Federalism Disad



Download 0.57 Mb.
Page55/56
Date conversion16.05.2016
Size0.57 Mb.
1   ...   48   49   50   51   52   53   54   55   56

Indonesian Federalism Bad: Hegemony




A) Federalism in Indonesia risk disintegration via economic isolation and trade barriers

The Jakarta Post 2001


(April 4, 2001, “, Lexis, Cfbato)

JAKARTA (JP): Regional autonomy, and the subsequent decentralization of fiscal policies are threatening domestic trade due to the creation of new trade barriers by regional governments, according to analysts on Tuesday. They said since the implementation of regional autonomy laws in January, domestic trade barriers had increased. The analysts also warned that higher trade barriers would cost Indonesia the competitiveness of its products and impede growth of local and foreign investment. [it continues…] But Brahmantio suspected that the new law on decentralization would further distort prices of commodities and trading activities. [it continues…] According to KPMG consultant and fiscal adviser to the Ministry of Finance, Douglas Todd Consulting, trade barriers can create economic isolation among regions. He warned that Indonesia is at risk from disintegration, even though decentralization was aimed at avoiding that risk in the first place. "If you allow the decentralization process to incorporate trade barriers, you will harm the very thing you're trying to achieve," he explained.



B) Indonesian collapse Kills US basing and Power Projection
Menon, Professor of International Relations at Lehigh University, 2001
(September 19, 2001,”The National Interest”, Lexis, Cfbato)


The consequences of Indonesia's breakup would affect American interests, as well. American energy and raw materials companies (Exxon-Mobil, Texaco, Chevron, Newmont Mining, Conoco and Freeport-McMoRan, among others) operate in Indonesia, particularly in Aceh, Riau, and West Papua, and many of the ships that traverse the Strait of Malacca are American-owned. The United States is also a major trader and investor in East Asia and is to some degree hostage to its fate, especially now that the American economy is slowing. Moreover, if Indonesia fractures, worst-case thinking and preemptive action among its neighbors could upset regional equilibrium and undermine the American strategic canopy in East Asia. The United States has a network of bases and alliances and 100,000 military personnel in the region, and is considered the guarantor of stability by most states-a status it will forfeit if it stands aside as Indonesia falls apart. America's competitors will scrutinize its actions to gauge its resolve and acumen. So will its friends and allies-Australia, Japan, Singapore, Thailand and South Korea-each of whom would be hurt by Indonesia's collapse.

C) Global Nuclear War
Khalilzad 1995
(Zalmay, “Losing the moment” WASHINGTON QUARTERLY, Spring 1995, LN, )


Under the third option, the United States would seek to retain global leadership and to preclude the rise of a global rival or a return to multipolarity for the indefinite future. On balance, this is the best long-term guiding principle and vision. Such a vision is desirable not as an end in itself, but because a world in which the United States exercises leadership would have tremendous advantages. First, the global environment would be more open and more receptive to American values -- democracy, free markets, and the rule of law. Second, such a world would have a better chance of dealing cooperatively with the world's major problems, such as nuclear proliferation, threats of regional hegemony by renegade states, and low-level conflicts. Finally, U.S. leadership would help preclude the rise of another hostile global rival, enabling the United States and the world to avoid another global cold or hot war and all the attendant dangers, including a global nuclear exchange. U.S. leadership would therefore be more conducive to global stability than a bipolar or a multipolar balance of power system.

Indonesian Federalism Bad: Terrorism




A) Federalism in Indonesia risk disintegration via economic isolation and trade barriers

The Jakarta Post 2001


(April 4, 2001, “, Lexis, Cfbato)

JAKARTA (JP): Regional autonomy, and the subsequent decentralization of fiscal policies are threatening domestic trade due to the creation of new trade barriers by regional governments, according to analysts on Tuesday. They said since the implementation of regional autonomy laws in January, domestic trade barriers had increased. The analysts also warned that higher trade barriers would cost Indonesia the competitiveness of its products and impede growth of local and foreign investment. [it continues…] But Brahmantio suspected that the new law on decentralization would further distort prices of commodities and trading activities. [it continues…] According to KPMG consultant and fiscal adviser to the Ministry of Finance, Douglas Todd Consulting, trade barriers can create economic isolation among regions. He warned that Indonesia is at risk from disintegration, even though decentralization was aimed at avoiding that risk in the first place. "If you allow the decentralization process to incorporate trade barriers, you will harm the very thing you're trying to achieve," he explained.



B) Indonesian collapse spurs terrorism
Australian Financial Review 2002
(November 22, 2002, “, Lexis, Cfbato)


There is no question that productive private sector investment is a vital driver for economic growth and poverty reduction in developing countries in our neighbourhood. So too, however, is the delivery of aid which focuses on the building blocks for human and economic development, education, health care, good governance and sustainable use of natural resources. The reality is that limited immediate financial return on investment is unlikely to attract private sector investment in these important sectors. While there clearly is not a direct link between entrenched poverty, gross inequality and terrorism, the events of the last year have shown the world that widespread poverty and suffering can create an environment conducive to breeding social instability and violent extremism. Achieving human security focused on the basic rights of people is one critical element to attaining global security. The social and economic challenges confronting Indonesia are staggering.
C) Terrorism leads to extinction
Alexander, professor and director of the Inter-University for Terrorism Studies in Israel and the United States, 2003
(Yonah, August 27 “Terrorism Myths and Realities,” Washington Times)
Last week's brutal suicide bombings in Baghdad and Jerusalem have once again illustrated dramatically that the international community failed, thus far at least, to understand the magnitude and implications of the terrorist threats to the very survival of civilization itself. Even the United States and Israel have for decades tended to regard terrorism as a mere tactical nuisance or irritant rather than a critical strategic challenge to their national security concerns. It is not surprising, therefore, that on September 11, 2001, Americans were stunned by the unprecedented tragedy of 19 al Qaeda terrorists striking a devastating blow at the center of the nation's commercial and military powers. Likewise, Israel and its citizens, despite the collapse of the Oslo Agreements of 1993 and numerous acts of terrorism triggered by the second intifada that began almost three years ago, are still "shocked" by each suicide attack at a time of intensive diplomatic efforts to revive the moribund peace process through the now revoked cease-fire arrangements (hudna). Why are the United States and Israel, as well as scores of other countries affected by the universal nightmare of modern terrorism surprised by new terrorist "surprises"?  There are many reasons, including misunderstanding of the manifold specific factors that contribute to terrorism's expansion, such as lack of a universal definition of terrorism, the religionization of politics, double standards of morality, weak punishment of terrorists, and the exploitation of the media by terrorist propaganda and psychological warfare. Unlike their historical counterparts, contemporary terrorists have introduced a new scale of violence in terms of conventional and unconventional threats and impact. The internationalization and brutalization of current and future terrorism make it clear we have entered an Age of Super Terrorism (e.g. biological, chemical, radiological, nuclear and cyber) with its serious implications concerning national, regional and global security concerns.
1   ...   48   49   50   51   52   53   54   55   56


The database is protected by copyright ©essaydocs.org 2016
send message

    Main page