Israel Politics da



Download 394.19 Kb.
Page1/37
Date conversion20.04.2016
Size394.19 Kb.
  1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   ...   37

Gonzaga Debate Institute 2010

Lab Charlie (Boykin, Kim, Lacy, Symonds) Israeli Politics DA

Israel Politics DA




Israel Politics DA 1

Israel Politics 1NC (1/3) 2

Israel Politics 1NC (2/3) 3

***Uniqueness*** 4

Netanyahu strong 5

Netanyahu supports 2 state solution and is strong enough 6

Netanyahu/Obama close now 7

Netanyahu supports Peace Process 8

Brink: Netanyahu on tightrope between US and Israel right wing 9

Coalition Tenuous 10

Coalition Tenuous 11

Coalition Tenuous 12

Coalition Tenuous – split on peace talks 13

Netanyahu Coalition pro-peace process 14

Peace Process will keep Labor in the coalition 15

Peace process necessary to stave off right wing 16

Labor won’t leave the coalition 17

Kadima Joining Coalition 18

Obama supports Kadima in the govt 19

A2: Netanyahu won’t follow Obama’s lead in peace talks 20

Peace Process Brink 21

Peace Process will succeed 22

Peace Process will succeed 23

Peace Process will succeed 24

Peace process will succeed – Palestinians on board 25

Peace process will succeed – 2 state solution good 26

Peace process will succeed – 2 State solution good 27

A2: Israel won’t end settlements 28

A2: Jerusalem prevents Peace Process success 29

US-Israel Relations Uniqueness 30

US-Israel Relations Uniqueness 31

***Links*** 32

Iraq Withdrawal --> Vulnerable Israel 33

Iraq Withdrawal --> Vulnerable Israel 34

Netanyahu can’t give in to US pressure 35

Israel wants strong Obama-Netanyahu ties 36

Israel wants strong Obana-Netanyahu ties 37

Netanyahu walking tightrope, threatens coalition 38

Making concessions to Arabs undermines Netanyahu 39

***Impacts*** 40

Labor departure collapses the coalition 41

Kadima key to avoid coalition collapse 42

Kadima is key to end settlements 43

Netanyahu is key to Peace Process 44

Netanyahu is key to Peace Process 45

Netanyahu coalition key to Israeli moderates ending settlements 46

Netanyahu coalition key to Israeli moderates ending settlements 47

Impact Module – Escalation 48

Impact Module – Escalation 49

Impact Module – Iran 50

Impact Module – Terror 51

Impact Module – Economy 52

Peace Process key to Israel Security 53

Peace Process Turns the Case 54

Peace Process stops Israel first strike on Iran 55

Peace Process stops Israel first strike on Iran 56

A2: Peace Process Bad 57

A2: Israel won’t really commit to peace process 58

Settlements key to peace talks 59

Settlements key to peace talks 60

Settlements key to peace talks 61

Settlements key to peace talks 62

Iraq withdrawal forces Israeli military in the Jordan Valley 63

Israeli Troops on the Jordan Border tank the Peace Process 64

Israeli Troops on the Jordan Border tank the Peace Process 65

Jordan Valley troops violate international law 66

Impact will be large – lots of WMDs 67

***AFF Answers*** 68

Netanyahu is weak now 69

Netanyahu is weak now 70

Netanyahu is weak now 71

Netanyahu weak - Obama demanding huge concessions 72

No Peace Process - Palestinian Refusal 73

Israel committed to building settlements, kills peace 74

Netanyahu committed to settlements, kills peace 75

Netanyahu Continuing Settlements 76

Netanyahu Continuing Settlements 77

Settlement Freeze Fail 78

Kadima won’t join the government 79

Coalition will collapse – Settlement Freeze 80

Netanyahu Internal Link Turn 81

Turn: Removing troops give US moral ground to pressure Israel 82

Netanyahu Coalition Prevents Peace 83

Peace process Fails – Palestine 84

Peace Process Fails – Too complex 85

Peace Process Fails – Israel 86

Peace Process Fails – Israel 87

Peace Process Fails – US involvement Bad 88

Peace Process Fails – Palestinian rejection 89

A2: Peace Process 90

Peace Process causes terrorism and Civil War 91

Peace Process Bad – 2 state solution prolongs conflict 92

Peace Process Fails – 2 State Solution won’t work 93

2 state solution fails - discriminates against Palestinians 94



Israel will stay in Jordan Valley permanently 95




Israel Politics 1NC (1/3)


Netanyahu is prepared to follow Obama’s lead in peace talks, but to maintain control he must not make big concessions to the US

Stolberg and Landler July 6 (Sheryl, writer for the New York Times, Mark, American journalist and Diplomatic Correspondent of the New York Times, New York Times, July 6, 2010, http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/07/world/middleeast/07prexy.html?src=me) EH

WASHINGTON — President Obama said Tuesday that he expected direct negotiations between Israelis and Palestinians to begin “well before” a moratorium on settlement construction expired at the end of September, and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel pledged to take “concrete steps” in the coming weeks to get the talks moving. The president’s comments, after a 79-minute, one-on-one session in the Oval Office, were the first in which he articulated a timetable for peace negotiations. They also reflected a palpable shift in the administration’s approach to a relationship that has been rife with tension since soon after Mr. Obama took office. The meeting was laden with theatrics as the men shook hands vigorously in front of the cameras after a series of steps by the Israelis over the past few days to reduce tensions with the United States. But it was also deeply substantive, the leaders’ aides said, with Mr. Obama and Mr. Netanyahu touching on a wide variety of contentious issues, including Iran’s nuclear ambitions and Israel’s undeclared nuclear weapons program, as well as the peace process. A single session in the Oval Office is not likely to have resolved a year and a half of deep policy differences, and the two leaders could hit more bumps in the months ahead, especially if Mr. Obama grows impatient with a lack of progress in the peace process. But on Tuesday, they sought to accentuate the positive. After publicly pressing Mr. Netanyahu for months to curb the building of Jewish settlements — an American policy that fanned resentment in Israel — Mr. Obama pointedly did not push Mr. Netanyahu to extend the existing moratorium. Instead, he said that moving from American-brokered “proximity talks” to direct talks would give Mr. Netanyahu the incentive and domestic political leeway to act on his own. “My hope is, that once direct talks have begun, well before the moratorium has expired, that that will create a climate in which everybody feels a greater investment in success,” Mr. Obama said, adding, “There ends up being more room created by more trust.” The Palestinian Authority reacted cautiously to the meeting, saying that it, too, wanted direct talks, but that the onus was on Mr. Netanyahu to halt the building of settlements and to agree on negotiations that would resume where the last direct talks, in 2008, left off. “It is about words not deeds,” said Saeb Erekat, the chief Palestinian negotiator, by phone late Tuesday. “We need to see deeds.” Tuesday’s much-publicized meeting in the Oval Office was in stark contrast to the frosty reception Mr. Netanyahu received during his last trip to the White House in March, when Mr. Obama left the prime minister waiting in the Roosevelt Room while he went upstairs to have dinner with his wife and daughters. The mood was so sour then that Mr. Obama barred news cameras. On Tuesday, photographers clicked away in the Oval Office as Mr. Obama praised the prime minister as someone “willing to take risks for peace” and blamed the press for reports of discord. Mr. Netanyahu loosely quoted Mark Twain, saying, “The reports about the demise of the special relationship aren’t just premature; they’re just flat wrong.” In another gesture to the Israelis, Mr. Obama emphasized that there had been no shift in American policy on Israel’s undeclared nuclear weapons program, despite the United States’ signature on a recent United Nations document that singled out Israel for its refusal to sign the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, binding 189 countries. Israeli officials were alarmed by the American decision to allow Israel to be named, which came at the prodding of Arab states. Some in Israel viewed it as a sign of the unreliability of the United States, Israel’s most important ally. Mr. Obama also tried to soothe Israeli jitters about calls for a regional conference on a nuclear-free Middle East. Any such meeting, he said, would only be a discussion of regional security, not an opportunity to press Israel on its nuclear program. “We strongly believe that, given its size, its history, the region that it’s in and the threats that are leveled against us — against it, that Israel has unique security requirements,” Mr. Obama said, briefly correcting himself in midsentence. “It’s got to be able to respond to threats or any combination of threats in the region.” The source of the friction during Mr. Netanyahu’s last visit was Israel’s announcement, during a visit by Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr., that it was approving plans for Jewish settlements in East Jerusalem. Now, settlements are again at issue, but the president’s modulated response seemed intended to return the American-Israeli relationship to one in which difficult issues are thrashed out in private, rather than through public lectures. Some analysts suggested that Mr. Obama and Mr. Netanyahu might have reached a private understanding that Israel would extend the construction moratorium in return for direct talks. “This enables Israel to say it didn’t pay for direct talks, but there’s an understanding that once the expiration date rolls around, the moratorium will be extended,” said David Makovsky, a senior fellow at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy. Among the other “concrete steps” Israel is expected to take toward the Palestinians, analysts said, is greater cooperation with the Palestinian Authority on security matters and increased economic aid for the West Bank. Mr. Netanyahu has suggested to aides that he has other steps in mind, Israeli officials said, but he has not yet disclosed them. Mr. Obama’s stance reflected domestic political pressures on both men. Mr. Netanyahu, who is struggling to keep his fractious right-wing coalition together, has been under pressure at home not to appear to pay an additional price to lure the Palestinians to the negotiating table.

  1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   ...   37


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

    Main page