Fellows Gramzinskiu.S. Human Rights Credibility Bad

ADI 20101

Fellows--GramzinskiU.S. Human Rights Credibility Bad

US Human Rights Credibility Bad Index

1NC Shell

Uniqueness: Human Rights Credibility Low-8

Links: Generic

Internal Link: Low Credibility Prevents Pressure

Impact: Human Rights Credibility Bad – Economy

Impact: Human Rights Credibility Bad – Conflict

Impact: Human Rights Credibility Bad – Otherization/Exclusion

Impact: Human Rights Credibility Bad – Corporations/Global Capitalism (1/3)

Impact: Human Rights Credibility Bad – Corporations/Global Capitalism (2/3)

Impact: Human Rights Credibility Bad – Corporations/Global Capitalism (3/3)

Impact: Human Rights Credibility Bad – US/China Relations

Impact: US-China War Bad

Impact: US-China Relations Good

Impact: Taiwan War Escalates 1/2

Impact: Taiwan War Escalates 2/2

Impact: Taiwan Conflict - Japan

Impact: Taiwan Conflict – Global Trade

Impact: Taiwan Conflict – Asian Arms Race

Impact: Taiwan Conflict– Korean war

Impact: Taiwan Conflict – Middle East war

2NC Soft Power Module: Answers To – No U.S. Interventionism 1/2

2NC Soft Power Module: Answers To – No U.S. Interventionism 2/2

Impact: Soft Power Bad - Terrorism

Impact: Democracy Promotion Module

Uniqueness: No Aggressive Democracy Promotion Now

Uniqueness: Democracy Promotion Low – Obama’s Fault

Internal Link: Human Rights Lead to Promotion of Democracy

Democracy Impact: Militarism

Democracy Impact: China

Democracy Impact: Middle East

2NC Answers To: Democracy Good

2NC Answers To: Democracy Promotion Good

2NC Answers To: Authoritarianism Bad

2NC Answers To: China Backlash

2NC Answers To: Middle East

Aff Answers: Democracy Good » US Interests

Aff Answers: Democracy Key to Economic Growth

Aff Answers: Democracy Good » ↓ War

Aff Answers: Middle East

Aff Answers: Frontline

Aff Answers: Uniqueness: Obama Promoting Democracy Now

Impact Turns: US/China War Good

US-China War Good Frontline

US-China War Inevitable

2NC No Impact to US-China War

No Nuclear or Global Escalation

Answers To: China-Taiwan War: Defense

1NC Shell

U.S. human rights credibility down now

Gude09Associate Director of theInternational Rights and Responsibility Program at American Progress,

[Ken, December 10, Excessive Secrecy Undermining Obama's Human Rights Achievements

In many areas of the Obama presidency, expectations quickly outpaced any realistic capability to meet them. But it was Obama himself who promised a paradigm shift in U.S. detention policy and the most transparent presidency ever. Despite some unquestionable successes the Obama administration is still struggling to convince the public that a truly new era of American transparency and leadership on human rights has begun. Failure to live up to those standards would undermine the positive strides Obama has made on human rights policy and American national security. Excessive government secrecy is an enemy of human rights and the rule of law. President Obama deserves praise for rejecting the underlying policies that caused the United States so much harm during the Bush years. But in withholding photos of detainee abuse, preventing legal challenges to torture and warrantless surveillance, and thwarting impartial hearings into suspicious deaths at Guantanamo, his administration has so far failed to pull down the veil of secrecy hiding the extent of Bush administration transgressions.The Obama administration needs to build public confidence in the institutions of American government, especially now that new and credible allegations of recent detainee abuse have surfaced in Afghanistan. The early promise of the Obama administration can still be fulfilled if it rejects excessive secrecy and recalls its pledge on transparency.

Plan restores U.S. human rights credibility leadership

Piper, Garcia and Flora 2010[Jennifer, Jordan, and Gabriela“Human rights and immigration reform” Flora are with the Colorado office of the American Friends Service Committee, a Quaker peace and justice organization. 03/28/To access A New Path Toward Humane Immigration Policy go to

Reforming our obsolete immigration system is a human rights issue that can no longer wait. Our nation needs a clear and workable path toward legal residency for the millions of undocumented workers and families living in this country.Some proposals, such as the immigration-reform blueprint that Senators Chuck Schumer and Lindsey Graham are spearheading, will only create the needed path after creating a more militarized southern border. Border communities along the U.S.-Mexico border have for generations demanded accountability and respect for their quality of life, not more of the same failed policies.Adding more patrols, or high-tech surveillance systems, to "secure the borders" does not make us more secure. The tragic deaths of at least 6,000 migrants attempting to cross the U.S. - Mexico border since the mid 1990s are a stark reminder that border control policies have only perpetuated suffering. Migrants are 17 times more likely to die today while crossing the border than they were in 1998.But, we hear from lawmakers that trumpeting border security is necessary to make immigration reform possible. Then where is the clear proof that the multimillion-dollar wall along the U.S. - Mexico border has curbed migration? Economists say the recession of the past two years has had more of an impact.Stepping up ineffective border patrols, filling more detention jails like the one in Aurora, and more wholesale deportations would only aggravate the climate of fear and uncertainty under which millions of families live. In fact, the Obama administration deported more undocumented migrants in its first year in office than in George W. Bush's last year in the White House, based on the Department of Homeland Security's own reports.That is why eighty people from Colorado are traveling via bus, van and plane to Washington D.C. and why tens of thousands of immigrant rights supporters are preparing to converge on the streets of Denver, Washington D.C. and across the country, this weekend to call for just and humane immigration reform, not policies that would expand the current ineffective, overzealous enforcement system.They and millions of others are calling for an end to policies that split families apart and the beginnings of policies that provide safe and swift paths to legalization. We believe the seven core principles the American Friends Service Committee have proposed in A New Path Toward Humane Immigration Policy will help achieve that goal quickly, fairly and humanely.These principles are: create justice with humane economic policies, protect the labor rights of all workers, develop a clear path to permanent residence, respect the civil and human rights of immigrants, demilitarize the U.S.-Mexico border, make family reunification a top priority, and ensure that immigrants and refugees have access to services. As a nation, we should reject appeals to tie the future of millions of families to a broken, unjust system of enforcement. Instead we should respect the human rights and dignity of immigrants through humane and fair immigration policies.

1NC Shell

Low human rights credibility is preventing the U.S. from pressuring other nations to improve human rights.

The Guardian (London) 2005 <1/14, “Bush under fire over human rights: Watchdog says US setting bad example,” lexis>

The torture and degrading treatment of prisoners in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Guantanamo Bay have undermined the credibility of the US as a defender of human rights and opponent of terrorism, the New York-based Human Rights Watch says in its annual report.
"The US government is less and less able to push for justice abroad because it is unwilling to see justice done at home," says Kenneth Roth, the group's executive director.
The report comes as the Bush administration prepares for inauguration next week. The administration has shown little interest in moderating its aggressive approach to its "global war on terror".
Yesterday's scathing report argues that the US has weakened its own moral authority at a time that authority is most needed, "in the midst of a seeming epidemic of suicide bombings, beheadings, and other attacks on civilians and noncombatants."

International human rights promotion leads to war

Baxi 98, Professor of Law, University of Warwick,

[Upendra, accessed 8/1/05, Fall Transnational Law & Contemporary Problems, lexis]

The post-modernist critique of human rights further maintains that the telling of large global stories ("metanarratives") is less a function of emancipation as it as an aspect of the politics of intergovernmental desire that ingests the politics of resistance. Put another way, meta-narratives serve to co-opt into mechanisms and processes of governance the languages of human rights such that bills of rights may adorn many a military constitutionalism with impunity and that socalled human rights commissions may thrive upon state/regime sponsored violations. Not surprisingly, the more severe the human rights violation, the more the power elites declare their loyalty to the regime of human rights. The near-universality of ratification of the Convention on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW), for example, betokens no human liberation of women. Rather, it endows the state with the power to tell more Nietschzean lies. n68 All too often, human rights languages become stratagems of imperialistic foreign policy through military invasions as well as through global economic diplomacy. n69 Superpower diplomacy at the United Nations is not averse to causing untold suffering through sanctions whose manifest aim is to serve the future of human rights. n70 The United States, the solitary superpower at the end of the millennium, has made sanctions for the promotion of human rights abroad a gourmet feast at the White House and on Capitol Hill.

Uniqueness: Human Rights Credibility Low

U.S. leadership and credibility low - GITMO

Krulak, 6-13-10 commandant of the Marine Corps from 1995 to 1999

[Charles C., Naples, Fla.

The June 7 front-page story "Camp Costly" revealed how the United States has spent more than $500 million to upgrade the U.S. facility at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. But the greatest cost of Guantanamo has been to American global leadership and credibility as a nation that respects the rule of law. Gen. David H. Petraeus has made it clear that "the existence of Gitmo has indeed been used by the enemy against us" and that it serves as a lingering reminder of missteps in the war on terror such as the abuses at Iraq's Abu Ghraib prison. There are not benefits to outweigh these costs. In the time that federal courts convicted 195 members of al-Qaeda and its allies, the military commissions at Guantanamo convicted three. A recent report confirmed that most Guantanamo detainees have been low-level operatives. Many were captured and turned over to the United States by poor locals hoping to cash in on a $5,000 reward. The real absurdity of the Guantanamo boondoggle is that we never needed to spend a dime to create it.

Human rights credibility is fading – restoration is key

Culpepper 2010 (Brent, J.D. @ Vanderbilt, “Missed Opportunity: Congress's Attempted Response to the World's Demand for the Violence Against Women Act,” 43 Vand. J. Transnat'l L. 733, Lexis)BB

The international human rights regime continues to evolve - in both its scope and legal apparatus - at an unprecedented rate. n66 However, as many will concede - particularly nations other than the United States and the United Kingdom - the U.S. war on terror significantly damaged the moral leadership necessary for the United States to remain a powerful advocate for the human rights regime. n67 Unfortunately, other nations did not fill the human rights vacuum left by the United States. Rather, the United States' lack of human rights credibility threatens to truncate the much-needed development of a uniform international regime. n68

Clinton tanking human rights credibility now

The Washington Post, 2009. “Some Friends: Hillary Rodham Clinton undercuts the State Department's own human rights reporting.” Tuesday, March 10, 2009; A12.

SECRETARY OF STATE Hillary Rodham Clinton continues to devalue and undermine the U.S. diplomatic tradition of human rights advocacy. On her first foreign trip, to Asia, she was dismissive about raising human rights concerns with China's communist government, saying "those issues can't interfere" with economic, security or environmental matters. In last week's visit to the Middle East and Europe,she undercut the State Department's own reporting regarding two problematic American allies: Egypt and Turkey. According to State's latest report on Egypt, issued Feb. 25, "the government's respect for human rights remained poor" during 2008 "and serious abuses continued in many areas." It cited torture by security forces and a decline in freedom of the press, association and religion.Ms. Clinton was asked about those conclusions during an interview she gave to the al-Arabiya satellite network in Sharm el-Sheikh, Egypt. Her reply contained no expression of concern about the deteriorating situation. "We issue these reports on every country," she said. "We hope that it will be taken in the spirit in which it is offered, that we all have room for improvement." Ms. Clinton was then asked whether there would be any connection between the report and a prospective invitation to President Hosni Mubarak to visit Washington. "It is not in any way connected," she replied, adding: "I really consider President and Mrs. Mubarak to be friends of my family. So I hope to see him often here in Egypt and in the United States." Ms. Clinton's words will be treasured by al-Qaeda recruiters and anti-American propagandists throughout the Middle East. She appears oblivious to how offensive such statements are to the millions of Egyptians who loathe Mr. Mubarak's oppressive government and blame the United States for propping it up. The new secretary of state delivered a similar shock in Turkey to liberal supporters of press freedom, now under siege by the government of Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan. According to the State Department report, "senior government officials, including Prime Minister Erdogan, made statements during the year strongly criticizing the press and media business figures, particularly following the publishing of reports on alleged corruption . . . connected to the ruling party." That was an understatement: In fact, Mr. Erdogan's government has mounted an ugly campaign against one of Turkey's largest media conglomerates, presenting it with a $500 million tax bill in a maneuver that has been compared to Russia's treatment of independent media. Ms. Clinton was asked by a Turkish journalist what she told Mr. Erdogan when he complained about the State Department report. She answered: "Well, my reaction was that we put out this report every year, and I fully understand . . . no politician ever likes the press criticizing them." "Overall," she concluded, "we think that Turkey has made tremendous progress in freedom of speech and freedom of religion and human rights, and we're proud of that."In fact, as the State Department has documented, Turkey is retreating on freedom of speech. In Egypt, the human rights situation also is getting worse rather than better. By minimizing those facts, Ms. Clinton is doing a disservice to her own department -- and sending a message to rulers around the world that their abuses won't be taken seriously by this U.S. administration.

Uniqueness: Human Rights Credibility Low

US Credibility low now – Guantanamo Bay and Middle East crisis proves

El-Amrani 09 Writer and consultant

[Issandr, “Restoring Credibility on Human Rights and Democracy”, American Progress, 7/15

“I think we really shouldn’t underestimate the extent to which the Bush administration damaged the image of the United States [in] the [Middle East],” said Issandr El-Amrani, publisher of a popular group of blogs on Egyptian and Middle Eastern affairs, Arabist.net. El-Amrani encouraged attendees to “be realistic about how long it will take to repair that damage” at a panel discussion on restoring U.S. credibility on democracy and human rights in the Middle East. The Center for American Progress, the Project on Middle East Democracy, and the Heinrich Boll Foundation sponsored the event, which was hosted at the Center.Claudia Hillebrand, a professor of international politics at Aberstwyth University, and Heather Hurlburt, the executive director of the National Security Network joined El-Amrani on the panel. Brian Katulis, a Senior Fellow the Center for American Progress, moderated the discussion.The panelists focused on the U.S. detention center at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, which remains at the forefront of conversation on the United States and human rights because of the prison’s questionable conditions and harsh interrogation techniques associated with it.The Obama administration pledged to close the prison by January 22, 2010, but the panelists were divided on the likelihood of meeting this goal. Hurlburt predicted that Guantánamo would be closed within the year “because there is so much personal credibility riding on it,” but she also thinks “that means it will be closed in a way that makes a lot of the human rights community unhappy.” Hillebrand thought that closing the prison was a difficult task that was not likely to happen by the end of 2009.Hurlburt and the other panelists attributed the delays in closing Guantánamo to unforeseen challenges instead of inactivity by the Obama administration. “In every instance, I think the problem has just turned out to be more complex, and—what Obama was left by his predecessors—more problematic than they had understood coming in,” said Hurlburt. The absence of comprehensive files on detainees at Guantánamo was the first major setback for the Obama administration, according to Hurlburt, who said that the records weren’t “kept to the standards they would have been kept, for example, if we had known from the beginning that they would face civilian trials.”Finding places to keep and try the detainees has been another obstacle to closing the base. The European Union’s adoption of an agreement on Guantánamo that allows member nations to share information and house detainees was a recent step forward on this issue. But under those provisions if a detainee were determined to be a security risk to Europe, then no member nation would be allowed to hold that detainee. Delays to closing Guantánamo have allowed both “legitimate security concerns to arise as well as an opportunistic political opposition,” said Hurlburt, so that “you now have sort of wildly exaggerated fears coursing around the country and political figures seeking to take political advantage out of this.”Panelists also looked at other options for improving U.S. credibility abroad. El-Amrani favored civilian trials for those in the U.S. government responsible for torture. “If I remember correctly, President Obama said, ‘Now is the time for reflection, not retribution,’” said El-Amrani, who said he disagreed with the president. “I think this is the time for retribution. I think retribution would be extremely politically effective.”But retribution may not be the only option for restoring our image. Hurlburt advocated for a better appeal system for detainees. “The first thing to look for in any measure that the administration puts forward” is whether or not there is review built in and a way for a person to challenge his or her status, she said.Hillebrand described the challenges of the international expectations for Obama on human rights, no matter which path the U.S. government takes in restoring its credibility. She said, “[European] expectations were probably too high, and [Obama] could never fulfill them. At the moment, I think there is a kind of rolling back” as people realize just how long this will all take.President Obama may never meet expectations, but El-Amrani was cautiously hopeful that U.S. standing in the Middle East would improve. “[Obama] has planted a seed in the region that we will see changes,” he said. Many human rights advocates would like to see immediate action on Guantánamo, and official detention and rendition policy changes from the Obama administration are due in July. El-Amrani explained that in the Middle East there is a trend toward a “wait-and-see” approach as that deadline approaches. “Let’s see if he can actually deliver,” he said.