Relations impacts and cp’s
Japanese rearm would end global non-prolif – causing nuclear war
Download 1.27 Mb.
|
- Navigate this page:
- Ext. Japan rearm bad – India/Pakistan
- US-Japan relations Bad-Russia
- A2: US-Japan relations Good-Heg
Japanese rearm would end global non-prolif – causing nuclear warBiden 01 [Joe Biden, Vice President, The World Affairs Council, National Press Club, 5/10/01, http://www.worldaffairsdc.org/Main.asp?sid=14&nxt=&recr=&iPressID=22] First, Asian arms races could spark a nuclear war, breaching the firebreak against nuclear war that we have maintained for 56 years. Second, countries like Taiwan, the two Koreas, or Japan might decide that they needed nuclear weapons because Asia has become such a dangerous neighborhood. That would end nuclear non-proliferation world-wide, and leave us much less secure than we are today. So, the arms race concern of a generation ago has gone away. But the concern about nuclear instability is no longer just a U.S.-Soviet matter. Today it is a global issue. Ext. Japan rearm bad – India/PakistanJAPANESE REARM WOULD BE RAPID AND CAUSE INDIA/PAKISTAN ARMS RACESBusiness Week 2003 <1/20, Lexis> If Japan could get beyond the hurdles, it likely wouldn't need long to develop a bomb. It has five tons of plutonium stored in the nuclear research center of Tokai-mura, north of Tokyo, and its scientists know how to convert it to weapons-grade material. Hideyuki Ban, director of the nonprofit Citizens' Nuclear Information Center, says Japan could build a nuclear bomb within months. And its civilian rocket and satellite launching system could easily be converted to military use. Japan also has superbly equipped land, sea, and air forces that could deliver medium-range nukes to North Korea. But if Japan decides to build its own nukes, get ready for an Asian arms race. China would likely want to boost its arsenal, which would prompt India to develop more nuclear weapons, which would spur Pakistan to do the same -- and on and on into an ever more perilous future. NOW IS KEY – ARMS RACING WILL RUIN INDIAN DÉTENTE AND CAUSE NUCLEAR WAR Dallas Morning News 5/15/04 Yet Indians aren't disadvantaged at the ballot, and they showed it by tossing out Vajpayee's Bharatiya Janata Party. The new administration probably will be a coalition dominated by the Congress Party, led by Sonia Gandhi of the Gandhi political dynasty. The new administration should retain the best of the old _ detente with Pakistan and China, openness to trade and investment, and cooperation in the war against Islamist terrorism. The detente is important to avoid a dangerous and debilitating nuclear arms race, which easily could deteriorate into nuclear war. The free-market strategy is necessary to create jobs for India's deep ranks of unemployed. And the defense cooperation is essential to defeat the Islamists, who have both India and the United States in their sights. THIS CAUSES EXTINCTION Washington Times, 2001 (July 8, lexis) The most dangerous place on the planet is Kashmir, a disputed territory convulsed and illegally occupied for more than 53 years and sandwiched between nuclear-capable India and Pakistan. It has ignited two wars between the estranged South Asian rivals in 1948 and 1965, and a third could trigger nuclear volleys and a nuclear winter threatening the entire globe. The United States would enjoy no sanctuary. US-Japan relations Bad-RussiaRelations Cause Russian Security Concerns and Arms RacesSevastyanov 10[Sergey Sevastyanov , Professor of International Studies as Vladivostok State University, “ The U.S. Japan Allaince” 2010 Ed by David Arase, pp. 148-149] As far as security threats posed by the US Japan alliance in the region arc concerned, Moscow considers two of them as most critical: the already running US-Japanese program to establish a TMD system in Northeast Asia and possible Japanese decision to acquire nuclear weapons. Both of these developments are unacceptable to Moscow, because they will destroy the military balance of power in the region, and inevitably accelerate conventional and nuclear arms races, especially involving China. Russia enjoys a positive experience of interaction with both members of the US-Japan security alliance in solving the nuclear safely problem of the Russian Far East. However, Moscow's general approach to the American-led security alliances in NEA is very cautious. Although they do not pose any direct threat to Russia's security, Moscow is not a part of this system and thus its options in championing its interest in the region are limited. That is why Russia is keen on complementing American regional alliances with a new international governmental organization to deal with security issues in Northeast Asia that could be formed, for example, on the basis of the Six-Party Talks mechanism. Moscow also welcomes the activities of the ASEAN Regional Forum and other multilateral security architectures, proposing to "move in this direction in a step-by-step manner, with the goal of establishing an integrated system that covers the entire Asia-Pacific.''"* A2: US-Japan relations Good-HegOnly solves Heg in asia, can’t solve alt causalities such as wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and national debts2. Heg solves nothing.Layne ‘6 (Christopher, Associate Prof. Pol. Sci. – Texas A & M, “The Peace of Illusions: American Grand Strategy from 1940 to the Present”, p. 176-177) A second contention advanced by proponents of American hegemony is that the United States cannot withdraw from Eurasia because a great power war there could shape the postconflict international system in ways harmful to U.S. interests. Hence, the United States "could suffer few economic losses during a war, or even benefit somewhat, and still find the postwar environment quite costly to its own trade and investment."59 This really is not an economic argument but rather an argument about the consequences of Eurasia's political and ideological, as well as economic, closure. Proponents of hegemony fear that if great power wars in Eurasia occur, they could bring to power militaristic or totalitarian regimes. Here, several points need to be made. First, proponents of American hegemony overestimate the amount of influence that the United States has on the international system. There are numerous possible geopolitical rivalries in Eurasia. Most of these will not culminate in war, but it's a good bet that some will. But regardless of whether Eurasian great powers remain at peace, the outcomes are going to be caused more by those states' calculations of their interests than by the presence of U.S. forces in Eurasia. The United States has only limited power to affect the amount of war and peace in the international system, and whatever influence it does have is being eroded by the creeping multipolarization under way in Eurasia. Second, the possible benefits of "environment shaping" have to be weighed against the possible costs of U.S. involvement in a big Eurasian war. Finally, distilled to its essence, this argument is a restatement of the fear that U.S. security and interests inevitably will be jeopardized by a Eurasian hegemon. This threat is easily exaggerated, and manipulated, to disguise ulterior motives for U.S. military intervention in Eurasia. 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 1.27 Mb. Share with your friends:
|