THBT trade and investment in Africa are more critical than inter-nation aid to overcome poverty

I. Debate Analysis: Definition Problem

Case Study: UIIA VS UNNES (Quarter Final IVED 10 Purwokerto)

Motion: THBT trade and investment in Africa are more critical than inter-nation aid to overcome poverty

1^st Affirmative:

We define trade and investment as trade and investment in Africa to increase industry and manufacture for a better development, whereas inter-nation aid in here would mean as Government to Goverment aid or G to G. The condition in Africa with the abundant resources and cheap human resources is an ideal place for investments in industries and more critically, to fight poverty. Poverty is the main problem in Africa and is ravaging countries and provinces in the continent. The solutions provided in this debate must first face this problem before proven to its effectivity.

I as the first speaker will explain about the nature of the trade and investment while the second speaker will explain regarding the future implications. Our house believes that the only way to stop this illness is through sustainabiliy in development through investment in manufacture and industries. To make this even more possible, we propose for a reduce in tariffs for African-based products to allow competitiveness in the international free trade. When the products are participating in the free market, then the sustainability of African industries in ensured, especially with the reduce in tariffs. Through the investment, made possible by the existing resources, employment will cherish and the number of Gross Per Capita Income would increase in line with the increasing industries and manufacture. In the end, poverty will slowly be eradicated with the increase of employment through industries made possible by the trade and investmets.

1^st Negative:

The Affirmative is neglecting what is currently happening in Africa which makes it impossible for their proposal. As we can see, the current fundamental problem in Africa right now as we speak is basic neccesities issue, in which basic fundamental neccesities such as food, health and shelters are very much lacking. This is the urgent problem which needs to be solved before any investments can come in and only possible from the inter-nation aid, due to the urgent nature. People in Africa are afflicted with HIV and AIDS and are in poor condition to be able to do any work even if provided with investments. This condition can only be cured with the presence of inter-nation aid, since these people are not in any condition to generate income by themselves.

I as the first speaker will explain regarding the severity of the basic neccesity problem while the second speaker will elaborate further regarding the the impact of this basic neccesity issue to the African people. Ladies and gentlemen, the condition in Africa right now is very poor and even less than basic. The people are lacking food, health and shelters and are dependent to the international aid to support their life. They are not in any condition to work or to create jobs because of these issues. Before any progress can happen, first the basic neccesity issues must be answered first to solve current critical condition that defines African people. As long as the African people are still facing the basic neccesities problem, then it is impossible for them to develop further. That is why we believe that aid is the best solution for facing the basic neccesities problem.

2^nd Affirmative

The conditions explained by the house of the negative explains regarding what we call as livelihood issues which comprise of the matters as they have provided; food, health and shelters. However, the livelihood issues are the issues handled by NGOes or Non Govermental Organizations, and thus cannot be considered as G-to-G aid as we have stated before. These livelihood issues do not fall into the responsibility of G-to-G aid, since there are already institutions such as the NGOes that handle it. NGOes such as the Red Cross and UNDP handles with these livelihood issues since it falls in their job description, yet however, it is simply not the nature of G-to-G aid. Therefore, until this moment, negative side of the house has failed to defend G-to-G aid. Furthermore, the negative also has failed to answer our point regarding sustainability. If they believe in international aid so much, then the question is how sustainable it is for the African countries until they can be independent from the aids.

Now I am going to explain my share of the case, which is the future implication of trade and investment in Africa for the African people. Ladies and gentlemen, the presence of investors to support trade in industries and manufactures would boost public service in Africa such as better seaports and airports since it is inherently needed by the investors to commute back and forth to Africa. This development would not only bring betterment to the Afrtican countries, but also to the African people, since the process of development would absorb employees and thus creating sustainability for income for the African people.

2^nd Negative

Ladies and gentlemen, again and again the government is neglecting the critical issue in Africa as we speak which is the lack of basic neccesities for the African people. They still havent answered the question of the impossibility of development with the presence of the sick and hungry people, as we have underlined that the people are just to hungry and sick to work. That is why seaports and airports cannot be built and investments in any form in Africa cannot occur until this point regarding the lack of basic neccesities is answered.

Ladies and gentlemen, now please allow me to launch into my split. As my first speaker has stated to us all that Africans are inherently poor and infested with HIV. This damages the country’s existing human resources and would only impede growth and development unless this problem is solved first. Due to their urgent nature, trade and investment is not quick enough to answer this problem, and only aid from international countries can be considered as effective enough to anwer this issue. Trade and investment cannot answer hunger and health issues, ladies and gentlemen. Only international aid is quick enough to provide a fast response for the demmanding Africans.

II. Discussion Group

Question 1: Which house has the upper hand in the debate? What is the main reason of your verdict? (if possible with margin range)

Question 2: What is the main issue needed to be supported by both teams’ proposal? Have any of the houses managed to provide sufficient defence?

Question 3: Has the background of African countries elaborated clearly by any of the houses? Why has this become a severe problem in this debate?

Question 4: In your opinion, how to improve the quality of the debate?

III. Assesment (Coach Only)

One of the main problems of the debate is the insufficient matters in form of the current condition in Africa. The Affirmative team did not explain this point, while it is neccesary to justify their points of how come trade and investment can really penetrate and solve poverty amidst this inherent problematic current condition. The negative only stated the problem produced from the basic neccesities without touching other significant problems, which may very well be the underlying reason of the basic neccesities problem and thus made it impossible for trade and investment to occur. One side of the house shouldve mentioned the war and security issues in Africa which is one of the key factor of the basic neccesities problem and also hinder investment, such as the Moslem insurgency in Somalia, Tribal war in Uganda, war between Ethiopia and Erithreia, etcs. Other factor is clean governance, corruption level is very high in African countries in which many of the money was dislocated to purchase arms or to support specific political parties.

The second problem is the lack of definition regarding G-to-G aid which trapped the negative side case into livelihood programs commonly conducted by NGOs. It is quite unfortunate that this point was not addressed properly and clarified by the negative side. Livelihood is not the matter exclusively only for NGOes. Government can also dwell in livelihood issues as a form of foreign aid, through in most cases the aid is given to specific implementing agencies to ensure good result. These implementing agencies are called IGO (International Govermental Organization), such as USAID, US Red Cross and Americare from USA, AUSAID from Australia, Turkish Red Crescent, France Red Cross, etcs. Two or more government can form an alliance to provide aid, and this is called TGO (Trans-Governmental Organization), most of which included in the United Nations, such as WHO, ILO, UNDP, UNICEF, etcs. So basically, with enough reading, both sides should’ve known that Government usually offers aid to other countries through an implementing agency to ensure good result, and this point has failed to be elaborated by the government in their definition and failed to be clarified by the negative team also.

The third problem is the clarification issue through proper linking. None of the house actually explained ow each of their proposals might solve poverty. Affirmative team never explained the process from having trade and investment to poverty eradication while facing the basic neccesities issue in the same time. Negative also never explained how come aid might solve basic neccesities issue and thus solve poverty problem. The theme lines from both sides are both untouched and unproven in the same time.

The fourth problem is elaboration issue. Clearly, the elaboration was very poor in this debate in which A-R-E-L was not fully implemented in the arguments. Affirmative team may have asserted that trade and investment through free market may provide betterment, yet they did not exlpain the process how how trade and investment can really absorb employment amidst war, corruption, health and education issues and how come trade and investment can be conducted in an area with no sufficient economic foundation which in the end may be worthy of fighting poverty. The reality aspect from the affirmative team’s argument was very much neglected. Whereas for the negative team, their team was too persistent in defending basic neccesities issue without properly elaborating what is the cause of basic neccesities issue and how come basic neccesities is that urgent to be solved first and how come it should be separated from trade and investment. Negative also should have explained that trade and investment is impossible without fixing the current urgent problems first through international aid.

The fifth problem and the one with the most weigh, which finally determines the winner of this round, is response issue. The negative team clearly did not support G-to-G, but rather, jumped into basic neccesities issue without explaining the logical link. Not only that, they have also failed to provide sufficient response to the point of sustainability, and also the affirmative’s proposal regarding opening Africa for free market. The affrimative team, however, has also failed to address current issue in Africa and jumped straight into the solution without explaining what is being solved by the solution. When the negative pointed out regarding basic neccesities issue, there wasn’t sufficient response from the affirmative toward this point.

*Suggestion for coaches:

- Provide the debaters with link to sources that may help improve the debate.

- Make an example for each point in the assesment, especially for the elaboration point.

- The margin for the debate is 1-3 margins for the affirmative team.

IV. Working Group

Task I : Find related matter(s) that may help improving the debate!

Task II: Strategize the debate better by analyzing the discussed points in this module and incorporate all of the discussed points into a better speech under the same motion!

Task III: Have a new and improved debate under the same motion!

Task IV (Coach only): Assess the debate and determine participant’s perception of the previously discussed points. Provide constructive criticism!

Taken from

http://anomali.or.id/modules.html