Royal Artillery Academy Vs. IE University
On November 15th, in Segovia, the Royal Artillery Academy and IE University challenged each other in a friendly debate discussing the topic of Russian influence. Artillery Academy was debating against the country’s influence, while the IE University team was arguing in favour.
The debate was preceded by a few opening remarks. First, Lt. Colonel Luis Torres - Head of the Language Department – addressed the audience on behalf of the director of the academy, Colonel D. José María Martínez Ferrer. Lt. Colonel Torres underlined that the debate was not a competition, but an interchange of opinions with the objective of strengthening the relationship between two educational institutions.
Enrique Araque – the Head of Competition Debates at the IEU Debate Club and team captain, addressed the importance of collaboration between IE University and the Royal Artillery Academy on a student level and highlighted the Academy’s historical significance. Later, the floor was given to Dario Hasenstab – the IEU Debate Club Leader, and a mediator, who described the structure of the debate to the audience.
The debate commenced with the opening statement from the Royal Artillery Academy. After stating their position on the topic, the team presented a wide array of arguments to justify it. Apart from Russia’s military intervention in Ukraine and Georgia, the persona of Russian President – Vladimir Putin – was discussed, alongside with asserting threats of cyber interventions in the US Presidential Election of 2016 and Brexit Referendum and growing doubts about the truthfulness of Russian elections. Moreover, questions were raised about the cases of journalists, former executive officials, and leaders of the opposition, who were assassinated under the suspicious circumstances throughout Putin’s Presidency.
In their opening statement, IE University team claimed that Russia is taking its stand as a global leader by investing in the education and renewable energy, helping nations under crisis like Syria and Venezuela by delivering political justice, and becoming the third super-power in the world divided and dominated by China and the United States.
Royal Artillery Academy team used the rebuttal to pose questions and raise doubts about the speech delivered by their opponents. They requested the opposing team to answer whether the military invasion is classified as a ‘political justice’, and enquired whether rocket systems were considered as humanitarian aid. The Artillery Academy team claimed that Russian aerial forces are challenging the EU member-states by flying suspiciously close to the European borders on a frequent basis. They compared Russian external politics to that of the imperial origin and claimed that Russia has no allies, but only uses countries as tools for reaching the hegemonic goal of expansion.
In the rebuttal, the IE University team focused on the destruction that the United States caused in Syria and presented Russia as an ally – a helping hand – for Bashar al-Assad, who’s state and people were left in the complete devastation after the American invasion. Moreover, they presented Russia as a new super-state, by declaring it as a counterbalance of the United States and Saudi Arabia not only for the prevention of the OPEC oil crisis but for the stabilisation of the political environment in the Middle East.
Before proceeding to an open debate, both teams presented the closing remarks. Royal Artillery Academy claimed that by intervening in Ukraine and Georgia, Russia – the country with one of the biggest military and nuclear arsenal in the world – violated the international law and the sovereignty of the above-mentioned countries. Questions were raised about the disappearance, under bizarre circumstances, of Malaysia Airlines Flight 370, and doubts were posed regarding the internal affairs of Russian politics. The IE University team claimed that questioning the decision of the Russian people in the elections is wrong, and elaborated on the negative American influence in Libya and the Middle East.
During the open discussion, the audience engaged in the debate and posed questions about the Russian intervention in Georgia in 2008, Russia’s positive influence in South Africa, and the US embargo affecting trade deals with Iran and Cuba.
After the debate, the Royal Artillery Academy invited the audience to an open bar, where interested parties continued the discussion and had the opportunity to socialize. “The debate went well. I am sure that such events will help us get to know each other and meet new people”, - claimed Officer Cadet Francisco Javier Peñas Dendariena. Officer Cadet Victor Hernandez Martinez added: “To understand our colleagues from IE University, we should organize similar events more frequently”.
Second Year BBA-BIR student, Arielle Combrinck was one of the team members representing IE University, who in a short interview for The Stork claimed: “It was interesting to see what both sides brought to the table and on what they emphasised our attention”. Furthermore, she shared her expectations that the new partnership with an educational institution in Segovia would result in more frequent joint events in the future.
On the other hand, IE student Ayo Ladak, a second year BBA student, said that he was unaware that this event was even taking place, and that “more publicity for the event would have been better in order to raise awareness amongst the student body of IE.” There was a lot of talk over the possibility of having a second round of debate in the spring semester, something that would be highly anticipated, specially after how this first event turned out. If you missed the opportunity to attend this debate, and you wish you had, stay alert for announcements from the IE Debate Club in the second semester to keep yourself updated with the latest news for upcoming events!
Comments