Penn State student Democrats and Republicans hold uninspiring debate on foreign policy

‘I forgot the part where Jesus said ‘Give me your poor, but not the Muslims”

This past week, the Penn State International Affairs and Debate Association hosted a debate between the College Republicans and College Democrats on the topics of Iran and North Korea, with a focus on nuclear proliferation. Unfortunately, while the event was well coordinated and well attended, the actual debate between the individuals proved lackluster.

First, the debaters discussed the Iranian deal. As expected, the Republicans took a hard stance, saying the deal was weak and failed to halt the Iranians. They discussed how Iran has shown that they are willing to abandon such deals if they don’t face harsh consequences. Democrats talked about the successes of the deal, stating how the number of centrifuges decreased dramatically, and that Iran “should be allowed to develop as any other nation” should, which means allowing them to create nuclear material for energy.

The moderator welcomed the audience

The Immigration Ban 

Here at Penn State, one of our own faces imprisonment if deported. The moderator asked if the US should take a more proactive role in helping others across the globe. Responses were typical. To the Republicans, Americans have no obligation to take others in calling it a “privilege” to come to America. Only “highly motivated” individuals ought to be allowed to come here, citing our Protestant founders’ regard for hard work. The Democrats spoke of Americans’ “moral obligation” to help others, then snarkily rebutted the Republicans’ comment about the Protestants: “I forgot the part where Jesus said, ‘Give me your poor, but not the Muslims.’”

The next topic was the ongoing tension between Israelis and Palestinians. Democrats stated that there should be two separate states. They said America should no longer support the Israelis, as the fights between the groups are “out of hand”. The Republicans cited the attacks on the Israelis by the Palestinians, saying that Israel “needs our help to win a war and survive”.

North Korea’s Nuclear Capabilities 

The question of how to protect our allies was presented, asking if we should continue Obama’s “strategic patience” or pursue a more hardline tactic. Democrats defended Obama’s strategy, citing how far behind America North Korea is in technological advancements. They emphasized the importance of “diplomatic solutions,” saying that if we play their game and threaten them, North Korea simply looks better. Republicans wanted to instead “raid their facilities.” 

The debate continued with talks of what a successful deal to lift sanctions would look like. Unfortunately, the students went entirely off topic before finally approaching an answer to the question, avoiding much of a response. Republicans said the US should be “more active” in stopping the North Koreans, as they are detonating bombs against UN regulations. Democrats called for “direct military movements,” but said “diplomatic pressure” could work first.

Finally, debate closed with a hypothetical question regarding how America should respond if Kim Jong Un should die, leaving North Korea without a leader. Democrats failed to provide a substantial answer, saying that America should simply hope for a more friendly dictator, but work out a deal that “works for him,” regardless of who ends up in power. The Republicans gave a grand analogy about Alexander the Great that confused half the room before finally saying that essentially, as people fought for Kim Jong Un’s position, America could stand behind someone, giving us the chance to implement a democratic regime.

The debate concluded here. The entire room seemed put off by the lackluster responses to this last question. Even so, the debate provided a great platform for both parties to civilly discuss foreign policy, providing an important way for people to expose themselves to the viewpoints of others.

More
Penn State