Cameron Bovell | Trump's Foreign Policy is Preferable to Obama's (1/6) | Oxford Union

Cameron Bovell | Trump's Foreign Policy is Preferable to Obama's (1/6) | Oxford Union



we therefore move to the motion before the house tonight which is this house prefers Trump's foreign policy to Obama's and I look to cameron boville the senior logistics officer at the Oxford Union son Edwin Hall to open the case for the proposition tonight [Applause] [Applause] so it's a good start when you watch everybody leaving just as you stand up so good evening members let me begin by thanking the president for allowing me the honor to speak on an issue that is so important for not just the Union but the world as a whole after all while some argue America's influence in world affairs may be waning the USA is still undeniably a global superpower and any action that the USA and the president as its leader takes will and does have reverberations around the world just over two years ago on November the 8th 2016 I settled in for an all-nighter to watch Hillary Clinton win the American presidency yeah that went really well little did I know what I and indeed all of us were installed for that night and over the coming years I like so many others had preconceptions of Donald Trump whether it be discussed at the accent Access Hollywood tapes or shocked as he appeared to mock disabilities none of this voted particularly well for what I would be feeling about his actual ability to lead without embarrassing himself and the USA especially in the world sphere that being said when we take into account some of the disasters that occurred during the Obama era foreign policy from Libya to Syria Ukraine to North Korea and the victories that Trump has achieved we can begin to understand why at the very least in foreign policy it is the case the president Trump far outstrips President Obama in both concept and positive effects I would urge everybody in this chamber when voting at the end to put aside their preconceptions of the men behind these policies and consider the real world effect of what these policies actually entail whilst it might be tempting to simply vote never Trump so to speak this would defeat the purpose of a debate that is specifically targeted at a comparative on foreign policy hopefully once you have heard both sides you will understand why the proposition case is so powerful and why this house should prefer Trump's foreign policy to Obama's my case tonight will delve a little into what in true Trump style I have designated as the three deals of the Trump foreign policy and attempt to contrast them directly to a bar on similar issues and explain why Trump has given a better deal for America and the world on each of these for the first the deal on America first breaking with the establishment and why that has been better for international cooperation secondly dealing with crisis management Syria North Korea and Trump's defense of human rights thirdly dealing up to facing global superpowers the short form of this is basically we're going to look at Trump's favorite which is China however before we enter the real substance of this debate it falls to me to introduce the opposition speakers for this week and you thought Spencer's jokes were bat speed boo first is mr. Ravi Malik a second-year philosophy politics and economics student at st. Anne's and the senior access officer here at the Oxford Union with a debate on Trump's foreign policy sure to be an item of contention in next year's election some would say it is an interesting choice to have the two student speakers tonight as both me and Rabi considering that we have both failed to convince voters here at the Union of our own policies and that is reflected in our somewhat awful electoral records hopefully by the end of tonight I will for once managed to get enough votes to win and if I do then nevermind Rabi with three slates this time around I'm sure that somebody will have Rutten if you fancy a third go at standard speaking second is Amy Pope who held several positions in the US Department of Justice before becoming deputy homeland security adviser to President Obama miss Pope is now a partner at UK based law firm shillings which specializes in risk management and crisis response although hopefully she may not be up to the task of dealing with the crisis of confidence that all of the members will have in Obama once the proposition has concluded its case for the night yeah and last but by no means least is secretary jeh Johnson currently he is a partner at Paul Weiss but previously secretary Johnson was the general counsel of the Department of Defense before going on to serve as the fourth US Secretary of Homeland Security in the Obama administration perhaps little known fact about secretary Johnson is that as designated survivor at the end of the Obama administration he was Trump's first cabinet officer for a whole seven and a half hours a role which perhaps unsurprisingly he does not speak about often all with passion hopefully his arguments today are a little more impassioned but preferably a little shorter than seven and a half hours or Spencer here may get somewhat excited with his vowel yeah with both with both of your years at the front line of US politics and policy on a large number of issues I am sure that you will bring valuable points to this debate and I for one look forward to hearing what you have to say Madam President these are your speakers and they are most welcome let us recall Trump was elected to put America first something that Obama never really did chumps engagements with NATO are abrasive they are angry and they follow his classic style of not really caring what other nations even the USA's allies actually think about him be that as it may aggressively confronting allies who damage both the USA s and actually world security interests is not necessarily a bad thing according to NATO during the Obama years defense expenditure by NATO countries not including the USA dropped by a total of over seven point eight percent while stirring the chunk years so far it has risen by nine point eight percent now some might come out and say that due to the economic slump at the beginning of Obama's era that actually accounts for why this has happened but it does not explain the resulting huge swing back towards defense simply because none of the nations involved have seen this level of growth consequently this can be attributed to Trump's rhetoric on increasing NATO spending and his aggressive posturing such as threatening to pull out of the agreement if Europe did not begin to pull its weight indeed Secretary General of NATO Jens Stoltenberg recently commented that the Allies were stepping up by adding 100 billion dollars to defense budgets over the next two years and that they had heard Trump loud and clear what this clearly depicts is a successful policy of strengthening NATO it is just often mischaracterized as attacking the nations within it when in reality it was just some necessary hard words to see a result which has and will continue to strengthen both European and world security through a strong alliance that is not afraid to stand up to foreign aggression which is so important at a time when foreign aggression is often used to try and affect everything down to our very elections who would have thought that all this could have come from few angry tweets a well-directed rant at a conference I suppose only a very consistent and very stable genius as the man himself said as far as putting America first goes it's not just NATO where Trump has excelled his rhetoric and action on NAFTA has resulted in a new trade agreement between the North American nations being drawn up called the u.s. MCA whilst some accuse it of having actually very little dip Princeton after or even stealing from TPP which Trump aboard what can actually be seen is a NAFTA plus it helps both US farmers and automakers by removing tariffs on exporting to Canada whilst in return benefiting essential Canadian exporters such as peanut products which surprisingly enough apparently contribute two hundred and seventy three million dollars in revenue to the Canadian economy every single year crucially the u.s. MCA also provides protections for workers in all three countries something that is often under looked when looking at its merits Mexico has to pass laws giving workers the right to real union representation to extend labor protection to migrant workers and to protect women from discrimination all things which are reasonably undeniably inherently good as they protect the people in society who are often treated the worst in the workplace Mexico has to do this in order to get the benefits that it has negotiated in the u.s. MCA whilst I'm not saying that these protections are not things that Obama's foreign policy cared about Trump's direct action and threats to remove the USA from NAFTA have resulted in the u.s. MCA and the protections that come with it rather than settling for not disturbing the status quo or leaving it alone as Obama stuck by the best move for Congress at this point would certainly be to ratify it in order to support a better deal for both Americans and others across North America that it brings by putting America first Trump has brought improvements for both the USA and its allies that Obama never successfully achieved we now come to my second point that Trump has through his crisis management defended human rights in a way that Obama never did Teddy Roosevelt who could be considered the father of modern American foreign policy famously said speak softly and carry a big stick Trump Serra has been defined not by the empty threat of a stick as Obama's whips but by the strong words which then resort in corresponding action this action far from being the rational uncoordinated chaos that the opposition will likely suggest has been a far stronger defense of human rights globally than Obama ever offered even if Trump doesn't necessarily plan it out it always ends up defending the human rights this happened in two main areas North Korea and Syria instead of indulging dictators and letting them cross red lines Trump has stood up for American interests and American principles let us start with North Korea strategic patience with North Korea was essentially Obama accepting that there was no foreign policy here he was like happy to just adopt a stance of doing nothing I say it this way because doing nothing in the face of aggression against a nation that is intent to develop a nuclear weapon that is able to hit the USA is the most dangerous form of inaction his sanctions failed to stop the nuclear program and have had or have any actual real-life impact on reducing the abhorrent human rights violations that were taking place for Trump's stance on North Korea we should be grateful his approach put maximum pressure on the North Korean regime it brought stronger sanctions that were supported by China John bolt Bolton advising pre-emptive war and Trump's fire and fury rhetoric appeared to bring North Korea to the negotiating table through this disruption of an unsatisfactory status quo for both sides the issue cannot be resolved in a day indeed Obama failed to have any impact after eight years in office so we cannot expect a perfect resolution to the conflict unlike Obama some concrete progress was made though Trump for example secure the release of 55 US soldiers who were previously in appalling conditions moreover he calmed tensions in the region that was left so high in the aftermath of Obama's do-nothing non policy the same can be said of the red line in Syria broken once in August 2013 to no reaction from the USA and then broken time and time again creating unimaginable amounts of suffering in an already horrific war Trump's policy of limited intervention in Syria meanwhile after just one chemical weapons attack in the Italy problems resulted in tomahawks hitting the air bits which the weapons came from and then again after the Duma attack the us-led coalition of airstrikes on strategic targets including storage and production facilities appears to a cramped Assad's ability or confidence to engage in this type of warfare all this with relatively little civilian casualties admittedly there have been rumblings of new chemical weapons attacks but nothing on the same scale of what came before when a sad was given a free hand Obama's refusal to act led to two main issues for the USA it's sort of shift in belief that they would stick by their principles from both allies in a far worse reaction to the harsh words that Trump gave over NATO may I have remind you and its rivals thus empowering nations like Russia to step up their support in Syria and arguably even laying the ground for the Ukraine crisis as they thought again that they would and they did get a free hand when lessening when letting a sad cross his redline Obama showed the world that the u.s. was no longer prepared to defend human rights wherever they were violated secondly for the world at large after guter with Trump's policy in an alternate world we can see the later chemical weapons attacks as avoidable through proper action and therefore the suffering to human lives as highly preventable Trump's actions appear to have largely stopped the chemical weapons attacks proving yet again that even outside of the USA Trump's foreign policy is preferable to Obama's lack of policy finally we come to Trump's favorite area China whilst I could talk about many different parts of the balance of power and world geopolitics I think in the time I have left a short summary of why Trump is better for the USA and the world than China and why his Chinese policy is better is the most important aspect to cover in 2015 President Obama and president G announced together a happy new era of international cooperation now you may note that this didn't appear in the international cooperation section earlier and that's because it was a fake whilst on the surface China may have been happy to make positive statements underneath this we can see why China needed dealing with and honestly where do you start whether it be the geo economic tools of belton road to coerce previously friendly nations into their arms and then lock them there with debt or simply the huge intellectual property theft and violation of international law in the South China Sea it is beyond clear that something needed to be done the engage in a hedge strategy was failing thus Trump's administration direct action on China's aggression in trade politics and is long overdue and very necessary the realization by Trump and his administration of how long the threat of China what of how strong even the threat of China was has allowed them to tackle the issues in a head-on manner rather than hedging the risks one example of the USA getting to grips with the threat of Chinese global dominance is John Bolton's prosper Africa this differs from Obama's vision in Africa as not only does it provide bilateral development through business-driven schemes it also directly combat China's economic activity on the African continent now some of you may ask why that is important for anybody but the USA however when you actually look at what Belton row provides which is essentially short-term economic growth that evolves into a long-term debt trap that uses imported foreign labor and exploits national workers it is far easier to understand why the u.s. way and indeed the Trump way is better furthermore the Trump nominee David Malpass as world bank president has begun to tackle this crisis by passing a thirteen billion dollar capital increase and negotiating reforms that move resources towards the world's most poverty-stricken countries rather than providing China with aid funding that can then be used to saddle these poor poverty-stricken countries with even more belt and road infrastructure projects and thus cement the inner quality of these developing nations against places like the US and China overall then we have seen why Trump has excelled in an unconventional but far more effective manner on international cooperation crisis response and the world balance of power whilst Obama's America may have had better approval ratings around the world his lack of tough decisions left a raft of difficult issues that Trump has tackled head-on often during criticism for his erratic manner but in the end seeing some far more positive results for all these reasons I urge you to look past your potential preconceptions of the man himself and defend stronger alliances by putting America first interventionism for humanitarianism and equality for workers and developing countries by voting with the eyes today thank [Applause] you

14 thoughts on “Cameron Bovell | Trump's Foreign Policy is Preferable to Obama's (1/6) | Oxford Union

  1. Watch the full debate here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ayw3VIqDpU4&list=PLOAFgXcJkZ2wY2dWZROErjUuxIdFSr0qV

  2. Love him or Hate him but there's never been a US president in human history been to North Korea soil & tried to make peace. That's a fact.

  3. How can debates and discourse be so fun in the UK yet they are so cucked on censorship and dissent? Sad. THIS should be the public space in Britain, not throwing people in jail for tweets.

  4. Well, he wasn't created and funded a "Salafist Principality in Easter Syria". That alone makes him LEAGUES better than the Obama administration.

  5. I'm a Scottish person with an English father, grew up in Scotland my entire life and what really rubs me the wrong way is the sense of British superiority over the US. We forever mock the US, cloaked in the language of "Allies should be able to say the tough stuff to each other" yet see ourselves as superior to them. We criticize them incessantly, yet when they do the same we say "Here comes the US wading in again". I honestly have a dislike o the culture that seems to emanate from Oxford Union. Look at them. Children, who see themselves as rightful progenitors of the mantle, yet never had a single day of suffering in their lives. Sheep leading wolves.

  6. We the people of the United States of America don’t want to fund foreign wars, don’t want to fund terrorists, don’t want to send our troops to their deaths for politicians, don’t want to fund dictators like China and Iran. We don’t want to fight in religious wars, we don’t want to overthrow elected world leaders, we don’t want to import Islamic culture, we don’t want to fund the infrastructure of nations who hate us, we don’t want to sell arms to our enemies. We demand that NATO allies pay for the American military services they requested. We demand that China and India stop polluting our planet without concern. TRUMP 2020🇺🇸

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *