Big Sky Debate Page
SOLVENCY: SPACE WEAPONIZATION WILL ENCOURAGE CHINESE WEAPONS
Download 1.49 Mb.
|
- Navigate this page:
- CHINA WILL PURSUE WEAPONS TO NEUTRALIZE THE AMERICAN SPACE WEAPONS-Hui ‘06
- CHINA DOES NOT WANT TO BUILD SPACE WEAPONS; AMERICAN ACTIONS COULD FORCE A CHINESE RESPONSE-Blazejewski ‘08
- THE PERCEPTION THAT THE US IS PURSUING SPACE WEAPONIZATION DRIVES CHINESE WEAPONS PROGRAMS- Zhang ‘11
- AMERICAN SPACE WEAPONS ARE FORCING CHINA TO ENGAGE IN AN ARMS RACE- Zhang ‘11
- CHINA IS MOTIVATED BY AMERICAN PLANS TO ESTABLISH MILITARY SPACE DOMINANCE- Zhang ‘11
- SOLVENCY: SPACE WEAPONS WILL JEOPARDIZE SPACE EXPLORATION/USE IF SPACE BECOMES A BATTLEGROUND, OUR ACCESS TO THE BENEFITS OF SPACE WILL BE IRREVOCABLY DISRUPTED-Johnson ‘07
- IF THE US FAILS TO LEAD ON ABANDONING SPACE WEAPONS, A GLOBAL NIGHTMARE FOR BILLIONS WILL ENSUE-Moore ‘09
- SPACE WEAPONIZATION WILL BADLY EXACERBATE SPACE DEBRIS-Hui ‘06
- WEAPONIZATION OF SPACE WILL BE DEEPLY DESTABILIZING AND RISK DEBRIS THAT MAKES SPACE EXPLORATION IMPOSSIBLE-Van Der Linden ‘10
- FAILURE TO PREVENT WEAPONIZED SPACE THREATENS THE ENTIRE ECONOMIC AND MILITARY USES OF SPACE--Van Ness ‘10
- UN GENERAL ASSEMBLY STRONGLY BELIEVES THAT WEAPONIZING SPACE COULD IMPACT THE PEACEFUL USES OF SPACE-Dean ‘04
- SOLVENCY: SPACE WEAPONS WILL INCREASE PROLIFERATION THE USE OF WEAPONS IN SPACE WILL INEXORABLY LEAD TO THE USE OF NUCLEAR WAR-Johnson ‘07
- SPACE WEAPONIZATION WILL LEAD TO NUCLEAR EXCHANGE-Johnson ‘07
- IF AMERICAN SPACE WEAPONS REDUCE THE CHINESE DETERRENT, THEY WILL INCREASE THEIR NUCLEAR FORCES-Hui ‘06
- WEAPONIZATION OF SPACE WILL ENCOURAGE NUCLEAR PROLIFERATION-Blazejewski ‘08
- AMERICAN SPACE WEAPONIZATION WILL ENCOURAGE CHINESE NUCLEAR PROLIFERATION-Blazejewski ‘08
- DECIDING TO FORGO SPACE WEAPONIZATION WILL GIVE THE US PRESSURE ON CRITICAL NUCLEAR PROLIFERATION CONTROL REGIMES-Blazejewski ‘08
- THREAT CONSTRUCTION BASED ON FUTURE THREATS LAYS THE FOUNDATION FOR AN EXPANSION OF THE KIND OF MILITARISM THAT KILLED HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS-Carr ‘10
SOLVENCY: SPACE WEAPONIZATION WILL ENCOURAGE CHINESE WEAPONS AMERICAN EFFORTS TO WEAPONIZE SPACE WILL SPUR ASYMMETRIC CHINESE RESPONSE TO ATTACK AMERICAN SPACE ASSETS-Hui ‘06 [Zhang; Senior Research Associate, Project on Managing the Atom; Space Weaponization And Space Security: A Chinese Perspective; 2006; http://www.wsichina.org/attach/CS2_3.pdf; retrieved 05 Jul 2011] The United States does have legitimate concerns about its space assets, given that U.S. military operations, economy and society are increasingly dependent on space assets and such assets are inherently vulnerable to attacks from many different sources. However, it does not mean that the United States currently faces credible threats from states that might exploit those vulnerabilities.6 Further, space-based weapons cannot protect satellites, since these weapons are also vulnerable to many types of attack, similar to the satellites requiring protection. The true aim of U.S. space plans is not to protect U.S. assets but rather to further enhance American military dominance. Prof. Du Xiangwan, vice president of the Chinese Academy of Engineering, recently presented his view that the Transformation Flight Plan indicated that “many types of space-based weapons will be developed,” and “the tendency toward space weaponization is obvious and serious.” He further noted that military dominance on Earth is not enough, “the U.S. also seeks to dominate space.”7 Beijing fears that by unilaterally developing missile defense systems and pursuing space weaponization, the United States is seeking to establish a global military superiority using both offensive and defensive means.8 Moreover, China’s fears about U.S. hegemonic tendencies are exacerbated by the fact that space weapons, due to their vulnerability to other less expensive, asymmetric measures, are inherently first-strike weapons. CHINA WILL PURSUE WEAPONS TO NEUTRALIZE THE AMERICAN SPACE WEAPONS-Hui ‘06 [Zhang; Senior Research Associate, Project on Managing the Atom; Space Weaponization And Space Security: A Chinese Perspective; 2006; http://www.wsichina.org/attach/CS2_3.pdf; retrieved 05 Jul 2011] Due to the threatening nature of space weapons, it is reasonable to assume that China and others would attempt to block their deployment and use by political and, if necessary, military means.11 Many Chinese 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 deployment 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. CHINA DOES NOT WANT TO BUILD SPACE WEAPONS; AMERICAN ACTIONS COULD FORCE A CHINESE RESPONSE-Blazejewski ‘08 [Kenneth; lawyer focusing primarily on international corporate and financial transactions; Space Weaponization and US-China Relations; Strategic Studies Quarterly; Spring 2008; http://www.au.af.mil/au/ssq/2008/Spring/blazejewski.pdf; retrieved 05 Jul 2011] On this account, China’s primary concern with US space weaponization is its contribution to a US multilayered missile defense shield. Indeed, China’s campaign for PAROS negotiation at the CD seems to intensify after each new development in United States BMD plans.20 Although China could respond to a BMD shield with effective countermeasures,21 future technological developments may permit the BMD system to vitiate China’s nuclear deterrent.22 In the case of a conflict over Taiwan, for example, a US space-based BMD system could prove very valuable to the United States. According to this view, if the United States decides to advance with such a BMD program, China will respond so as to maintain its nuclear deterrence. It will modernize its ICBM fleet (a program it has already initiated), develop further countermeasures to circumvent the BMD shield, and develop the means to launch multiple ASAT attacks. Ultimately, an arms race could ensue. This, however, would not be China’s chosen outcome. Its development of space weapons is merely a counterstrategy to what it views as likely US space weaponization.23 China would much prefer that the United States negotiate a PAROS agreement not to build the BMD shield.24 If this were the case, China’s January ASAT test would appear to be an attempt to get the United States to the negotiating table. By launching the ASAT, China sought to put the United States on notice that any attempt to weaponize outer space would lead to this mutually undesirable path.
[Baohui; Professor of Political Science and Director of the Center for Asia Pacific Studies, Lingnan University; The Security Dilemma in the U.S.-China Military Space Relationship; Asian Survey; Volume 51, No. 2; 2011; pgs. 311-332] This perception of the American lead in space militarization and attempts for its weaponization is a major motive for the Chinese military to develop similar projects and thus avoid U.S. domination in future wars. The PLA believes that control of the commanding heights will decide the outcome of future wars, and China cannot afford to cede that control to the U.S. As a result, space war is a key component of the PLA Air Force’s (PLAAF) new doctrines. In 2006 the PLAAF released a comprehensive study called Military Doctrines for Air Force, which makes the following statement: In future wars, merely possessing air superiority will no longer be sufficient for seizing the initiative of battles. In significant ways, only obtaining space superiority could ensure controlling the initiative of war. The contest in outer space has become the contest for the new commanding heights. Seizing control of space will mean control of the global commanding heights, which will in turn enable dominance in air, land, and sea battles. Thus, it is impossible to achieve national security without obtaining space security. AMERICAN SPACE WEAPONS ARE FORCING CHINA TO ENGAGE IN AN ARMS RACE- Zhang ‘11 [Baohui; Professor of Political Science and Director of the Center for Asia Pacific Studies, Lingnan University; The Security Dilemma in the U.S.-China Military Space Relationship; Asian Survey; Volume 51, No. 2; 2011; pgs. 311-332] Chinese military strategists believe U.S. missile defense poses a real threat to China’s nuclear deterrent. Until recently, the Chinese military tended to believe that U.S. missile defense could not effectively deter a major nuclear power like China or Russia. It was thought that a range of countermeasures, such as deploying decoys and multiple warheads, could be employed to deceive and overwhelm U.S. missile defense. Now, however, with the maturing of a multilayered missile defense system by the U.S. and its allies, Chinese nuclear experts are losing confidence in China’s offensive capabilities. This pessimism was illustrated in a 2008 interview of Wang Wenchao in a Chinese military magazine. Wang, credited with being the chief designer of China’s sea-based strategic missiles, expressed grave pessimism about China’s offensive nuclear capability against U.S. missile defense. He said, “I have done research: Facing a multi-tiered missile defense system, if any single layer can achieve a success rate of 70%, then 100 single warhead missiles could all be intercepted even if they are mounting a simultaneous attack.”30 This is why Wu Tianfu—arguably the most important deterrence strategist of the Second Artillery of the PLA, which runs China’s strategic nuclear forces—charges that the U.S. has “forced China to engage in a space arms race.”31 More specifically, U.S. missile defense has forced China to integrate space war with its strategic nuclear deterrence. China must possess the ability to weaken American space-based assets such as early-warning satellites, to ensure the credibility of its own offensive nuclear forces. Thus, space war and nuclear war are now intertwined in Chinese strategic thinking. Indeed, China’s official media have credited Wu with establishing the PLA’s first space war research institute. CHINA IS MOTIVATED BY AMERICAN PLANS TO ESTABLISH MILITARY SPACE DOMINANCE- Zhang ‘11 [Baohui; Professor of Political Science and Director of the Center for Asia Pacific Studies, Lingnan University; The Security Dilemma in the U.S.-China Military Space Relationship; Asian Survey; Volume 51, No. 2; 2011; pgs. 311-332] Chinese strategists certainly perceive the U.S. quest for space dominance as damaging to China’s national security; whoever controls space will have the edge in winning the next war. Indeed, Chinese military and civilian strategists argue that the U.S. search for “absolute security” jeopardizes other countries’ security. It is widely reported in Chinese military literature that the U.S. has already developed and is in fact implementing a master plan for military dominance in space. The challenge for China is to prevent the U.S. from jumping too far ahead. As observed by a major study organized by the General Staff of the PLA, “In recent decades the U.S. has been consistently pursuing dominance in space in order to become its overlord.”18 The study also points out that the U.S. is the first country to develop a full set of doctrines for space militarization and dominance: In April 1998, the U.S. Space Command published its long-term strategic development plan, Vision for 2020, which specifically proposed the concept of space dominance and revealed the goals of allowing the American military to use space weapons to attack the enemy’s land, sea, air, and space targets. World opinion believes this represented the formal debut of U.S. space war theory and indicated an important first step by the U.S. military toward space war. SOLVENCY: SPACE WEAPONS WILL JEOPARDIZE SPACE EXPLORATION/USE IF SPACE BECOMES A BATTLEGROUND, OUR ACCESS TO THE BENEFITS OF SPACE WILL BE IRREVOCABLY DISRUPTED-Johnson ‘07 [Rebecca; PhD, The Acronym Institute for Disarmament Diplomacy; Threat of Weaponisation; 09 October 2007; http://www.acronym.org.uk/space/congo.htm; retrieved 19 Jul 2011] Our development of and access to the benefits from space-based capabilities risk being seriously, perhaps irrevocably disrupted if space is turned into a potential or actual battleground. The Chinese ASAT test and Russia's responses to the threatened siting of missile interceptors and missile defence tracking and targeting facilities in Poland and the Czech Republic provide tremors of the adverse consequences of the very idea of space weaponisation, even if due to its cost, technological challenges or political opposition it ends up not being actualised. IF THE US FAILS TO LEAD ON ABANDONING SPACE WEAPONS, A GLOBAL NIGHTMARE FOR BILLIONS WILL ENSUE-Moore ‘09 [Mike; a research fellow with the Independent Institute; Space Debris: From Nuisance to Nightmare; Foreign Policy; 12 Feb 2009;http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2009/02/11/space_debris_from_nuisance_to_nightmare; retrieved 16 Jun 2011] A nightmare scenario: The United States continues to work on its defensive ASAT systems. China and Russia do the same to counter U.S. capabilities. India and Japan put together their own individual systems. Ditto for Pakistan, if it survives as a coherent country. Israel follows suit, as does Iran. In a time of high tension, someone preemptively smashes spy satellites in low-earth orbits, creating tens of thousands of metal chunks and shards. Debris-tracking systems are overwhelmed, and low-earth orbits become so cluttered with metal that new satellites cannot be safely launched. Satellites already in orbit die of old age or are killed by debris strikes. The global economy, which is greatly dependent on a variety of assets in space, collapses. The countries of the world head back to a 1950s-style way of life, but there are billions more people on the planet than in the 50s. That's a recipe for malnutrition, starvation, and wars for resources. The United States, by far the world's most-advanced space power, must take the lead in Geneva and engage in good-faith talks. If not, the space-is-ruined scenario could become reality. SPACE WEAPONIZATION WILL BADLY EXACERBATE SPACE DEBRIS-Hui ‘06 [Zhang; Senior Research Associate, Project on Managing the Atom; Space Weaponization And Space Security: A Chinese Perspective; 2006; http://www.wsichina.org/attach/CS2_3.pdf; retrieved 05 Jul 2011] Weaponizing space would further exacerbate current problems with space debris.17 Even worse, some scientists warn that if a number of satellites are destroyed in the course of a war, the Earth would be encased in a cloud of debris that would prevent future satellite stationing and space access.18 Given concerns over the space debris issue, senior scientists in China have emphasized that preventing environmental pollution should not only apply on Earth, but should also apply in outer space. As Xiangwan recently noted, “prevention of pollution in space should be put on an agenda and as time goes by, this problem will become increasingly obvious.” He further states: “In preventing space pollution, the following two issues are worth noticing: space garbage and weaponization of space.” “[W]eaponization of space is more dangerous than ordinary space garbage,” since “it will seriously pollute space” and “it will threaten peace and stability on the Earth.” WEAPONIZATION OF SPACE WILL BE DEEPLY DESTABILIZING AND RISK DEBRIS THAT MAKES SPACE EXPLORATION IMPOSSIBLE-Van Der Linden ‘10 [Harry; Professor of Philosophy, Butler University; From Hiroshima to Baghdad: Military Hegemony versus Just Military Preparedness; Philosophy After Hiroshima; 2010; pgs. 203-232] The weaponization of space is deeply irrational in the same manner as the build-up of nuclear weapons by the United States after Hiroshima and Nagasaki was irrational, leading to the nuclear arms race with the Soviet Union and the danger of nuclear omnicide. One nation’s possession of space weapons will inevitably lead others to acquire them, setting the stage for war in space. This scenario is deeply irrational because, as Theresa Hitchens (2007, 2) of the Center for Defense Information puts it, “the specter of warfare in space—especially warfare involving destructive antisatellite weapons that would produce tons of dangerous and indiscriminate space debris—would endanger all space operations, civil, commercial and military.” She adds: “As the world’s preeminent space power, the United States would have the most to lose in a world bristling with space armaments and thus it is in U.S. national interests that space not be weaponized.” Besides, the weaponizing of space would be a huge expense and have great opportunity costs (and so violate the third and fourth principles of just military preparedness). FAILURE TO PREVENT WEAPONIZED SPACE THREATENS THE ENTIRE ECONOMIC AND MILITARY USES OF SPACE--Van Ness ‘10 [Peter; The Time Has Come for A Treaty to Ban Weapons in Space; Asian Perspective; Volume 34, No. 3; 2010; pgs. 215-225] However, the present arrangement in space is vulnerable to disruption or even destruction if there were ever to be a serious conflict in space. Debris from destroyed satellites might create a “collisional cascading effect” that could endanger the entire system. 14 Estimates of current space debris run as high as 600,000 objects of larger than l centimeter in diameter. As an example of the continuing dangers of space debris, Russian officials in July 2010 were reported to be warning about the threat to astronauts in the International Space Station from debris produced by the 2007 Chinese ASAT some three and a half years earlier.15 So from a positive perspective, we should propose to affirm a global-commons approach, keeping in mind that, if an agreement cannot be reached, a conflict in space could destroy the major benefits, both commercial and military, that we now enjoy, plus the potential benefits of future development. This would be an immense loss: all the ways that we communicate with each other today, the way that we navigate, and of course the way that governments spy on each other. Proponents of weaponizing space have not yet taken into account the full dimensions of this serious risk. UN GENERAL ASSEMBLY STRONGLY BELIEVES THAT WEAPONIZING SPACE COULD IMPACT THE PEACEFUL USES OF SPACE-Dean ‘04 [Jonathan; Union of Concerned Scientists; PROSPECTS FOR PEACE AND SECURITY IN OUTER SPACE; http://www.ngocdps.org/20041024; retrieved 14 August 2011] The General Assembly, considering that all UN member states, including those without space facilities, are already highly dependent on space orbiting satellites for services of all kinds, among them communications, information, navigation, remote sensing, weather forecasting, weather warning, and scientific exploration, believing that this dependence will surely increase, and convinced that the loss of or damage to these global utilities would be a major disaster for the world, calls on the governments of all UN member states to commit themselves through their vote for this resolution to non-interference, including no use of force, against all unarmed satellites of all states orbiting in space, and decides, given the importance of this issue, that evidence of non-compliance will be referred to the Security Council for action. SOLVENCY: SPACE WEAPONS WILL INCREASE PROLIFERATION THE USE OF WEAPONS IN SPACE WILL INEXORABLY LEAD TO THE USE OF NUCLEAR WAR-Johnson ‘07 [Rebecca; PhD, The Acronym Institute for Disarmament Diplomacy; Threat of Weaponisation; 09 October 2007; http://www.acronym.org.uk/space/congo.htm; retrieved 19 Jul 2011] The pursuit of missile defences could increase nuclear threats by creating an escalating offence-defence spiral, not only in production of weaponry, but also in operational situations, which could be particularly destabilising and dangerous in times of crisis. The use of space for targeting conventional forces may already provoke asymmetric threats, particularly through hacking, jamming or attacks to disable ground stations. A number of adverse security consequences are foreseeable if space were to be weaponised. It could exacerbate the threats from space debris and EMP and provoke other space-faring nations to deploy weapons for use in, to or from space. In computer wargame trials conducted by the Pentagon a few years ago, the use of weapons in space (including anti-satellite weapons) led inexorably to the use of nuclear weapons and therefore to nuclear war on the ground. Losing one's space-based 'eyes and ears' appeared to cause miscalculations that led to rushed, panicky 'use them or lose them' decisions being made, with devastating consequences.
[Rebecca; PhD, The Acronym Institute for Disarmament Diplomacy; Threat of Weaponisation; 09 October 2007;http://www.acronym.org.uk/space/congo.htm; retrieved 19 Jul 2011] The pursuit of missile defences could increase nuclear threats by creating an escalating offence-defence spiral, not only in production of weaponry, but also in operational situations, which could be particularly destabilising and dangerous in times of crisis. The use of space for targeting conventional forces may already provoke asymmetric threats, particularly through hacking, jamming or attacks to disable ground stations. A number of adverse security consequences are foreseeable if space were to be weaponised. It could exacerbate the threats from space debris and EMP and provoke other space-faring nations to deploy weapons for use in, to or from space. In computer wargame trials conducted by the Pentagon a few years ago, the use of weapons in space (including anti-satellite weapons) led inexorably to the use of nuclear weapons and therefore to nuclear war on the ground. Losing one's space-based 'eyes and ears' appeared to cause miscalculations that led to rushed, panicky 'use them or lose them' decisions being made, with devastating consequences.
[Zhang; Senior Research Associate, Project on Managing the Atom; Space Weaponization And Space Security: A Chinese Perspective; 2006; http://www.wsichina.org/attach/CS2_3.pdf; retrieved 05 Jul 2011] To protect against the potential loss of its deterrent capability, China could potentially resort to enhancing its nuclear forces. Such a move could, in turn, encourage India and then Pakistan to follow suit. Furthermore, Russia has threatened to respond to any country’s deployment of space weapons.Moreover, constructing additional weapons would produce a need for more plutonium and highly enriched uranium to fuel those weapons. This impacts China’s participation in the fissile material cut-off treaty (FMCT).15 Eventually, failure to proceed with the nuclear disarmament process, to which the nuclear weapon states committed themselves under the Non-Proliferation Treaty, would damage the entire nuclear nonproliferation regime itself, which is already at the breaking point. As Hu Xiaodi, China’s ambassador for disarmament affairs, asked, “With lethal weapons flying overhead in orbit and disrupting global strategic stability, why should people eliminate weapons of mass destruction or missiles on the ground? This cannot but do harm to global peace, security and stability, and hence be detrimental to the fundamental interests of all States.” WEAPONIZATION OF SPACE WILL ENCOURAGE NUCLEAR PROLIFERATION-Blazejewski ‘08 [Kenneth; lawyer focusing primarily on international corporate and financial transactions; Space Weaponization and US-China Relations; Strategic Studies Quarterly; Spring 2008; http://www.au.af.mil/au/ssq/2008/Spring/blazejewski.pdf; retrieved 05 Jul 2011] I argue that the United States should take a proactive role in developing international rules for the military use of outer space. The United States can use its significant international influence to shape rules that preserve its national interests, such as deploying a limited ballistic missile defense (BMD) system but placing a ban on the testing of ASAT weapons. To maximize US long-term security, however, I would argue that the United States not deploy space weapons as part of a multilayered BMD shield or otherwise. Space weapons would not contribute to US security in the way that many proponents suggest. Ultimately, space weapons deployment is likely to expose US satellites to greater threat by encouraging foreign states to develop more advanced ASAT technology and expedite nuclear proliferation. Even when considered in isolation, the decision to forgo space weaponization is a wise one; when considered within the larger context of arms control negotiations, it clearly presents an opportunity to advance US long-term security. The United States should concede to negotiate on space weaponization with China in return for Chinese cooperation in other more critical areas of counterproliferation, such as the Fissile Material Cut-Off Treaty (FMCT) and the Proliferation Security Initiative (PSI). Finally, the United States should continue to push for increased transparency in China’s military and space programs. AMERICAN SPACE WEAPONIZATION WILL ENCOURAGE CHINESE NUCLEAR PROLIFERATION-Blazejewski ‘08 [Kenneth; lawyer focusing primarily on international corporate and financial transactions; Space Weaponization and US-China Relations; Strategic Studies Quarterly; Spring 2008; http://www.au.af.mil/au/ssq/2008/Spring/blazejewski.pdf; retrieved 05 Jul 2011] First, if the United States proceeds with space weaponization China will respond by bolstering its own military capabilities.37 China’s response will seek to preserve the asymmetric threat it poses to US space assets and maintain its nuclear deterrent. Under each of the interpretations considered, China is not willing to allow the United States to build up its space weapons program unchallenged. In the least, China would develop additional ASAT weapons to which the United States would seek to develop effective countermeasures.38 Alternatively or in addition, China could invest in more ICBMs and nuclear warheads,39 acquiring the capacity to overwhelma BMD shield. An option less likely in the near future, China could counter US space weaponization by deploying its own space weapons. Other potential Chinese responses include adopting a “launch on warning” policy or abandoning its no-first-use pledge.40 Each of these strategies would seek to counter the effectiveness of US space weapons. The United States, ofcourse, could always respond to China’s response, but such tit-for-tat policy making risks devolving into an arms race. Chinese officials claim that an arms race would “likely emerge” unless a negotiated solution can be reached on PAROS.41 It is noteworthy, however, that under at least two interpretations, this is not China’s preferred outcome. Under the first and second interpretations, China will only proceed with further developing ASAT technology and acquiring additional weapons if it cannot be assured that the United States does not plan to weaponize outer space. DECIDING TO FORGO SPACE WEAPONIZATION WILL GIVE THE US PRESSURE ON CRITICAL NUCLEAR PROLIFERATION CONTROL REGIMES-Blazejewski ‘08 [Kenneth; lawyer focusing primarily on international corporate and financial transactions; Space Weaponization and US-China Relations; Strategic Studies Quarterly; Spring 2008; http://www.au.af.mil/au/ssq/2008/Spring/blazejewski.pdf; retrieved 05 Jul 2011] A second reason for US commitment not to place weapons in space is the negotiating leverage such a concession would provide. Of course, such leverage cannot be taken for granted. Rather, agreement not to weaponize outer space could be loosely conditional on making progress in other areas of US security. There are at least three areas where the United States could expect to gain concessions from China in return for a commitment not to weaponize space. First, China’s participation at the CD strongly suggests that it might be willing to begin negotiations on an FMCT, a top security priority of successive US governments, if the United States agrees to negotiate on space weapons.54 Since China’s commitment to the FMCTcan facilitate the FMCT commitments of India and Pakistan, its participation is critical.55 Second, the United States can demand greater support from China on the Proliferation Security Initiative. The PSI, which seeks to prevent illicit sea and air transport of fissile material, has been identified by the Bush administration as a key program in reducing the possibility of acquisition of nuclear weapons by a terrorist organization. To date, China’s muted opposition to the PSI stands as one of the greatest impediments to a fuller development of the initiative.56 Chinese cooperation could be vital to this program’s success. THREAT CONSTRUCTION BASED ON FUTURE THREATS LAYS THE FOUNDATION FOR AN EXPANSION OF THE KIND OF MILITARISM THAT KILLED HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS-Carr ‘10 [Matt; writer and journalist; Slouching towards dystopia: the new military futurism; Race & Class; Volume 51 (3), 2010; pgs. 13-31] In the course of the twentieth century, unchecked militarism killed millions of human beings, destroyed entire cities and placed the existence of humanity in jeopardy. Today, as the Pentagon seeks to use its vast military budgets to populate the future with robot armies, super soldiers and airborne drones that ‘see’ inside buildings and kill their occupants, the dark visions of the military futurists are providing a justification for endless global war against enemies that may never exist. In doing so, they are laying the foundations for a militarised and weaponised future, even as they shape the wars and conflicts of the present. All this suggests, if nothing else, that the future is too important to be left to the military. And if we are to avoid the bleak dystopias that the military futurists would impose upon us, we need, perhaps more than ever, to work towards a future where human beings, not robots and soldiers, can find their place on earth. Directory: file -> fetch fetch -> 11 th Lit Semester 1 Final Study Guide!!! fetch -> Industrial Revolution Inventors fetch -> Analysis for Galveston Hurricane of 1900 fetch -> The Illuminators (Team 2) 1900 Galveston Hurricane Cycle a team Assignment fetch -> Team csi-utb ruth Reyes Jose Ferrer fetch -> Galveston Hurricane of 1900 Cycle a-teacher as a Problem Solver fetch -> Is Climate Change Starting a New Dust Bowl? Cycle A fetch -> What makes a storm a hurricane fetch -> The 1950s were the "Happy Days" because it was a time of economic prosperity, technology development, new entertainment, new fashion and family growth. The 1950s was a great time fetch -> Sputnik and The Dawn of the Space Age Download 1.49 Mb. Share with your friends:
|