A. Space being used to support ruling party legitimacy
Download 207.65 Kb.
|
A2: China isn’t a threatChina has the ability to attack us in space Walsh 07 (Frank M., “Forging a Diplomatic Shield for American Satellites: The Case For Reevaluation the 2006 National Space Policy in Light of a Chinese Anti-Satellite System,” Journal of Air Law and Commerce. Vol. 72, pages 769-770) Regardless of the actual reason for the pursuit of an ASAT, China's research into the system outpaced almost all estimates. In early 2003, the Director of the Defense Intelligence Agency testified that ASAT systems would not be available for ten years. In 2004, political scientist Michael E. O'Hanlon underestimated the Chinese ASAT program when he posited that "China might also have means to attack U.S. space assets, particularly lower-flying reconnaissance satellites, by 2010 or 2015." The rapid rate of Chinese research, underestimated by the American intelligence community, should serve as a warning to American policy-makers: China has set its sights on asymmetrical systems that can target vulnerabilities in the American military. China will respond to US space militarization- leads to arms race in space Zhang 06 (Hui, Senior Research Associate, Project on Managing the Atom, "Space Weaponization and Space Security: A Chinese Perspective" Journal Article, China Security, volume 2, issue 1, pages 24-36) Due to the threatening nature of space weapons, it is reasonable to as- sume that China and others would attempt to block their deployment and use by politicaland,ifnecessary,militarymeans.11 ManyChinese officials and scholars believe that China should take every possible step to maintain the effectiveness of its nuclear deterrent. This includes negating the threats from missile defense and space weaponization plans.12 In responding to any U.S. move toward deploy- ment space weapons, the first and best option for China is to pursue an arms control agreement to prevent not just the United States but any nation from doing so – as it is advocating presently. However, if this effort fails and if what China perceives as its legitimate security concerns are ignored, it would very likely develop responses to counter and neutralize such a threat. Despite the enormous cost of space-based weapon systems, they are vulnerable to a number of low-cost and relatively low-technology ASAT attacks including the use of ground-launched small kinetic-kill vehicles, pellet clouds or space mines. It is reasonable to believe that China and others could resort to these ASAT weapons to counter any U.S. space-based weapons. This, however, would lead to an arms race in space. China has the ability to attack us in space Walsh 07 (Frank M., “Forging a Diplomatic Shield for American Satellites: The Case For Reevaluation the 2006 National Space Policy in Light of a Chinese Anti-Satellite System,” Journal of Air Law and Commerce. Vol. 72, pages 769-770) Regardless of the actual reason for the pursuit of an ASAT, China's research into the system outpaced almost all estimates. In early 2003, the Director of the Defense Intelligence Agency testified that ASAT systems would not be available for ten years. In 2004, political scientist Michael E. O'Hanlon underestimated the Chinese ASAT program when he posited that "China might also have means to attack U.S. space assets, particularly lower-flying reconnaissance satellites, by 2010 or 2015." The rapid rate of Chinese research, underestimated by the American intelligence community, should serve as a warning to American policy-makers: China has set its sights on asymmetrical systems that can target vulnerabilities in the American military. China will respond to US space militarization- leads to arms race in space Zhang 06 (Hui, Senior Research Associate, Project on Managing the Atom, "Space Weaponization and Space Security: A Chinese Perspective" Journal Article, China Security, volume 2, issue 1, pages 24-36) Due to the threatening nature of space weapons, it is reasonable to as- sume that China and others would attempt to block their deployment and use by politicaland,ifnecessary,militarymeans.11 ManyChinese officials and scholars believe that China should take every possible step to maintain the effectiveness of its nuclear deterrent. This includes negating the threats from missile defense and space weaponization plans.12 In responding to any U.S. move toward deploy- ment space weapons, the first and best option for China is to pursue an arms control agreement to prevent not just the United States but any nation from doing so – as it is advocating presently. However, if this effort fails and if what China perceives as its legitimate security concerns are ignored, it would very likely develop responses to counter and neutralize such a threat. Despite the enormous cost of space-based weapon systems, they are vulnerable to a number of low-cost and relatively low-technology ASAT attacks including the use of ground-launched small kinetic-kill vehicles, pellet clouds or space mines. It is reasonable to believe that China and others could resort to these ASAT weapons to counter any U.S. space-based weapons. This, however, would lead to an arms race in space. A2: Deterrence ChecksA2: Deterrence checks Gargaz 10 (Michale Luke, Major, United States Air Force, A research Report Submitted to the Faculty of the Air Command and Staff College Air University, “We’ve Rattled Our Sabers…Now What?” pdf) China received the message of US power but was not fully deterred. They decided to counter US strength by quietly developing countermeasures to stop the US’s march toward “space dominance”. During this period, there was very limited contact between the US and China on space matters. This lack of interaction has led to a very “high level of suspicion...setting up an antagonistic if not adversarial relationship” between the two space powers.19 The 2007 Chinese ASAT demonstration was a clear indication that US deterrence efforts have not produced the intended results. Perhaps a change in strategy is necessary to prevent space war between the Chinese and the US and to avoid the crippling economic ramifications of such an endeavor. **Affirmative AnswersNon-UniqueCurrently, the U.S. has leveraged military and civilian advantages in space- cross domain superiority in defense prove Zhang 11 [Baohui, Associate Professor of Political Science and Director of the Center for Asia Pacific Studies at Lingnan University, Hong Kong, The Security Dilemma in the U.S.-China Military Space Relationship Author(s): Baohui Zhang Source: Asian Survey, Vol. 51, No. 2 (March/April 2011), pp. 311-332 Published by: University of California Press Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1525/AS.2011.51.2.311] The U.S. is the leader in the militarization of space. It was the first country that established a dedicated command, the U.S. Space Command, to unify military operations in space. In fact, as its Vision for 2020 proclaims, the Space Command seeks to achieve “full spectrum dominance” in space.13 Furthermore, it envisions permanent dominance in the military dimension of space operations: “Today, the U.S. is the preeminent military space power. Our vision is one of maintaining that preeminence—providing a solid foundation for our national security.”14 General Lance W. Lord, former commander, Air Force Space Command, points out the importance of space dominance: “Space superiority is the future of warfare. We cannot win a war without controlling the high ground, and the high ground is space.”15 In December 2007, the U.S. Air Force released a White Paper called The Nation’s Guardians: America’s 21st Century Air Force, in which General T. Michael Moseley made a similar statement: “No future war will be won without air, space and cyberspace superiority”; thus, “the Air Force must attain cross-domain dominance. Cross-domain dominance is the freedom to attack and the freedom from attack in and through the atmosphere, space and electromagnetic spectrum.”16 This strategy of space dominance, however, generates the classic security dilemma between the U.S. and other countries. Although the U.S. may be motivated by defensive purposes, such as shielding the American population from nuclear weapons and other threats, other countries have to assume the worst in an anarchic world. As observed by Joan Johnson-Freese, “I would argue that the rest of the world accepts U.S. space supremacy. What the Bush Administration claims is space dominance, and that’s what the rest of the world won’t accept.”17 US Supremacy now- challengers rising and space is integral to the defense posture Zhang 11 [Baohui, Associate Professor of Political Science and Director of the Center for Asia Pacific Studies at Lingnan University, Hong Kong, The Security Dilemma in the U.S.-China Military Space Relationship Author(s): Baohui Zhang Source: Asian Survey, Vol. 51, No. 2 (March/April 2011), pp. 311-332 Published by: University of California Press Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1525/AS.2011.51.2.311] The U.S. is the leader in the militarization of space. It was the first country that established a dedicated command, the U.S. Space Command, to unify military operations in space. In fact, as its Vision for 2020 proclaims, the Space Command seeks to achieve “full spectrum dominance” in space.13 Furthermore, it envisions permanent dominance in the military dimension of space operations: “Today, the U.S. is the preeminent military space power. Our vision is one of maintaining that preeminence—providing a solid foundation for our national security.”14 General Lance W. Lord, former commander, Air Force Space Command, points out the importance of space dominance: “Space superiority is the future of warfare. We cannot win a war without controlling the high ground, and the high ground is space.”15 In December 2007, the U.S. Air Force released a White Paper called The Nation’s Guardians: America’s 21st Century Air Force, in which General T. Michael Moseley made a similar statement: “No future war will be won without air, space and cyberspace superiority”; thus, “the Air Force must attain cross-domain dominance. Cross-domain dominance is the freedom to attack and the freedom from attack in and through the atmosphere, space and electromagnetic spectrum.”16 This strategy of space dominance, however, generates the classic security dilemma between the U.S. and other countries. Although the U.S. may be motivated by defensive purposes, such as shielding the American population from nuclear weapons and other threats, other countries have to assume the worst in an anarchic world. As observed by Joan Johnson-Freese, “I would argue that the rest of the world accepts U.S. space supremacy. What the Bush Administration claims is space dominance, and that’s what the rest of the world won’t accept.”17 Uniqueness OverwhelmsCCP on the brink of collapse- space is uniquely key Yao 6/22 (Liang, CCP’s Tombstone Planted on Parliament Hill, Epoch Times Staff) He said his residence was located in a flourishing business district of Zhengzhou City. The local government seized it and tore it down, offering Zhang very low compensation, about US$34 per square foot.“Behind the real estate developer were corrupt CCP officials,” Zhang said. “Due to the local authorities’ forced expropriation of private properties, there have been countless instances of frustrated appeals ending in protests, self-immolation, and even bombings of state buildings in China,” he said. Putting his right foot on the tombstone expresses his feelings of contempt for the CCP and his hope for its swift demise, Zhang said. “The social contradictions between haves and have-nots have accumulated to the tipping point. Every event, regardless of how minor, can trigger conflicts between authorities and citizens,” he said. Zhang said he chose to publicly protest to upholding his rights, and in addition to convey the voices of thousands upon thousands of oppressed Chinese people, who aren’t able to make their voices heard. No LinkRelations not zero sum Christensen 2007 (Thomas J., The State of US-China Diplomacy, Deputy assistant secretary for East Asian and Pacific Affairs, dept of state, 2-2-2007) When I was before this Commission last August, I discussed the notion of China as a responsible stakeholder in the global system. Importantly, as I emphasized last August, our view is not that China currently is the responsible stakeholder we envision, but rather that U.S. policy should focus on urging China in that direction. Our vision is a China that is more open, transparent, and democratic, and a China that will join us in actions that strengthen and support a global system that has provided peace, security, and prosperity to America, China, and the rest of the world. Encouraging China to move in that direction continues to be the foundation of our policy; the question, as this Commission has correctly pointed out, is how we can most effectively do that.Today I will address that question and provide an update on our diplomatic efforts to that end. We have made real progress in some areas, but much work remains to be done. We continue to work closely with China, engaging on an extremely broad range of issues, cooperating on issues in which we can find common ground, but also discussing in a frank and candid manner the issues on which we do not see eye-to-eye. In those areas in which we differ, we encourage China to understand our concerns and change its behavior in ways that will advance not only our interests, but also its own. The tone of our discussions with China is consistent and firm and based on what we know to be true: that the changes we encourage China to undertake-internationally and domestically-will benefit China as a nation and a member of the global community. U.S.-China relations are far from a zero-sum game. A strong U.S. regional presence combined with constructive and candid diplomatic engagement should serve to deepen areas of cooperation and reduce the likelihood of backsliding in the relationship. China wants cooperation, not conflict, over space China Defense 11(China Starts Seeking Space Coop 3-22-11 http://www.china-defense-mashup.com/china-starts-seeking-space-coop.html) "It signals that while certain members of Congress want to continue to ignore China as a space player, other than providing a rationale for certain DOD programs, U.S. industry sees the Chinese aerospace industry advancing, working with other countries, and increasingly becoming part of the globalized aerospace industry. The National Space Symposium is a venue where, as an industry friend of mine put it last week, 'business deals are made.' While some politicians still see US-China relations as zero-sum, clearly the business world does not," said Joan Johnson-Freese, a senior professor at the Naval War College and one of the country's preeminent experts on China's space programs. Dean Cheng, the Heritage Foundation's top expert on China's space efforts, said in an email that, "the Chinese definitely appear interested in greater cooperation in space w/ the US." He pointed to the fact the joint statement from the US and China during President Hu's recent visit included a commitment to space cooperation. It remains to be seen who the Chinese will send, per that statement, to reciprocate for the Bolden visit last October.
It depends on what you mean by “conflict.” If you mean ideological conflict, of the type that produced the Cold War between the United States, the Soviet Union, and their respective proxy regimes around the world, then the answer, I would argue, is a clear “no.” The prevailing world views in both Beijing and Washington, DC are inherently pragmatic in their orientation. Contrary to what many ordinary Americans believe, China is a Communist country in not much more than name these days. And contrary to what many ordinary Chinese think, America’s leadership does not see China’s rise as a threat to the security of the United States and the world. In another sense, conflict between China and the United States is indeed inevitable. As perhaps the two leading world powers as the twenty-first century progresses (although the European Union certainly has an argument to make), China and the United States will increasingly find themselves competing with one another on a number of dimensions. This competition will go deep into Africa and other places that are rich in natural resources. It will also go out into the reaches of satellites and space exploration. And it will continue to play out in more traditional venues, such as relations across the Taiwan Strait. How will such conflicts be resolved? The fact that competition between China and the United States is driven more by pragmatic economic imperatives than entrenched ideological differences opens up the possibility that situational difficulties, when they inevitably flare up, will not spill over and poison bilateral relations as a whole.
Directory: file -> view view -> Western Europe after wwii view -> Author study: paul fleischman view -> Qpa1 7ela study Guide view -> Arctic Oil/Gas Neg view -> November 1970 Approximately 150,000-500,000 deaths Bhola Cyclone Bangladesh view -> Grade Level: 6 Unit of Study: Caribbean glce view -> Citation: Duffield, Katy view -> Table of Contents Lesson # view -> Chinese Wind Energy Disad Download 207.65 Kb. Share with your friends:
|