Resolved: The United States is justified in intervening in the internal political processes of other

“We will be as a city upon a hill. The eyes of all people are upon us, so that if we deal falsely with our God in this work we have undertaken and so cause Him to withdraw His present help from us, we shall be made a story and a byword throughout the world.” Because I agree with the position stated by Ronald Ragen, I uphold the resolution that Resolved: The United States is justified in intervening in the internal political processes of other countries to attempt to stop human rights abuses. I am the affirmative. Attempt- is to make an effort at or to try according to dictionary.com. “The affirmative team will advocate the value of freedom, as define by dictionary.com exemption from external control, interference, regulation, etc. http://dictionary.reference.com...“In order to support the value of freedom, the affirmative would like to offer the criterion Nirvana as defined as a place or state characterized by freedom from or oblivion to pain, worry, and the external world. http://dictionary.reference.com... Arguments that force will only make things worse ignore the result of WW2. Dr John Janzekovic 04 (Politics and International Relations/Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences/University of the Sunshine Coast), “Forcible Humanitarian Intervention: practical Objections to the Ethical Principles and Applications, Refereed paper presented to the Australasian Political Studies Association Conference University of Adelaide 29 September – 1 October 2004 ) To dismiss the use of force on the basis that it can only make things worse for oppressed peoples means that allied entry into World War II to stop the spread of fascism in Germany, Italy and elsewhere should not have occurred. Allied entry into WW II was not primarily for humanitarian reasons, but this does not mean that humanitarian issues did not exist. Very few people seriously argue that Nazi attempts to exterminate the Jews should not have been stopped. Stopping Nazis exterminating Jews could not have occurred without force (Kagan 1995, 336). There are four key players in humanitarian affairs. These are; the onlookers, potential or active interventionists, those being abused, and those doing the abusing. Humanitarian attention must be focused on the oppressed because they are doing most of the dying and the suffering. Currently, the onlookers, and occasionally the interventionists have the loudest voices regarding what they think about the humanitarian value of the use of force.The interventionists have the added difficulty of trying to stay alive themselves. This means World War 2 serves as one gigantic empirical example of the potential of humanitarian intervention to work to save lives meaning humanitarian intervention can be successful and so intervening can be morally justified. Humanitarian intervention in combination with other efforts has been proven it can be successful. Michael C Williams 94 (Professor in the Graduate School of Public and International Affairs at the University of Ottawa), “Humanitarian Intervention and the Use of Force,” The Center for Applied Policy Research, www.cap.lmu.de/transatlantic/download/williams.doc, written in 1994, AL) Humanitarian intervention alone, however, does not and cannot eliminate the root causes of the problems it addresses. In spite of its increasing "sophistication", if I may use this term , it remains a curative measure, unless it is part of a more comprehensive approach which includes, in particular, a political dimension. Operation Provide Comfort, in northern Iraq, gave rise to the illusion that the New World Order would include a New Humanitarian Order. We know, of course, how history challenged the overall concept of New World Order. Somalia, in particular, represented the failure of its humanitarian ambitions. Former Yugoslavia and the Great Lakes region of Central Africa defined the contours of this "humanitarian crisis" in the following years. In both, the combination of humanitarian intervention and political abstention was conspicuous. Proximity to the West, however, prompted the major powers, and the US in particular, to finally overcome this gap in the former Yugoslavia. Dayton, despite all its shortcomings, remains a very important model of comprehensive response to a crisis which is "humanitarian" in its effects, but not in its causes. Refugees are being turned away from borders and denied help from humanitarian agencies. Michael C Williams 94 (Professor in the Graduate School of Public and International Affairs at the University of Ottawa), “Humanitarian Intervention and the Use of Force,” The Center for Applied Policy Research, www.cap.lmu.de/transatlantic/download/williams.doc, written in 1994, AL) The number of people in need of rescue, however, has not diminished. In fact it has grown. One should be deeply concerned about the diminishing observance of humanitarian principles by governments in many parts of the world. Many of the poorest countries, particularly in Africa, have long traditions of hospitality toward refugees. But even in some of these, the past two years have seen refugees forcibly turned away from the borders of states where they sought asylum, or forced to return home to unsafe conditions. We have seen humanitarian agencies denied access to people in great need, governments unwilling to separate fighters from refugees, and wanton disregard for the civilian character of refugee camps.