My side of the house will argue that such a split would assuredly NOT be China's best interests for a range of sound and logical asons. We believe it's no exaggeration to say that that to do so now could potentially lead to the collapse of China as we know her today.
While our main argument will be based from China's perspective, considering the global implications of China's collapse will certainly be something we will bring to the table.
"Xinjiang, conventional Sinkiang, in full Uygur Autonomous Region of Xinjiang, officially Xinjiang Uygur Zizhiqu, Chinese (Pinyin) Xinjiang Weiwu’er Zizhiqu or (Wade-Giles romanization) Hsin-chiang Wei-wu-erh Tzu-chih-ch’ü, Uygur also spelled Uighur or Uyghur, autonomous region of China, occupying the northwestern corner of the country. It is bordered by the Chinese provinces ofQinghai and Gansu to the east, the Tibet Autonomous Region to the south,Afghanistan and the disputed territory of Kashmir to the southwest,Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan to the west, Kazakhstan to the northwest, Russia to the north, and Mongolia to the northeast. It is China’s largest political unit. Its capital is at Ürümqi (Wulumuqi).
Known to the Chinese as Xiyu (“Western Regions”) for centuries, the area became Xinjiang (“New Borders”) upon its annexation under the Qing (Manchu) dynasty in the 18th century. Westerners long called it ChineseTurkistan to distinguish it from Russian Turkistan. Xinjiang is an area of lonely, rugged mountains and vast desert basins. Its indigenous population of agriculturalists and pastoralists (principally Uighurs) inhabit oases strung out along the mountain foothills or wander the arid plains in search of pasturage. Since the establishment of firm Chinese control in 1949, serious efforts have been made to integrate the regional economy into that of the country, and these efforts have been accompanied by a great increase in the Han (Chinese) population there. The policy of the Chinese government is to allow the ethnic groups to develop and maintain their own cultural identities. However, the extent to which that policy has been successful in Xinjiang has been interpreted variously; ethnic tensions exist, especially between Uighurs and Han.
Area 635,900 square miles (1,646,900 square km). Pop. (2010) 21,813,334."
- Britannica.com
To be very clear here, there is no debate over whether this region belongs to China- it does, and has done for a long time. If independence is to be granted to Xinjiang, it will need to come from China. The real issue here is that the Ethnic Uighers, who currently make up roughly 45% of the population of the region, compared to the Han Chinese's 41% [ this PDF detailing the ethnic make up of the region] feel that they should be granted independence from China.
Our side argues that China should not grant this independence on the following grounds:
1. Economic Loss.
2. Resource Loss.
3. Sets a precedent.
4. Geo-Political instability.
1. Economic Loss:
Aside from the obvious economic loss that would come from China having to replace the resources it already gains from this region, (see the next section) it needs to be noted that China has invested heavily into this area developing urban areas and encouraging internal migration into the area. In 2013, China AgBank pledged to increase its investment in the area to the tune of loans extending to over 16 billion dollars. And most recently, the government has built a 23 billion dollar high speed train bringing Xinjiang that much closer to Beijing.
2. Resource Loss:
The Xinjiang region of China is resource rich. With almost 1.4 billion people, China has some serious resource drains and with a chunk of land approximately the same size as Iran, Xinjiang is far valuable to lose. The following list can be checked from a number of sources including this one.
- Grassland. Just over 40% of the total land area is suitable for agricultural development. This provides valuable meat, crops and timber for the rest of China.
- Water. Over 110 billion cubic metres of water, (Surface and Ground) not to mention an estimate 2,580 billion cubic metres of water locked away in Glaciers.
- Coal and Petroleum. Coal reserves estimated at 38% of the national total. Petroleum and Natural Gas reserves estimated at more than 25%of the national total.
- Mineral reserves. Significant reserves of Iron, Beryllium, Muscovite and Jade.
- China is bordered by more foreign nations than most and 8 of its 14 neighbours border the Xinjiang province. Many of these areas are hot beds of political and religious instability, for example, Afghanistan and Pakistan. As a communist country, Religious terrorism is something that China needs to constantly be on guard against. Xinjiang provides a buffer zone between these countries and China's valuable East. In fact the name literally means, "new border".
- In recent times, China has invested heavily into building trade relations with Central Asia. In 2006 it began receiving oil from Kazakhstan and Russia through a massive overland pipeline which runs right through Xinjiang. In 2009, the same thing with Natural Gas. More pipelines are planned for the future.
Return To Top | Posted:
Round Forfeited
Return To Top | Posted:
Is there a bug with notifications before rounds end?Posted 2014-09-19 13:42:08
Another reason I'm not a fan of autoforfeit.
Especially since I have so much troubles getting the site to notify me before the round ends.Posted 2014-09-19 12:03:44
Arc probably forgot about it.Posted 2014-09-19 00:56:14
Hey! What happened to my debate?!Posted 2014-09-19 00:53:26
That was lamePosted 2014-09-18 05:58:46
YipPosted 2014-09-15 17:22:07
@Admin-Can I make random topic suggestions to you over mail?Posted 2014-09-15 14:28:20
I'm convinced, good luck guy's. Posted 2014-09-15 14:27:49
Can I just clarify this briefly. I didn't mean don't discuss the debate. I meant don't discuss arguments that haven't been made in the debate. Let the debaters figure them out.
The reason I say this is because these two are really closely matched in the table. They even have their own bracket all to themselves. I think for the final round, some kind of time is warranted for the debaters to figure out arguments on their own.
However, even if this were not the case, it's not yet the appropriate time for this kind of discussion on here.
AFTER the debate you can totally discuss arguments they should have made (or should not have), and indeed if you keep it constructive like that I recommend that you do, because that's really useful for the debaters. If you can't wait that long, you can also make your own debate on this subject, talk about it on the forums, make a group about it, shoutbox it - heck, you could post a status update about it and people could reply to that. Edeb8 has no shortage of ways to discuss a subject outside of debate comments.Posted 2014-09-15 12:34:43
We should do a debate on sideline comments during a debate.
But until then, I'd appreciate it if you didn't make a case for or against in the comments section while the debate is still going on. Its not polite.
Posted 2014-09-15 12:32:31
I may make a forum post about this. I feel talking about debates should be encouraged here. Posted 2014-09-15 12:27:39
+1 on what Admin said.
It's cool bro, I can make my arguments myself.
Posted 2014-09-15 12:27:31
Wrichcriw was once a big advocate of discussing debates. I feel the comment section is the place to do that.
Talking and progressing a topic is only doing it justice, and I hate that culture of "winning" that restricts us from discussing debates.Posted 2014-09-15 12:27:00
On the off chance that Arctimes makes an argument like "Turkish people aren't Chinese people", it should be easy to strike down. China isn't a region, more than it is a united group of people's. Anyone who know's anything about China, is well aware of how culturally and politically diverse its many regions are.Posted 2014-09-15 12:23:52
Hey Csareo, can you please stop making arguments for the sides? This is a WODC debate after all.Posted 2014-09-15 12:22:43
If I was Arctimes, I would focus most on disputing geopolitical stabillity. Since this debate is no longer "China should", he is free to make arguments about what can benefit "Xinjiang". If this was my debate, I would argue the insitution of East Turkestan wouldn't only make the region safer, but improve the welfare and stabillity of China as a whole.
East Turkestan has yearly riots, causing 1000's of deaths. Much of the military is concentrated in that region, raising taxes for people on the coast, and reducing civil liberties in Xinjiang. It is also well known that China and India have many land disputes. Including Kashmir, and two other areas bordering Xinjiang.
If I were NZlockie, I would argue losing xinjiang is affront to Chinese unity and manifest destiny, possibly even relating examples of when an autonomous Xinjiang has fought with China in the past, such as the East Turkestan war, between the Kuomintang and Soviet Union.Posted 2014-09-15 12:21:24
This is R5, that was R4Posted 2014-09-15 10:25:01
r u guys doing this or the DDO better than Edeb8?Posted 2014-09-15 10:24:04
Well I'm cool with it, my argument was always going feature heavily from Chinese perspective anyway- as evidenced by my opening round in the original debate.
I just didn't want Arc thinking I'd tried to do something under handed or anything...Posted 2014-09-15 00:17:08
I do but you know what, so long as both debaters argue the same thing I'm sure judges won't penalize either side if the resolution is odd. Debaters define the debate as they will.Posted 2014-09-14 23:31:46
Unless of course admin has the ability to alter it?Posted 2014-09-14 23:24:37
Arc is right, the resolution shouldn't have had, "China" in the title. I've stated as such in my first round, and the wording change hasn't changed my original argument at all - so I've left this debate as is. But if it gets to confusing, I'm happy to start ANOTHER version of this debate and copy my first round over... Let me know Arc. Posted 2014-09-14 23:23:48
That's like saying that a person should eat babies should be deterined by the interest of that person.
I considered the resolution to be about what we ought to do.
Specially considering that the original resolution didn;t mention "China should".
I accepted because there should not be a difference.Posted 2014-09-14 15:19:07
The debate is "China should". All NZlockie has to do is prove that it is in China's interest.
There is a way to counter this line of reasoning though. Prove keeping Xinjiang works against the Chinese people in the long run.
You can argue all day that the Turks would be better off independent, but this debate is strictly limited to China. Why should China do something that hurts their country?Posted 2014-09-14 08:42:42
On second thoughts, maybe you WILL like my argument.
Posted 2014-09-14 05:43:29
Well... I will say that there ARE perfectly legitimate lines of argument other than a China-only approach. I don't include topics on my list that have only one valid line of argument, as a general rule.Posted 2014-09-14 03:42:51
Remember, this is a "China should topic", which means you only need to prove it isn't in China's best intrest to grant independence to Xinjiang.
In the OPIC debate, it is a "US should topic", therefore, I only need to prove it is in America's best intrests.
If you argue from that POV, you'll do fine. I'm sure the CON side will make many arguments about "What's in Xinjiang's intrest", although this isn't what is being debated. Posted 2014-09-14 03:12:09
Random debate topic. I can guarantee you're not going to like my argument. Sorry. Posted 2014-09-13 21:12:53
This is actually a subject I am very knowledgable in. Who's idea?Posted 2014-09-13 16:01:46