the united states should suspend all asistance to pakistan

==Introduction==It appears this will, sadly, be a short debate. I never really got to go to a tournament with this topic, so I suppose I'm at somewhat of a disadvantage. :) Sorry for the bad judges, Con. It happens to everyone. :POh, and as agreed, I will only post my own contentions and arguments. Some how I will summarize and refute in the last round.... xD==Argumentation==Contention 1: Aid fails when used in Pakistan. The Telegraph recently stated in 2012 that aid workers, who are/were being sent to Pakistan are/were being kidnapped by local terrorists and gunmen [1]. Some of these workers are even being released in exchange for the release of terrorist soldiers, bolstering extremist groups. Both the Congressional Research Service and the Los Angeles Times found that due to Pakistan’s mistrust of US aid, a large amount of aid isn’t even delivered to the people who need it [2]. Other ways that aid is wasted is attributed to lost resources, theft, and a general inability to manage large amounts of funding [2]. Congressional Research Service noted that corruption in Pakistan is high – it was rated in 2010 by the Berlin-based Transparency International (an organization that tracks global corruption trends) 143rd out of 178 countries [2]. Need I say more? The aid that we are giving them is increasing dependency and corruption. Much of the aid doesn’t even reach the intended people, as it is taken by corrupt politicians[5]Up to 80% of all aid goes to contractors, says one source [10]. Not to mention the fact that the average life of a Pakistani hasn’t changed at all, even with the steady flow of aid we are giving them [4]. Common people are still struggling to gain access to basic needs – such as education or health facilities [4]. Foreign aid has nearly had no positive effect on the development or growth of Pakistan’s economy.Foreign aid doesn’t actually help to promote democracy within Pakistan, and in fact, aid can lead to negative effects on the development of more democracies. Empirical data from Djankov (2006) discovered that aid doesn't promote, but worsens democracy [14]. Despite corruption, economic mismanagement, etc, aid allows governments to continue their practices. Also, studies have shown that there cannot be a correlation between the increase of aid and the increase of democracy [15].The study states that reliance on local resources can prove to be better than foreign aid [3]. On the other hand, outside aid can increase "rent-seeking" and cripple economic development. Also, foreign aid can lead to increased dependency and possibly hinder the development of the economy [5].It is possible, perhaps even likely, that Pakistan's condition will improve after we withdraw aid.Contention 2: Pakistan is a doubtful ally.There are many cases where Pakistan's actions have proved that, at the best, they are not allies.One example would be the IPI pipeline. The general plan to build the IPI pipeline would strengthen Iran's importance in gas/energy markets in Asia [6]. Pakistan has tried to perhaps even accelerate the building of the IPI pipeline, while the US have demonstrated their obvious opposition to the pipelines [6].Pakistan is also becoming increasingly inhospitable to the US due to drone attacks. The general public has grown hostile towards US attacks, because of the many innocent lives lost [7].Pew Surveys found that 69% of the citizens of Pakistan view the USA as an enemy, and 73% see America as unfavorable. The US public image in Pakistan is obviously bad.Public support for the use of an army to combat extremists have also been steadily declining [8].However, it is not only Pakistan that has been 'unfaithful'. Pakistani leaders have grown angry at America's support of the quickly growing India [6]. Other accounts include the "sale of U.S. military hardware and provision of civilian nuclear technology assistance to India" [6] and Obama's endorsement of a permanent seat in the UN for New Delhi. India is seen as the greatest threat to Pakistan - a majority of 57% [8]. In the eyes of Pakistanis, the USA is teaming up with their greatest enemy. No wonder why they support our enemies, extremists, lol.Contention 3: Chances of DeathtLittle known fact - aid can increase the chances of a war."In some circumstances external aid can fill so great a proportion of civilian needs for food, shelter, safety, and health services that significant local resources are thereby freed up for the pursuit of warr. This economic substitution effect of aid has a further political impact. When external aid agencies assume responsibility for civilian survival, warlords tend to define their responsibility and accountability only in terms of military control. Even if they started with a commitment to peacetime political leadership, as the international aid community takes over the tasks of feeding and providing health services and shelter for civilians these military-oriented leaders increasingly relinquish responsibility for civilian welfare. They focus on military ends and, over time, define their roles solely in terms of physical control (and the violent attainment and maintenance of that control). As this occurs, warriors struggling for victory over space and people lose all interest and competence in civilian affairs and become increasingly ill prepared to assume broad, responsible leadership in a post war period" [11]. Self-explainable - aid shifts the responsibility of leaders and allow them to wage war.Furthermore, aid can be exploited and be twisted to benefit corrupt local leaders, who may end up harming vulnerable and defenseless groups, even if the original intention of the aid is good [12]. The best example of developmental aid going bad would be Rwanda. "...development aid can exacerbate social tensions, encourage bad policy making, make governments less accountable to voters, intensify competition for resources, and feed processes of structural violence in a country, ultimately empowering the very elites who benefit from exploiting marginalized segments of the country..." [12/13]. In Rwanda's situation, the aid that was sent directly resulted in a corrupt and genocidal government slaughtering an ethnicity. ==Conclusion==I'm running out of space, so I'll stop here.In the end, aid is just a means to allow Pakistan, already corrupt, to futher cast themselves into a failed, problematic state. Certainly, aid is not the way to solve this issue. If anything, aid should be withdrawn - it would help both Pakistan and the US.==Sources== [1] http://www.telegraph.co.uk...[2] http://fpc.state.gov...[3] http://www.waset.org...[4] http://www.pide.org.pk...[5] http://www.ibtimes.com...[6] http://www.ips-dc.org...[7] http://www.csmonitor.com...[8] http://www.pewglobal.org...[9] http://www.dawn.com...[10] http://www.washingtonmonthly.com...[11] Mary Anderson, President of the Collaborative for Development Action, Inc, DO NO HARM: HOW AID CAN SUPPORT PEACE OR WAR, 1999, p. 49-50[12] http://reliefweb.int...[13] http://books.google.com...[14] http://probeinternational.org...[15] http://conferences.wcfia.harvard.edu...