Gonzaga Debate Institute 2011 Mercury China Coop Aff
Topicality – Space Development (1/2)
Download 0.99 Mb.
|
- Navigate this page:
- Topicality – Space Development (2/2)
- Security/Pan K Link Turn (1/3)
Topicality – Space Development (1/2)Space development includes international coop Moskowitz, Space.com senior writer, 10 [Clara, 4-29-10, Space.com, "Future Space Exploration Hinges on International Cooperation, Astronauts Say," http://www.space.com/8297-future-space-exploration-hinges-international-cooperation-astronauts.html, accessed 7-10-11] The final frontier must become more of an international endeavor or space exploration could stagnate, according to three veteran astronauts from two different countries. Only through further collaboration between nations can humanity reach its next major space goals, the spaceflying group — which included a former NASA astronaut, an American space tourist and the first Chinese man to fly into space — said at the 26th National Space Symposium in Colorado Springs, Colo., this month. "I think the development of space endeavors is not for one nation or one country," said Yang Liwei, China's first astronaut. "I myself as an astronaut, I believe that the multinational, the international cooperation is the future triumph of the development of space industry," he said through a translator. Cooperation includes continual development with China Imran, Masters candidate at Universidade Nova de Lisboa, 10 (Mara, “China's space program : a new tool for PRC "soft power" in international relations?” accessed:7-01-11, http://run.unl.pt/handle/10362/5473 pg 87-89)TJL If the United States truly wants to engage China in a positive and productive manner regarding space, this perspective argues that Washington needs to see China as a potential partner and not just as “rival” or “competitor.” As Nicolas Peter notes, “…few if any countries in the world today can stand alone in space activities, demonstrating therefore the importance of cooperation”.307 Although Washington continues to snub Beijing’s request to serve as a partner on the ISS, there may be some actual merit to allowing China to participate in the program. One obvious benefit would be China’s ability to participate financially and allow for some cost-sharing. With its large foreign reserves and sovereign wealth fund, China is in a better position than other ISS participants (e.g., Brazil, Italy) to help offset some of the continual development and sustainment costs. Another potential benefit in Chinese collaboration would be greater insight and transparency into China’s own space program and technical capabilities. Richard Fisher, vice president of the International Assessment and Strategy Center, offered a slightly puzzling, pessimistic argument in favor of denying Chinese participation in the ISS, as follows: When we look to our own potential future cooperation, dialogue, space dialogue with China, we have to keep this [potential for military dual-use purposes] in mind. That when we invite—if we were to invite—a Chinese astronaut onto the space shuttle, that the information technology that that single individual might pick up could be turned into a potential Chinese military space platform.308 There is scant evidence, however, that a man orbiting in space would truly add any significant military advantage, especially concerning information technology. Johnson-Freese dryly noted that neither the Americans nor Soviets could find any particular advantage to having a manned military presence in space and that “there seems little basis for such a fear [that Chinese ingenuity would find value in a military-man-in space that eluded the U.S. military]”.309 On a more optimistic note, space cooperation between NASA and the CNSA, its Chinese counterpart, through increased contact and exchanges of information, could help overcome mutual mistrust and ambiguity. Over the long-term, it could potentially give way to strengthened confidence and assurance of each others’ intentions and concerns about space, reducing ambiguity and increasing transparency across the board. Even during the height of the Cold War, America held a joint space docking exercise with the Soviet Union in 1975 which “achieved important [CARD CONTINUES] Topicality – Space Development (2/2)[CARD CONTINUED, NO TEXT REMOVED] technical and political breakthroughs”.310 If the United States could work with its bitter communist rival during the dark days of the Cold War, according to the “space partner” perspective, Washington could safely find a place for Sino-U.S. space cooperation in the 21st century. Working in a more direct fashion with the Chinese, it could be argued, may also help keep their space program directed at peaceful objectives and dampen any secret ambitions to militarize outer space. Even some Chinese scholars would agree on this point, including Wu Chunsi from Fudan University’s Center for American Studies. He suggests that Washington’s active engagement China in space could help create a clean break between the civilian and military programs and that “the commercial and civilian elements of China’s space program will see their capabilities grow along with a sense of independence from the military”.311 Furthermore, Wu argues, “if China follows a path of isolation, exclusion will only deepen its suspicion and resentment, and the commercial and civilian sectors…would be forced to seek help from the government, or even the military”.312 Thus, instead of acting as a “space hyper-power,” a U.S. invitation to the Chinese to become a space partner could arguably soften its image as a global hegemon, and also increase U.S. soft power and credibility with the Chinese.313 Security/Pan K Link Turn (1/3)Link Turn – Cooperation with China defies traditional realist theories and can solve for the miscalculations and arm race over space Rathberger et al., European Space Policy Institute Resident Fellow, 7 (Wolfgang AND Joachim GLAUBITZ (formerly with Stiftung Wissenschaft und Politik, Berlin) AND Keith HAYWARD (Royal Aeronautical Society, London) AND Isabelle SOURBÈS-VERGER (Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, Paris), China’s Posture in Space, Report 3, June 2007, pp 42-43) AC Even if China has its own plan to build an independent capability, it’ll be eager to cooperate with the US But the reluctance of US militaries and containment promoters is still overweighting the need for cooperation. As James Lewis showed, China’s plans fit well with Michael Griffin’s description of how he envisions the cooperation between the two countries: each nation will build is own highway to the moon and then they will cooperate when they’ll get there15. But this view clearly demonstrates that the US is ready to cooperate only if they don’t substantially improve China’s capabilities in doing so. This is precisely the inescapable paradox of the US position toward China. On one hand, cooperation will increase American influence over China’s space program and capabilities. This could foster economic ties and mutual comprehension. But on the other hand, this will fill the technological gap between the two countries which means that the relative power of the US will decrease in the benefit of China. Thus, the possibility of cooperation between China and the US still depends on how both countries conceive their national interests. The close economic interdependence between both countries has not yet been followed by any great increase in trust and dialogue. And at the same time, the intertwining of civil and military programs as well as the lack of a clear-cut definition of China’s space ambitions will worry the promoters of engagement and motivate those of containment. The Chinese anti-satellite test of 11 January 2007 has clearly shown the divide between those two strategies toward China. The hit of a seven-year old Chinese satellite (Feng-Yun 1C) in polar orbit at an altitude of 848 kilometres by a missile launched from the Xichang Space Centre stirred up the media, the congressmen and the political analysts, but not always for the same reasons. While hardliners such as California Republican Senator Duncan Hunter called upon the United States to increase its anti-missile capabilities immediately, analysts like Philip E. Coyle and Theresa Hitchens outlined the need for cooperation after the event16. Through the lenses of power politics and balance of power theory, the test has largely been interpreted as a sign of China’s aggressiveness. Even if the United States and Soviet Union have conducted anti-satellite tests from the early 60’s, the January test seemed to have clearly demonstrated the increase of China’s capabilities and its challenging behaviour. Thus, facing the new Chinese capabilities, the US has no choice but to increase its capabilities in order to ensure its security. Corresponding to the idea of international politics as Realpolitik, this view has been held by the promoters of US leadership in space. Since the Rumsfeld Commission Report of 2001, the US government devoted significant resources to establish military space control and the Chinese test seems to challenge this goal. But in the meantime, it raises questions about the legitimacy of the current US strategy. For example, if Theresa Hitchens considers the test as “provocative” and “irresponsible”, this was not because it could trigger a militarization of space but because it created persistent space debris in a highly used orbit. Challenging the realist common-sense assumptions and denouncing the aggressive unilateral path in space being trod by the Bush administration during the past 5 years, Hitchens – consistent with her liberal views – believes that China’s efforts to become a peer competitor in space could have positive implications (like cooperation on civil space programs). So does Phillip Coyle when he states that an arms race in space does not necessarily need to follow from the Chinese test. Far from being an aggressive act, this test could be interpreted as a signal to open the difficult discussion leading to a treaty freeing space from militarization. Thus, as Theresa Hitchens stated, this test signifies that the US has a “rapidly disappearing window” within which it can construct a cooperative atmosphere with China and all the space-faring powers. Therefore, even if China should be criticized for the material consequences of its act, it should not be condemned for its political implications. Directory: files files -> Answer True False 2 points Question 2 files -> Integer programming and game theory files -> 4 Integer Programming files -> Bpa vehicle Window Repair Scenario #1 task: Procure vehicle window relacement. Objective files -> Pop Warner History files -> North Carolina Inclusion Initiative Mapping Where Children with ieps are Being Served Purpose files -> Fall 2013 Spring 2014 Program Data: Standard 1 Exhibit 4d files -> Hanban – asia society confucius classrooms network 2010 request for proposal files -> Northern England’s set-jetting locations Download 0.99 Mb. Share with your friends:
|