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

The Sahel region should have development over military aid by the USA

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
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: 12/31/2013 Category: Politics
Updated: 6 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 4,892 times Debate No: 43197
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (5)
Votes (1)




First round is for acceptance
Second case
third rebuttal
4th 2nd rebuttal
5th conclusion
Debate Round No. 1



The US is actually increasing Islam tension

Crisis group 2005

The prospects for growth in Islamist activity in the region - up to and including terrorism - are delicately balanced. Muslim populations in West Africa, as elsewhere, express opposition to U.S., policy in the Middle East, and there has been a parallel increase. The U.S. military is a new factor in this delicate balance. To avoid creating problems it needs to be folded into a more balanced approach. If this keeps going there will be more violence leading to US death.

Sahal is a very poor region September 2013

The combined threat of drought, high food prices, displacement and chronic poverty have affected the livelihoods of farmers, pastoralists and agropastoralists in 2012. Today, more than 10.3 million people, including those who did not receive sufficient support for their livelihoods, are food and nutrition insecure, and extremely vulnerable to external shocks. To counter this we need to provide early, rapid action is needed to prevent further deterioration of the food security situation and avoid further deterioration of livelihoods in the Sahel. In addition to emergency and rehabilitation activities, medium to longer term interventions are required to reverse the cycle of food shortages and crises in the Sahel and address structural vulnerabilities. If we can do this we can provide as reported by a safe and healthy enviroment.

US entering hurts economy
Think Africa Press February 12 2013
Peter Dorrie

US interest is more recent and has to be seen largely in the context of the post-9/11 War on Terror. With its large, sparsely inhabited and only loosely governed spaces, the Sahara was always seen as a potential terrorist haven by military planners in the Pentagon. This impression only hardened with a string of kidnappings by groups, some claiming ties to al-Qaeda, starting in 2005. This resulted in at least $500 million being spent by the US on training and supplying regional military forces, as well as the deployment of spy planes and " to a limited extent " Special Forces operations. The US, for its part, has made it known that it will dispatch drones " unarmed and strictly for surveillance purposes " most likely from an as-yet undefined location in Niger. The US military will also likely step up its efforts in training and supplying its regional partners, including Mauritania, Niger and Nigeria. This will cost takpayers 500 billion dollars in an already weak economy.


I negate the resolution Resolved: Developmental assistance should be prioritized over military aid in the Sahel region of Africa.
I support this stance with the following contentions

1) Military aid paves the way for developmental assistance

A) Majority of these countries are failed states
Seyla Benhabib the chair of political sciences at Yale University stated in her study that "if we do not clean up the region, developmental assistance will not be effective. Military aid is a necessity in order for developmental assistance to be effective. Logically if we want the infrastructure and developmental assistance to last it would be a requirement that we clean up the area first or else the terrorist organizations that want more of the resources will find a way to get it, often violently. This would logically lead to lawlessness over whatever resources were grown or given to the region."

B) Countries can not develop efficiently without military aid
We have to look at the time-frame. Even if it is the case the that poverty is the underlying cause of conflict, it would take a very long time to solve poverty and other potential root causes of conflict in the Sahel. In the short-term, it is essential to provide military aid to prevent the outbreak of violence. There are significant security problems now, Alexander Neill, Masters degree in African Studies from Stanford University, concluded. He wrote that these countries were failed states because they were simply not able to balance security and development.

2) Prioritizing developmental assistance creates foreign dependency
A) Majority of economy is relying on foreign aid
In a study done by Nathan Allen 12.3% of all Sub Saharan countries GDP came from foreign aid, 70% of all National savings, and 50% of imports. This shows that if a dropout of foreign aid were to come the countries who are so reliant on foreign aid would not be able to fulfill half of their budgetary commitments.

I urge a con vote
Debate Round No. 2


On A. First lets start with the fact of how many people are hungry. Last year, over 18 million people in the Sahel region of West Africa were affected by a severe food crisis caused by drought, a failure of several crops, and sharp rises in food prices.

With the current conflict in Mali, more than 350,000 people have been forced to flee their homes, both in Mali and its neighbors in Sahel, adding more pressure on already vulnerable communities.

The lives of over 1 million children were at risk from severe malnutrition. Communities across the Sahel suffered (and malnutrition rates remain dangerously high) but a major humanitarian operation, acting earlier than ever before, managed to protect the lives and livelihoods of millions of people. This all from which supports the Sahel region.

B. While military aid may be effective again people are dying form food issues. So right now the more important issue is food. Again 18 million issues are effected by this food crisis. So we need to focus on food and assists them by food before anything else

2. Yes this mat create dependency. If we provide aid to them in military form they will also be dependent. This is just common sense. So this argument is irrelevant because in both they will depend on us.


My opponent practically just stated that DA is a temporary solution to what may become a permanent problem, quite frankly that's not affordable. Now the main reason this region is stripped of all resources is because of drought. Now you can't tell me DA is going to end the droughts? Let's look at this logically here even though yes DA Is vital it can't be prioritized otherwise these countries are going to starve as soon as our aid is removed. I want to further my position with these next arguments.

Not enough resources in DA are being put in the right places
Speaking at the New Partnership for African Development (NEPAD) meeting in Abuja, Nigeria, in December 2003, the former British secretary of state for international development, Lynda Chalker, noted that 40 percent of the wealth created in Africa is invested outside the continent. "If you bring the funds back into infrastructure, the economies of African countries would be much better than what they are today," she said. The chairman of the session and president of the African Business Round Table, Alhaji Bamanga Tukur, agreed that indeed Foreign Aid will not pull Africa out of poverty.

Military Aid supports countries development
Erastus Mwencha, chair of the African Union said in July 2013, "France in no way wanted to do anything linked to the past or to militarism or paternalism but on the contrary to give Africa and in this case Mali every chance to become a democratic independent nation, which can ensure its own development." The French intervention which then led to the countries first election gave Mali a chance to restore its democracy by removing insurgents from the northern part of the country.

African Union recognizes aid has been ineffective in the past
According to the Cato institute Africa's economy grew only 5% last year. Short of the UN's goal of 7%. Estimates suggest it will take nearly 150 years to achieve the UN's millennium goal to end poverty. Not very effective at all?
Debate Round No. 3


First on the temporary solution. From the Sahel region currently has 11.3 million people that are in risk of starvation so a temporary solution is indeed needed. My opponent has no stats to show how this is unaffordable. Also later the fact that this wouldn't stop droughts was used. Well military assistance won't either so that argument is defeated. While providing assistance this will get people on their feet which reported their already fighting hard. This little assistance will give them what they need to be function fully again. Also DA can mean anything it could mean disadvantage like it does in debate or Denmark association. So with this we have no idea what DA means. For the sake of the debate I'll keep arguing even though I just defeated everything my opponent said. Also my opponent used the UN's goals and this irrelevant. The resolution pertains only to the USA not the UN. Thanks to my opponent for a great debate.


My opponent doesn't understand that obviously DA is going to cost money? It's literally defined as the giving of resources to develop a countries economy. It costs money so I am not sure what they are talking about. Quite frankly if the problem is gonna be solved for a week, alright that's great but honestly does nothing.. DA means developmental assistance? I think that's obvious. Also considering the US is part of the UN it does pertain but all I said was that it wasn't reaching the UNs goal.

Anyways going to further my stance by saying I understand we need some sort of DA to save lives, however we need to start looking towards a permanent solution and that's through developing these countries and making them independent nations. That's the most effective way. We are only going to see this through the prioritization of military aid that way DA can even be successful.
Debate Round No. 4


I never said that developmental assistance wouldn't cost money just said it wouldn't cost too much. Also all I have to say that development is more important. Which I have in that with aid prioritized we will be providing aid for a bunch of dead starved people. With that I urge you to vote aff.


alevan forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 5
5 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Posted by colebond97 6 years ago
Classic milking of for the benefit of your PF case. loving tit
Posted by alevan 6 years ago
Dang dude why was the time only one hour? Never gave me time to even type my thing I was like trying to type it and I ran out of time. Whatever
Posted by Spamkybones 6 years ago
After debate send me your case
Posted by Spamkybones 6 years ago
Posted by alevan 6 years ago
Are you a PF debater?
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by SPENCERJOYAGE14 6 years ago
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:10 
Reasons for voting decision: FF.

By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use.