in urban areas. All
care delivery is organized at the local level, and the patients and their caregivers generally live
in the same community. The medical records in cardboard folders are simple and handwritten, not unlike those we used in
the United States 50 years ago. But the system is surprisingly information-rich copic nd focused on
population health.
Cuban health care strong – lots of positive trends
Campion M.D. & Morrissey Ph.D. 2013 Edward & Stephen “A Different Model — Medical
Care in Cuba” New England Journal of Medicine
http://www.sld.cu/galerias/pdf/sitios/santiagodecuba/nejmp1215226_1.pdf
This highly structured, prevention-oriented system has produced positive results. Vaccination
rates in Cuba are among the highest in the world. The life expectancy of 78 years from birth is
virtually identical to that in the United States. The infant mortality rate in Cuba has fallen from more
than 80 per 1000 live births in the 1950s to less than 5 per 1000 — lower than the U.S. rate, although the maternal
WFI 13
Pre Camp
48
Cuba Neg
mortality rate remains well above those in developed countries and is in the middle of the range for Caribbean countries.3,4
Without doubt, the improved health outcomes are largely the result of improvements in nutrition and education, which address the
social determinants of health. Cuba’s
literacy rate is 99%, and health education is part of the
mandatory school curriculum. A recent national program to promote acceptance of men who have sex with men was
designed in part to reduce rates of sexually transmitted disease and improve acceptance of and adherence to treatment. Cigarettes
can no longer be obtained with monthly ration cards, and smoking rates have decreased, though local health teams say it remains
difficult to get smokers to quit. Contraception is free and strongly encouraged. Abortion is legal but is seen as a failure of prevention.
WFI 13
Pre Camp
49
Cuba Neg
2NC – Health Care Turn – Lifting Embargo = Brain Drain
Lifting the embargo causes Cuban medical brain drain
Garett, 2010
[Laurie, LAURIE GARRETT is Senior Fellow for Global Health at the Council on Foreign Relations,
Castrocare in crisis: will lifting the embargo make things worse?, Foreign Affairs. 89.4 (JulyAugust 2010): p61, Accessed online via academic onefile] /Wyo-MB
Cuba's economic situation has been dire since 1989, when the country lost its Soviet
benefactors and its economy experienced a 35 percent contraction. Today, Cuba's major
industries--tourism, nickel mining, tobacco and rum production, and health care--are fragile.
Cubans blame the long-standing U.S. trade embargo for some of these strains and are wildly
optimistic about the transformations that will come once the embargo is lifted. Overlooked in
these dreamy discussions of lifestyle improvements, however, is that Cuba's health-care
industry will likely be radically affected by any serious easing in trade and travel restrictions
between the United States and Cuba. If policymakers on both sides of the Florida Straits do
not take great care, the tiny Caribbean nation could swiftly be robbed of its greatest triumph.
First, its public health network could be devastated by an exodus of thousands of well-trained
Cuban physicians and nurses. Second, for-profit U.S. companies could transform the remaining
health-care system into a prime destination for medical tourism from abroad. The very
strategies that the Cuban government has employed to develop its system into a major
success story have rendered it ripe for the plucking by the U.S. medical industry and by
foreigners eager for affordable, elective surgeries in a sunny climate. In short, although the
U.S. embargo strains Cuba's healthcare system and its overall economy, it may be the better
of two bad options.
Lifting the embargo causes medical brain drain
Garett, 2010
[Laurie, LAURIE GARRETT is Senior Fellow for Global Health at the Council on Foreign Relations,
Castrocare in crisis: will lifting the embargo make things worse?, Foreign Affairs. 89.4 (JulyAugust 2010): p61, Accessed online via academic onefile] /Wyo-MB
But a lot may change if the United States alters its policies toward Cuba. In 2009, a group of 30
physicians from Florida toured Cira Garcia and concluded that once the U.S. embargo is lifted,
the facility will be overwhelmed by its foreign patients. It takes little imagination to envision
chains of private clinics, located near five-star hotels and beach resorts, catering to the elective
needs of North Americans and Europeans. Such a trend might bode well for Canadians seeking
to avoid queues in Ottawa for hip replacements or for U.S. health insurance companies looking
to cut costs on cataract surgery and pacemakers. But providing health care to wealthy
foreigners would drain physicians, technicians, and nurses from Cuba's public system.¶ And
any such brain drain within Cuba might be dwarfed by a brain drain out into the rest of the
world, as Cuban doctors and nurses leave the country to seek incomes that cannot be
matched at home. Countries facing gross deficits in skilled medical talent are already
scrambling to lure doctors, nurses, lab technicians, dentists, pharmacists, and health
administrators from other nations. In 2006, the WHO estimated that the global deficit of
medical professionals was roughly 4.3 million, and the figure can only have grown since then. As
the world's population ages and average life expectancies rise from the United States to China,
millions more patients will need complex, labor-intensive medical attention. And in countries
WFI 13
Pre Camp
50
Cuba Neg
with falling life expectancies and high rates of HIV/AIDS, donor resources aimed at combating
the disease often have the unintended consequence of further straining meager supplies of
human medical resources by drawing talent away from less well-funded areas of medicine,
such as basic children's health care. According to the American College of Physicians, the United
States currently has approximately one doctor for every 2,500 patients and a critical shortage of
nearly 17,000 doctors. The American Medical Association estimates that there is an especially
grave deficit of primary-care physicians, with only 304,000 licensed--about 30,000 fewer than
needed. And the recently enacted federal health-care reform law will put more than 30 million
more Americans on insurance or public rolls, thereby dramatically increasing the need for
physicians.¶ Primary-care physicians are the worst-paid doctors in the United States. Their
average salaries have grown by less than four percent per year since 2000, compared with
roughly ten percent per year for the salaries of surgeons and specialists, according to the
American College of Physicians. Last year, primary-care doctors in the United States earned
about $173,000 on average, compared with $344,000 for anesthesiologists and $481,000 for
orthopedic surgeons. With most U.S. doctors incurring debts of $200,000 to complete their
schooling, there is little hope that the acute primary-care deficit can be filled anytime soon by
talent trained in the United States. Already, U.S. and Canadian medical institutions are trying to
fill their human-resource gaps through recruitment from Africa, Asia, eastern Europe, and Latin
America.
WFI 13
Pre Camp
51
Cuba Neg
2NC – Health Care Turn – Doctors K2 Cuban Economy
Doctors k2 cuban economy
Garett, 2010
[Laurie, LAURIE GARRETT is Senior Fellow for Global Health at the Council on Foreign Relations,
Castrocare in crisis: will lifting the embargo make things worse?, Foreign Affairs. 89.4 (JulyAugust 2010): p61, Accessed online via academic onefile] /Wyo-MB
The second profound effect that changes in basic living conditions in Cuba have had on health
relates to the medical profession. Like all Cubans, health-care professionals are eager to obtain
CUC, but they are paid in the worthless domestic peso, receiving an average equivalent of $25
per month. These low wages give doctors a strong incentive to participate in international
missions that earn them convertible currency. Of the 73,000 physicians licensed to practice in
Cuba, 37,266 are now working overseas, under special bilateral agreements between the Cuban
government and the governments of 77 other countries. Since 1963, Cuba has sent 126,321
health-care workers to 103 countries, according to the Cuban Ministry of Public Health. This
overseas deployment of health-care workers benefits the Cuban state, as two-thirds of the
doctors' overseas income goes to the state and only one-third goes to the individual.¶ The Castro
government's largest and most extensive bilateral effort is with Hugo Chavez's leftist
government in Venezuela. Under an "oil-for-doctors" program initiated in 2000, Venezuela
provides 100,000 barrels of petroleum products to Cuba per day in exchange for three things:
31,000 Cuban doctors and dentists, training by Cuban doctors for 40,000 Venezuelan
physicians, and Operation Miracle, an initiative funded by Venezuela under which Cuban
doctors provide eye surgery, in Cuba, to thousands of poor Latin Americans annually.¶ The
Cuban government benefits politically from this medical diplomacy, including by
demonstrating the wisdom of its approach to public health. It is widely believed that
healthcare workers have become a top, if not the top, trade commodity for Cuba. Based on oil
prices in February 2010, the Venezuelan oil exchange alone would have had a value of $7.5
million per day, or nearly $3 billion per year. Whatever the exact benefits of these exchanges,
however, Cuba's medical diplomacy is taking a toll on the homeland.
WFI 13
Pre Camp
52
Cuba Neg
2NC – Health Care Turn – Solves Disease
Cuba is a key model for global health care – key to disease prevention
Monthly Review 7/12/2012 “Why Is Cuba's Health Care System the Best Model for Poor
Countries?” http://mrzine.monthlyreview.org/2012/fitz071212.html
Furious though it may be, the current debate over health care in the US is largely irrelevant to charting a path
for poor countries of Africa, Latin America, Asia, and the Pacific Islands. That is because the US squanders perhaps 10 to 20
times what is needed for a good, affordable medical system. The waste is far more than 30% overhead by private insurance
companies. It includes an enormous amount of over-treatment, creation of illnesses, exposure to contagion through overhospitalization, disease-focused instead of prevention-focused research, and making the poor sicker by refusing them treatment.1
Poor countries simply cannot afford such a health system. Well over 100 countries are looking
to the example of Cuba, which has the same 78-year life expectancy of the US while spending 4% per person annually of
what the US does.2
The most revolutionary idea of the Cuban system is doctors living in the neighborhoods they serve. A doctor-nurse team are part of
the community and know their patients well because they live at (or near) the consultorio (doctor's office) where they work.
Consultorios are backed up by policlínicos which provide services during off-hours and offer a wide variety of specialists. Policlínicos
coordinate community health delivery and link nationally-designed health initiatives with their local implementation.
Cubans call their system medicina general integral (MGI, comprehensive general medicine). Its programs focus on
preventing people from getting diseases and treating them as rapidly as possible.
This has made Cuba extremely effective in control of everyday health issues. Having doctors' offices in
every neighborhood has brought the Cuban infant mortality rate below that of the US and less than half that of US Blacks.3 Cuba
has a record unmatched in dealing with chronic and infectious diseases with amazingly limited
resources. These include (with date eradicated): polio (1962), malaria (1967), neonatal tetanus (1972), diphtheria (1979),
congenital rubella syndrome (1989), post-mumps meningitis (1989), measles (1993), rubella (1995), and TB meningitis (1997).4
The MGI integration of neighborhood doctors' offices with area clinics and a national hospital system also means the country
responds well to emergencies. It has the ability to evacuate entire cities during a hurricane largely because consultorio staff know
At the time
when New York City (roughly the same population as Cuba) had 43,000 cases of AIDS, Cuba had
200 AIDS patients.5 More recent emergencies such as outbreaks of dengue fever are quickly followed by
national mobilizations.6
everyone in their neighborhood and know who to call for help getting disabled residents out of harm's way.