Tampa Prep 2009-2010 Impact Defense File


Ext #1 – No War No Central Asian war – the SCO checks conflict



Download 2.71 Mb.
Page35/230
Date28.01.2017
Size2.71 Mb.
#9494
1   ...   31   32   33   34   35   36   37   38   ...   230

Ext #1 – No War




No Central Asian war – the SCO checks conflict

Maksutov in ‘6 (Ruslan, Stockholm International Peace Research Institute, “The Shanghai Cooperation Organization: A Central Asian Perspective”, August, http://www.sipri.org/contents/worldsec/Ruslan.SCO.pdf/download)

As a starting point, it is fair to say that all Central Asian countries—as well as China and Russia—are interested in security cooperation within a multilateral framework, such as the SCO provides. For Central Asia this issue ranks in importance with that of economic development, given the explosive environment created locally by a mixture of external and internal threats. Central Asia is encircled by four of the world’s eight known nuclear weapon states (China, India, Russia and Pakistan), of which Pakistan has a poor nuclear non-proliferation profile and Afghanistan is a haven for terrorism and extremism. Socio-economic degradation in Central Asian states adds to the reasons for concern and makes obvious the interdependence between progress in security and in development. Some scholars argue that currently concealed tendencies evolving in various states of Central Asia—such as the wide-ranging social discontent with oppressive regimes in the region, and the growing risks of state collapse and economic decline—all conducive to the quick growth of radical religious movements, could have far-reaching implications for regional stability once they come more into the light. 41 At first sight, the instruments established by the SCO to fulfil its declared security- building objectives seem to match the needs that Central Asian states have defined against this background. While the existence of the SCO further reduces the already remote threat of conventional interstate war in the region, 42 it allows for a major and direct focus on the non-state, non-traditional and transnational threats that now loom so large by comparison.




Ext #2 – No Escalation



Won’t draw in Russia, China, or the U.S.

Weitz ’06 (Richard, Senior Fellow – Hudson Institute, Washington Quarterly, Summer, Lexis)

Concerns about a renewed great game are thus exaggerated. The contest for influence in the region does not directly challenge the vital national interests of China, Russia, or the United States, the most important extraregional countries in Central Asian security affairs. Unless restrained, however, competitive pressures risk impeding opportunities for beneficial cooperation among these countries. The three external great powers have incentives to compete for local allies, energy resources, and military advantage, but they also share substantial interests, especially in reducing terrorism and drug trafficking. If properly aligned, the major multilateral security organizations active in Central Asia could provide opportunities for cooperative diplomacy in a region where bilateral ties traditionally have predominated.
Central Asian conflict won’t escalate

Olga Oliker, Senior International Policy Analyst at RAND and David Shlapak, acting director for strategy and doctrine for RAND, 2005, “U.S. Interests in Central Asia,” http://www.rand.org/pubs/monographs/2005/RAND_MG338.pdf, p. 41-42



Broadly speaking, there are two primary military reasons the United States would seek to maintain a long-term military presence on for- eign shores. The first has already been mentioned: the existence of an imminent threat to key U.S. interests. For half a century, for exam- ple, the United States has kept Army and Air Force units stationed in South Korea to deter a second North Korean attack and to help de- feat it, should deterrence fail. Putting aside the question of whether or not U.S. interests in Central Asia are sufficient to justify an American defensive shield, even if an external threat to the area existed, the facts appear to support the conclusion that no such danger exists. Although Russia is certainly angling to restore its influence in these ex- Soviet territories, there is no hint of a serious military threat. The new Russian base in Tajikistan, which evolved from many years of pres- ence by its 201st Motor Rifle Division, will keep some 5,000 troops in the country, including an air component. Russian border guards have now left the mission in Tajik hands, leaving only an advisory presence. Moreover, Russian forces in Tajikistan are seen by many as bolstering the Dushanbe regime. Similarly, the air base outside the Kyrgyz town of Kant does not appear to threaten Kyrgyz sover- eignty.4 China, the neighborhood’s other heavy hitter, is also anxious to enhance its relationships with the Central Asian republics; it is the lead nation in the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) and has participated in multiple military exercises with various Central Asian countries. Beijing’s military attention is focused elsewhere and its designs on the region are economic and political—they do not threaten the Central Asian states militarily.5 While aggression among Central Asian actors is sometimes touted as a possibility, none of the region’s militaries appear capable of mounting serious offensive operations and there are few if any issues at stake between Central Asian nations that would warrant large-scale military action

AT: Civil-Military Relations




1. Civil military relations will always be strained – opposing values

Cohen 2000 Former Secretary of Defense.

Eliot A. Cohen. Why the Gap Matters - gap between military and civilian world. The National Interest. http://www.dtic.mil/miled/pamphlet/AFO18.pdf.


To do so, they must begin by purging themselves of the notion that if there is no threat of a coup, there is no problem. The truth is that the civil-military relationship in a democracy is almost invariably difficult, setting up as it does opposing values, powerful institutions with great resources, and inevitable tensions between military professionals and statesmen. Those difficulties have become more acute in the United States as a result of two great changes: the end of a centuries-old form of military organization, and a transformation in America's geopolitical circumstances.



Download 2.71 Mb.

Share with your friends:
1   ...   31   32   33   34   35   36   37   38   ...   230




The database is protected by copyright ©ininet.org 2024
send message

    Main page