The Instigator
Con (against)
7 Points
The Contender
Pro (for)
0 Points

On balance, the rise of China is beneficial to the interests of the United States.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 1 vote the winner is...
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/11/2013 Category: Politics
Updated: 5 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,378 times Debate No: 31177
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (3)
Votes (1)




RD 1 --> acceptance
RD 2 --> arguments
RD 3 --> refutations and conclusion


I accept your challenge and look forward to it.
Debate Round No. 1


Hello Judge, my name is (X) and my team NEGATES today’s topic…

Resolved: On balance, the rise of China is beneficial to the interests of the United States.

Before we present our main arguments, we’d like provide a proper framework for today’s debate…

Our team defines….

“United States interests” this phrase refers whether an idea achieves our goals such as influence in key markets, worldwide prosperity of citizens, and secure defense of the US and its allies. (US DoD)

“rise of China” as China’s ongoing rapid military, political, and economic advances over the past 30 years (International Monetary Fund) international organization which promotes internal trade, economic stability

“soft power” as a persuasive approach to international relations, typically involving the use of economic or cultural influence. (Joseph Nye) American political scientist - Harvard University

An observation we would like is that the topic must be viewed from a net benefits standpoint, which means the outcome of the debate will be based on which team weighs out possible arguments meaning which team can benefit the world the most. Also, we would like to remind you that China is still undergoing its rise and contentions should be weighed based on possible future effects.

With that being said, I would now like to move on to my 3 main contentions…

Contention 1: Foreign Policy Strategy affects U.S. in political and economic standpoints
Our first contention is that China’s soft power can damage U.S. foreign policy
  • Shanthi Kalathil, a professor at Georgetown University confirms this by stating that China has rapidly shifted attention towards Africa and Southeast Asia, areas in which the U.S. has had shaky relationships historically. [1]
Subpoint A: Relationships with Africa:
  • Joanne Wagner, a reporter for the National Defense Organization, says that Sino-African trade has burgeoned—from $10 billion in 2000 to more than $108 billion by 2008, and recognizes in a report the potential harms of China’s interactions with African countries “Awash with cash, the Chinese are investing in extensive infrastructure projects; spending billions on oil, copper, and cocoa-secured loans to African nations; spreading Chinese culture across the continent....China poses a genuine threat to U.S. interests in Africa. Attempts to secure Africa’s resource wealth while the benefits related to those resources fail to reach local populations are potentially destabilizing and a cause for concern.” What the report is saying is that, China is making peace with U.S. allies which will result in less prosperity for the U.S. as the countries stop communicating with the U.S. [2]
Subpoint B: Relationships with Southeast Asia
  • In 2010, China started a major partnership with Southeast Asia with the ASEAN-China Free Trade Agreement where there are zero tariffs on the goods. Currently, China is heavily exporting goods to these countries, explaining how they rose 20.1% percent in export increases and successfully knocking off the U.S. as the third biggest exporter in the area and will surpass Japan as the top exporter to the area by 2015. As the dominating economy in the agreement, China has full power over the region and as exporting will grow, these countries will be more dependent on China for economic sustainment and will create LESS interest in U.S. affairs. [3]
The impact here is that as China cuts off economic ties from America to countries in Asia and Africa, it gains economic ties with those countries and steals trade and business from us. In the future, China could use this economic relation to strengthen political and military ties, which could turn more countries under China’s soft power and under their influence. Clearly, this is detrimental and is against our interests.

Contention 2: Military results in instability
Our second contention is that China’s growing military challenges the U.S. and regional powers in the area, due to increased funding and development of new weapons.
  • The Heritage Foundation says “The increase in China’s defense spending, atop last year’s 12.2 percent increase, highlights that China’s defense spending is now larger than that of all other Asian nations combined.” This is especially concerning, if you considering the budget is greater than Japan, the world’s third largest economy and the ongoing war conflict between North and South Korea. But, the real concern is that China doesn’t include special ops and nuclear missile spending in their reports, and as foreign defense experts ( Mike Mullen) say, it could be 50% higher if these expenditures are counted. [4]
  • Mike Mullen, the highest ranking military officer in the United States, also admitted that weapons such as China’s newly developed J-20 aircrafts are pointed towards the U.S., disproving all claims that the U.S. and China are militaristic allies [5]
  • Pentagon is recognizing this, calling China’s motives to try and further relationships between the U.S. and other Asian countries. Furthermore, Reuters ( international news agency) now says that China will achieve military equality with the U.S. in 15-20 years. [6]
Judge, you have to recognize how serious the impacts of all these moves can be. If any conflict with China occurs in the future, China is well armed to take down the U.S. in the East Pacific, in a few years, with the possibility of that this occurring in the near future due to ongoing military cuts. As the dominant military power in Asia, China can do what it pleases, and can possibly manipulate other countries to bring advantages to themselves, resulting in a huge loss for the U.S., regardless of whether or not we go to war with China. From both standpoints, this would be regarded as detrimental to U.S. interests.

Contention 3: Environmental problems from China’s rise
Our third and final contention is that China’s rise is creating environmental problems for the future that can harm global interests, including those of the United States.
  • As China has grown over the past 10 years, it has emitted more CO2 than the U.S. and China combined. This is a huge reason why world CO2 emission rates are up from 20,000 million tons to over 30,000 million tons in the past ten years, setting back any U.S. progress of mitigating climate change. [7]
  • A study from UC Berkeley concludes in a report that China ”... generates about 70% of its electricity with coal-fired power plants, creating large amounts of particulate pollution. Dust storms crossing China pick up these particles and carry them across the Pacific to the U.S.” The effect has clearly been shown, as over 29% of pollution presently in California has come from China. [8]
  • This is a huge reason why American Lung Association recognizes that over 10 million people in the Los Angeles Area are at a risk from air pollution and an additional 3,000,000 are at risk in the San Diego area, proving that China’s air pollution is having a serious effect on American welfare [9]
The impact is clear: as China is still rising, it will continue to pollute more to keep up with worldwide manufacturing. These alarming CO2 emission rates would cancel out the world’s initiative to mitigate climate change, and if not so, would not only affect U.S. interests, but entire global interests for their own countries. China hasn’t taken any steps to try and combat these very likely effects, and by not doing so, could prove to be detrimental in the future through extinction, showing a clear loss in long term benefits.

My sources will be posted in comments because of the limitation of space
sorry for the inconvinience


sorry, but my computer which i had my case on isn't working, so i won't be able to do this debate. I'll accept another debate like this if you want later.
Debate Round No. 2


Its ok
i can open up a new debate later
Debate Round No. 3
3 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Posted by awesomeness 5 years ago
u too
Posted by Tim98 5 years ago
Good luck awesomeness.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Subutai 5 years ago
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Reasons for voting decision: FF.