Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Federalism Adv
Federalism Adv
Indian Federalism Good
Federalism Adv...........................................................................................................................................................1
Federalism Adv...............................................................................................................................1
Indian Federalism Good- Economy FL ......................................................................................................................5
Indian Federalism Good- Economy FL .......................................................................................5
Indian Federalism Good- Ethnic Conflict...................................................................................................................6
Indian Federalism Good- Ethnic Conflict...................................................................................6
Indian Federalism Good- General...............................................................................................................................7
Indian Federalism Good- General................................................................................................7
Indian Federalism Good- Economy............................................................................................................................8
Indian Federalism Good- Economy.............................................................................................8
Indian Federalism Good- Solves Ethnic Conflict.......................................................................................................9
Indian Federalism Good- Solves Ethnic Conflict........................................................................9
Indian Federalism Bad- Spurs Ethnic Conflict.........................................................................................................10
Indian Federalism Bad- Spurs Ethnic Conflict.........................................................................10
Indian Federalism Bad- Leads to Conflict................................................................................................................11
Indian Federalism Bad- Leads to Conflict.................................................................................11
Indian Federalism Bad- Fails India...........................................................................................................................12
Indian Federalism Bad- Fails India...........................................................................................12
Indian Federalism Bad- Never Increase....................................................................................................................13
Indian Federalism Bad- Never Increase....................................................................................13
Indian Federalism Bad- Collapse approaching.........................................................................................................14
Indian Federalism Bad- Collapse approaching.........................................................................14
Indian Federalism Bad- Won’t Model US 1/2...........................................................................................................15
Indian Federalism Bad- Won’t Model US 1/2...........................................................................15
Indian Federalism Bad- Won’t Model US 2/2...........................................................................................................16
Indian Federalism Bad- Won’t Model US 2/2...........................................................................16
Nigerian Federalism Good- Stability FL..................................................................................................................17
Nigerian Federalism Good- Stability FL...................................................................................17
Nigerian Federalism Good- Ethnic Conflict.............................................................................................................18
Nigerian Federalism Good- Ethnic Conflict..............................................................................18
Nigerian Federalism Good- Squo Fails ....................................................................................................................19
Nigerian Federalism Good- Squo Fails .....................................................................................19
Nigerian Federalism Good- Squo Solves..................................................................................................................20
WNDI 2008 2
Federalism Adv
Indian federalism is very corrupted on a local level, thus failing the Indian people
Frontline, “Derailing decentralization.” 12/27/04 http://india.eu.org/2133.html
The fears about the future of the decentralisation experiment in Kerala are coming true. People are
staying away from the gram and ward sabhas in the invigorated panchayats, municipalities and corporations
in the State and, as a result, the most exciting programme to empower citizens is seemingly running into
trouble. In the majority of local bodies, attendance registers are being fudged regularly to fake the
quorum at gram/ward sabha meetings. Genuine local governance by the people, thought to be a dream
come true in Kerala under democratic decentralisation experiment, is thus being tampered with,
knowingly or unknowingly.
WNDI 2008 13
Federalism Adv
The Indian federalist system is different from the US model, thus Indian modeling can not
occur
S.D. Muni. http://www.sagepub.com/authorDetails.nav?contribId=500667Jawaharlal Nehru University. 1996.
“Ethnicity and power in the contemporary world.” 1996
http://www.unu.edu/unupress/unupbooks/uu12ee/uu12ee00.htm#Contents
In 1992, the Sikkim Chief Minister and his regional party, the Sikkim Sangram Parishad, asked for membership in
the North-East Council (of NorthEast States and Tribal Areas) for this same purpose.31 Some scholars have
described the federal system in India as one of "coalition and administration," or one with a "high degree of
collaborative partnership."32 In addition, both at the central and state levels, a consciously followed
approach to preserve and promote the cultural specificities of diverse groups has helped such groups identify
with the national mainstream.33 All this has contributed to the secularization of ethnicity and has thus helped
strengthen integrative forces.
WNDI 2008 16
Federalism Adv
B. Nigerian dissolution would be devastating – it would trigger massive oil shocks and the
U.S. would intervene in an attempt to protect oil supplies
Dan Gardner, “Western world ignoring demise of Nigeria”, The Ottawa Citizen, 3/23/06, lexis
Imagine a country that is one of the world's largest exporters of oil. Imagine a country in which ethnic and
sectarian violence has killed thousands and driven millions from their homes, a country so fragile that a recent report commissioned by
the CIA concluded there is a good chance it will collapse. Imagine a country that Osama bin Laden has declared to be "ripe for
liberation." This country is not in the Middle East. It's also not on the minds of western media or politicians, despite the
almost unimaginable havoc that would be unleashed if the feared collapse comes. It is Nigeria. A British invention, Nigeria is a
country made up of some 250 ethnic groups and countless tribal subdivisions sharing only a weak national identity. It is also a
country of intense and growing religious passions whose 132 million people are divided almost equally between Christians and
Muslims. Violent earthquakes can erupt along any of these fault lines. In February, Muslims in the north murdered 50 Christians.
Christians in the south retaliated by murdering Muslims. Thousands fled in terror. These latest clashes started with protests against the
Danish cartoons, but most have less exotic origins. People fight for land or God. They fight to control local governments. They fight to
avenge insults. In the Niger Delta, they fight for control of oil. Dozens die in one clash. Hundreds in another. It's low-grade warfare but
the toll steadily climbs. By one estimate, 20,000 Nigerians have been killed in fighting since 1999, when democracy was restored after
16 years of military rule. And for every corpse, more than a hundred people have been driven from their homes. "The magnitude, scope,
character and dimension of internally displaced persons in Nigeria is frightening," declared a report released last week by Nigeria's
National Commission for Refugees. Since 1999, the commission says, three million people have fled. Their plight represents one of the
gravest humanitarian crises in the world. It is also one of the most unrecognized. The bloody clashes in Nigeria almost never rate a
mention in the western media and western politicians pay even less attention to the country than they do to other African hot spots. As a
result, very few people in Canada realize how dangerous the situation has become. "While currently Nigeria's leaders are locked in a bad
marriage that all dislike but dare not leave," states a 2005 report commissioned by the CIA, an event such as a coup attempt could
spark open warfare and "outright collapse." AN OIL SHOCK The consequences would be immense. "If
Nigeria were to become a failed state," the report concluded, "it could drag down a large part of the West
African region." Millions would flee. There's also the matter of oil. Even now, world oil prices jump every time a bullet is
fired in the Niger Delta. If Nigeria were to collapse, there could be an oil shock the like of which we haven't
seen since the Iranian Revolution. And since the long-term energy strategy of the United States assumes rising
African oil production, chaos in the Niger Delta would almost certainly bring in the Marines.
C. This scenario is ripe for escalation into a great power war that goes nuclear
Dr. Jeffrey Deutsch, founder of the Rabid Tiger Project, a political risk consulting and related research firm, 11-
18-02, http://www.rabidtigers.com/rtn/newsletterv2n9.html
The Rabid Tiger Project believes that a nuclear war is most likely to start in Africa. Civil wars in the Congo (the
country formerly known as Zaire), Rwanda, Somalia and Sierra Leone, and domestic instability in Zimbabwe, Sudan and other
countries, as well as occasional brushfire and other wars (thanks in part to "national" borders that cut across tribal ones) turn into a
really nasty stew. We've got all too many rabid tigers and potential rabid tigers, who are willing to push the button rather than risk being seen as
wishy-washy in the face of a mortal threat and overthrown. Geopolitically speaking, Africa is open range. Very few countries in Africa are
beholden to any particular power. South Africa is a major exception in this respect - not to mention in that she also probably already has
the Bomb. Thus, outside powers can more easily find client states there than, say, in Europe where the political
lines have long since been drawn, or Asia where many of the countries (China, India, Japan) are powers unto themselves and don't need
any "help," thank you. Thus, an African war can attract outside involvement very quickly. Of course, a proxy war
alone may not induce the Great Powers to fight each other. But an African nuclear strike can ignite a much broader conflagration, if the
other powers are interested in a fight. Certainly, such a strike would in the first place have been facilitated by outside help - financial,
scientific, engineering, etc. Africa is an ocean of troubled waters, and some people love to go fishing.
WNDI 2008 18
Federalism Adv
B. Impact: This scenario is ripe for escalation into a great power war that goes nuclear
Dr. Jeffrey Deutsch, founder of the Rabid Tiger Project, a political risk consulting and related research firm, 11-
18-02, http://www.rabidtigers.com/rtn/newsletterv2n9.html
The Rabid Tiger Project believes that a nuclear war is most likely to start in Africa. Civil wars in the Congo (the
country formerly known as Zaire), Rwanda, Somalia and Sierra Leone, and domestic instability in Zimbabwe, Sudan and other
countries, as well as occasional brushfire and other wars (thanks in part to "national" borders that cut across tribal ones) turn into a
really nasty stew. We've got all too many rabid tigers and potential rabid tigers, who are willing to push the button rather than risk
being seen as wishy-washy in the face of a mortal threat and overthrown. Geopolitically speaking, Africa is open range. Very few
countries in Africa are beholden to any particular power. South Africa is a major exception in this respect - not to mention in that she
also probably already has the Bomb. Thus, outside powers can more easily find client states there than, say, in
Europe where the political lines have long since been drawn, or Asia where many of the countries (China, India, Japan) are powers
unto themselves and don't need any "help," thank you. Thus, an African war can attract outside involvement very
quickly. Of course, a proxy war alone may not induce the Great Powers to fight each other. But an African nuclear strike can ignite a
much broader conflagration, if the other powers are interested in a fight. Certainly, such a strike would in the first place have been
facilitated by outside help - financial, scientific, engineering, etc. Africa is an ocean of troubled waters, and some people love to go
fishing.
WNDI 2008 25
Federalism Adv
Federalism Is Corrupt.
Alexei Sitnikov, senior researcher at the Institute of Open Economy in Moscow. “A Brief History of Russian
Federalism,” 2/4/05, Lexis
However strong the centralization trend might appear, the history of Russian federalism is hardly over. Many
of the current policy choices are made in an ad hoc manner, without broad societal discussion and consent.
The power vertical, so cherished by the administration, will begin to buckle under the weight of
corruption, popular dissent and administrative inefficiencies. Then the authorities will realize that
central control is not the best governing option. For now, the rules of the game have changed. But the
game itself is far from over.
WNDI 2008 40
Federalism Adv
Russian rejection of Democracy could lead to dangerous alliances with Iran, Syria, and
China
David Frum, Senior Editor at The American Prospect, Previously a Senior Writer at The Washington City Paper.
"Russian democracy is dying," 3/10/07, Lexis
But this explanation goes only so far. Even in the mid-1990s, only 25% of Russians regarded Western
democracy as the ideal system for Russia. Russians have been debilitated by 70- plus years of communism
into feelings of personal helplessness that leads them to crave a strong boss. Virtually every Russian
surveyed, 94%, said they felt they had zero influence on events in their country; 82% felt they bore no
responsibility. It's as if they are saying: Let Putin kill his enemies -- there's nothing we can do, and so
it's not our fault. As an institution, Russian democracy is dying. Inside the minds of the Russians, it is
already dead. We have no shortage of things to worry about in our troubled world: Islamic extremism,
Chinese aggression, European weakness, American isolation. Now add one more. A potentially great
power, endowed with vast energy wealth and inheriting a vast nuclear arsenal, is deliberately and with the
approval of the majority of its people turning its back on democracy and freedom. Instead of joining the
West, Russia is finding its way to dangerous alliances with Iran, Syria, China, and who knows what
other sinister forces. This grouping of anti-democratic states is extending its reach around the world -- even
perhaps to the suburbs of Washington D.C.
WNDI 2008 42
Federalism Adv
Their universal model of American federalism doesn’t solve Russian internal problems.
Evgueni Vladimirovich Pershin, second director of the Analytical Department of the Federation Council
Apparatus. Kazan Federalist. “Issues in the improvement of Russian federalism.” 2003.
<http://www.kazanfed.ru/en/publications/kazanfederalist/n8/4/>
All of this leads to the conclusion that federalism, as shown by Western experiences, is not a universal
solution for all internal political problems. Not all internal political problems can be solved through
federalization of the state. For instance, ethnic and confessional problems are such that they are not directly
connected with federal organization. There are many non-federal countries where such problems are
solved successfully through other means and methods.
WNDI 2008 43
Federalism Adv