322 Ko Nmd Da

DDI ’08 Jackie “Awesome” Wu & A-Bomb

NMD DA 1/115

NMD DA- Peer Reviewed and Censored NMD DA- Peer Reviewed and Censored.........................................................................................................1 1NC POLISH SECURITY Shell..................................................................................................................4 1NC CZECH SHELL 1..................................................................................................................................6 1NC CZECH SHELL 2/3...............................................................................................................................7 1NC CZECH SHELL 3/3...............................................................................................................................8 1NC CZECH LOLCRABS Alternate SHELL 2/2......................................................................................10 1NC EUROPE NMD SHELL ........................................................................................................................11 1NC EUROPE NMD SHELL 2/2 .................................................................................................................13 1NC EUROPE NMD SHELL 2/2 B..............................................................................................................15 U: NOW IS KEY............................................................................................................................................16 Perception of unilat blocks NMD...................................................................................................................17 U: CZECH......................................................................................................................................................18 U: POLAND...................................................................................................................................................19 U: RUSSIA.....................................................................................................................................................21 U: GERMANY...............................................................................................................................................22 U: FRANCE....................................................................................................................................................23 LINK: SECURITY.........................................................................................................................................24 LINK: SECURITY.........................................................................................................................................26 LINK: SECURITY—POLAND ....................................................................................................................27 LINK: SECURITY—POLAND.....................................................................................................................29 LINK: ALTERNATIVE ENERGY—POLAND............................................................................................31 LINK: ALTERNATIVE ENERGY—POLAND............................................................................................32 LINK: ALTERNATIVE ENERGY—POLAND............................................................................................34 LINK: NUCLEAR PLANT LOLZ.................................................................................................................35 LINK: PROLIF...............................................................................................................................................36 LINK: PROLIF...............................................................................................................................................38 LINK: PROLIF...............................................................................................................................................40 LINK: PROLIF—POLAND...........................................................................................................................41 LINK: IRAQ...................................................................................................................................................42 LINK: IRAQ—POLAND/CZECH................................................................................................................43 AFF LINK: CTBT..........................................................................................................................................44 LINK: ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION.................................................................................................45 LINK: CLIMATE...........................................................................................................................................46 LINK: CLIMATE...........................................................................................................................................48 LINK: CLIMATE...........................................................................................................................................49 LINK: CAP AND TRADE.............................................................................................................................50 LINK: MULTILATERAL ANYTHING.........................................................................................................51 LINK: MULTILATERAL ANYTHING.........................................................................................................52 LINK: AIR POWER / MILITARY—POLAND.............................................................................................54 LINK: AIR POWER / MILITARY—POLAND.............................................................................................55 LINK: AFGHANISTAN.................................................................................................................................56 INTERNAL: NMD TRADING......................................................................................................................57 INTERNAL: NMD TRADING—POLAND..................................................................................................59 INTERNAL: SUPPORT KEY........................................................................................................................60 INTERNAL: Poland key to European support...............................................................................................62 NMD BAD—ARMAMENT..........................................................................................................................63 NMD BAD: KILLS RUSSIAN RELATIONS...............................................................................................64 NMD BAD: KILLS RUSSIAN RELATIONS...............................................................................................65 NMD BAD: WAR WITH CHINA..................................................................................................................66 NMD BAD: NUCLEAR ARMS RACE.........................................................................................................67 1 A Jackie Wu and Anuj Bapodra Production:

DDI ’08 Jackie “Awesome” Wu & A-Bomb

NMD DA 2/115

NMD BAD—ARMS RACE, CHINA............................................................................................................68 Terminal Impacts: Russian retaliation............................................................................................................69 NMD invades Russian Sphere of Influence/ Disrupts Relations...................................................................71 U.S. Russian Relations Brink Card.................................................................................................................73 Impact Module: Joint Data Exchange Center/Accidental Launch.................................................................74 Impact- Intermediate Range Nuclear Forces Treaty.......................................................................................76 Impact- Accidental Space Arms Race ............................................................................................................77 Impact- U.S. Russian Relations Key to Iran...................................................................................................79 Impact- Pre-Emptive Nuke Strike..................................................................................................................82 NUCLEAR PROLIF.......................................................................................................................................84 NMD GOOD—DETERRANCE....................................................................................................................86 NMD GOOD: PREVENT WAR.....................................................................................................................87 NMD GOOD: WEAPON PROLIF................................................................................................................88 NMD "GOOD"—WIN WARS.......................................................................................................................89 NMD Good Impacts- Deters Nuclear War....................................................................................................90 NMD Good Impact- Deters Proliferation......................................................................................................91 NMD Good Impact- Solves Terrorism..........................................................................................................93 NMD Good Impact- Iran...............................................................................................................................94 .......................................................................................................................................................................94 NMD Good Iran Impact Extension ...............................................................................................................96 NMD Good Impact– Russian Expansionism ................................................................................................98 NMD Good – Russian Expansionism Extension ........................................................................................100 NEG: CZECH/POLAND KEY....................................................................................................................101 NEG: A2 "NMD FAILS"..............................................................................................................................102 POLITICS—OBAMA K2 NMD..................................................................................................................103 2AC FRONTLINE 1/2.................................................................................................................................104 2AC FRONTLINE 2/2.................................................................................................................................105 AFF: OTHER NMD INEVITABLE.............................................................................................................106 AFF: DISAD'S NOT INTRINSIC ...............................................................................................................108 AFF: NON/U—CZECH...............................................................................................................................109 AFF: NO LINK—POLAND........................................................................................................................110 AFF: RUSSIAN IMPACT TURN.................................................................................................................111 SPACE AFF TURNS 1/2..............................................................................................................................112 SPACE AFF TURNS 2/2.............................................................................................................................112 IRAQ ADVANTAGE LINK TURN.............................................................................................................114 RANDOM EXTRANEOUS CARDS...........................................................................................................115

Notes: Jackie’s Notes: THERE ARE FIVE F---ING SHELLS! FIVE!!!

SHELLS!!!!!!!!

LOLCRAB SHELLS!!!!!!!!!!! Security links are for Heg, Soft power, Military, Deterrance, Etc, or anything that could

be construed to increase Poland or whoever's security. The Air Power links to Poland are really, really sweet; they literally say trading NMD for improved security in the same sentence. Read them. They apply to military too. Also, there are almost no terminal impacts in this file. I don't believe in terminal impacts. Pull them from other files. Lolcrabs, a new disad the day before disclosure? --NMDz 2 A Jackie Wu and Anuj Bapodra Production:

DDI ’08 Jackie “Awesome” Wu & A-Bomb

NMD DA 3/115

Anuj’s Notes: It’ll be in your best interest to watch out for Jackie Wu’s psychotic behavior; apparently he likes eating LOLCRABs- yet another thing to be banned at the Beijing Olympics along with dog meat. The terminal impacts are so good you’ll want to read them all in the 2NC and 1NR without doing any line-by-line. Research and let your cards do the talking. -Anuj (A-Bomb)

3 A Jackie Wu and Anuj Bapodra Production:

DDI ’08 Jackie “Awesome” Wu & A-Bomb

NMD DA 4/115

1NC POLISH SECURITY Shell A. UNIQUE LINK : U.S. talks over NMD now—increasing Polish security is key to acceptance ChinaView, March 08 http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2008-03/13/content_7780787.htm [JWu]

A day after Tusk's meeting with Bush at the White House, Polish Defense Minister Bogdan Klich said Tuesday that the deployment of the U.S. missile defense system in Poland would depend on the country's security situation despite pledges by Washington to upgrade its military. The minister said the Polish government is assessing whether the promised U.S. military aid can offset a possible security threat to Poland brought about by the deployment of the missile shield. Klich said if Poland's national security should be undermined as a result of the scheme, the government will by no means ink a deal with the United States on the issue. Out of security concerns, Poland has asked the U.S. to provide Patriot 3 or THAAD missiles and listed 17 areas of its military that the U.S. could help modernize. Poland has also asked for military aid worth several billion U.S. dollars. Poland also wants to forge closer ties with the U.S., demanding a bilateral relationship similar to the one between the U.S. and Britain. The Polish government's desire for such a hard bargain with the United States is also a response to the concerns of the Polish people.

4 A Jackie Wu and Anuj Bapodra Production:

DDI ’08 Jackie “Awesome” Wu & A-Bomb

NMD DA 5/115

B. NMD CAUSES GLOBAL ARMS RACE, WEAPONS PROLIF, AND SPACE WEPS CAMILLE GRAND, Institut français des Relations internationales (IFRI), Paris. Lecturer, Institut

d’études politiques de Paris, and Ecole spéciale militaire, and Adviser for arms control and nonproliferation at the French Ministry of Defense. 01 "NMD and arms control: a European view." http://www.mi.infn.it/~landnet/NMD/grand.pdf [JWu]

Analysts opposing NMD and European leaders have written numerous pieces, and made numerous statements demonstrating a genuine concern that, if mishandled, NMD could or would jeopardize 30 years of arms control efforts. French President Jacques Chirac stated that NMD is “of a nature to retrigger a proliferation of weapons, notably nuclear missiles.”3 German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder expressed a similar view when he said, “Neither economically, nor politically, can we afford a new round of the arms race.”4 According to these views, the worstcase arms control scenario is that NMD deployment by the US will be followed by Russia’s withdrawal from major arms treaties and verification regimes (the INF Treaty, the tactical nuclear regime of 1991, START), as well as its development of greater offensive and defensive capabilities. China would also block further arms control efforts and increase the expansion of its nuclear forces, followed by India and Pakistan. Additionally, Russia and China could loosen their already weak export controls and deliberately accelerate missile and WMD technology proliferation. “States of concern” could engage in a missile buildup to try to challenge the emerging NMD and local TMD programs. This would lead to a renewed interest and potential arms race among the major powers in more modern offensive capabilities and counteroptions including space-based weapons. Many would therefore share the view expressed at the 2000 NPT review conference by Swedish Foreign Minister Anna Lindh that NMD “could run counter to efforts to halt the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction.”

5 A Jackie Wu and Anuj Bapodra Production:

DDI ’08 Jackie “Awesome” Wu & A-Bomb

NMD DA 6/115

1NC CZECH SHELL 1 A. UNIQUENESS CZECH REPUBLIC ON FENCE ABOUT NMD

AP 7-4-08 http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2008/07/04/europe/EU-Poland-US-MissileDefense.php [JWU]

On Friday, Czech Foreign Minister Karel Schwarzenberg said his government will sign a deal with the U.S. next week on installing the radar in the Czech Republic. His government said Washington is expected to be represented at the signing by U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice during a visit to the country. However, such a deal still requires the approval of the Czech parliament, and it remains unclear whether the measure would pass. Missile defense is deeply unpopular among the Czech public, and the vote is parliament is expected to be extremely close.

B. LINK: Czech Republic is dependent on Russian oil and would love to transition to alternative energy Vladimir Volkov International Editorial Board member of WSWS 18 July 2008 http://www.wsws.org/articles/2008/jul2008/miss-j18.shtml [JWU] One more response by Russia was the decision to “punish” the Czech Republic economically. On July 8, the supply of oil to the Czech Republic through the “Friendship” pipeline was cut by half. Officially, the reduction was attributed to profound economic considerations, however the Russian mass media unequivocally pointed to a direct linkage between this decision and the issue of the radar system in the Czech Republic. It is not the first time that the Russian regime has used an “economic weapon” to exert pressure on its neighbors and partners. During the first days of 2005, gas supplies to Ukraine were halted for several days; similar threats were made against Belarussia. In the spring of 2006, a ban was placed on the import into Russia of Moldavian and Georgian wine, which painfully affected the economies of both republics. In the summer of 2006, Russia halted the supply of oil to the Mazheikyaisky oil refinery in Lithuania. This occurred after Vilnius declared the Polish oil company PKN Orlen, rather than Russian companies, the winner in competition for privatizing the refinery and transferring stock shares. The present suspension of the export of Russian oil to the Czech Republic

has caused great concern in this country. The major Czech oil-refining company, Unipetrol AS, promised that it would not allow a shortage of fuel oil or a rise in prices. Strategic reserves would be used and more oil would be supplied through a pipeline from Germany. However, if the Russian “blockade” continues, it might cause serious difficulties in supplying the Czech economy with petroleum products.

6 A Jackie Wu and Anuj Bapodra Production:

DDI ’08 Jackie “Awesome” Wu & A-Bomb

NMD DA 7/115

1NC CZECH SHELL 2/3 C. UNIQUE INTERNAL LINK—FURTHER NMD PROGRESS WILL BE PERCEIVED AS HARMFUL TO SECURITY AND CAUSE RUSSIAN BACKLASH Vladimir Volkov International Editorial Board member of WSWS 18 July 2008 http://www.wsws.org/articles/2008/jul2008/miss-j18.shtml [JWU] The US and the Czech Republic signed an agreement July 8 in Prague for the deployment of radar and anti-missile systems on the territory of this Eastern European country. The pact has become one more step in sharpening geopolitical tensions between the United States and Russia. It evoked a stormy response from Moscow. Signed by American Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and Czech Minister of Foreign Affairs Karel Schwarzenberg, the agreement is opposed by about 70 percent of Czech citizens. Its defenders justify the agreement by pointing to the need to defend Europe from possible Iranian missile attacks. However, the Russian side insists that the true target of creating an infrastructure of anti-missile defense in Eastern Europe is not Iran, but Russia. If the plan is realized, then the military and political positions of Russia would be weakened. A statement by the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs published on the next day said that “the Russian side in such a situation will take adequate measures to compensate for potential threats to its national security.” This statement referred not to “diplomatic, but military-technological methods.” Speaking on July 15 in the Kremlin at a meeting with representatives of the diplomatic corps, Russian President Dmitry Medvedev said: “Placing elements of a global anti-missile system by the US in Eastern Europe only deepens the situation, and we will be forced to react to this adequately.” He declared that Russia’s national security could not be maintained simply by the good word of its partners, and he accused Washington of “gradually undermining... the strategic stability in relations between our countries.” D. KABLOOEY!!!! Helen Caldicott, founder of Physicians for Social Responsibility, 2002, “The New Nuclear Danger”, p. 7-12. [T-Jacob] If launched from Russia, nuclear weapons would explode over American cities thirty minutes after takeoff. (China's twenty missiles are liquidfueled, not solid-fueled. They take many hours to fuel and could not be used in a surprise attack, but they would produce similar damage if launched. Other nuclear-armed nations, such as India and Pakistan, do not have the missile technology to attack the U.S.) It is assumed that most cities with a population over 100,000 people are targeted by Russia. During these thirty minutes, the U.S. early-warning infrared satellite detectors signal the

attack to the strategic air command in Colorado. They in turn notify the president, who has approximately three minutes to decide whether or not to launch a counterattack. In the counterforce scenario the US. government currently embraces, he does [the U.S.] launch[es], the missiles pass mid-space, and the whole operation is over within one hour. Landing at 20 times the speed of sound, nuclear weapons explode over cities, with heat equal to that inside the center of the sun.

There is practically no warning, except the emergency broadcast system on radio or TV, which gives the public only minutes to reach the nearest fallout shelter, assuming there is one. There is no time to collect children or immediate family members. The bomb, or bombs-because most major cities will be hit with more than one explosion-will gouge out craters 200 feet deep and 1000 feet in diameter if they explode at ground level. Most, however, are programmed to produce an air burst, which increases the diameter of destruction, but creates a shallower crater. Half a mile from the epicenter all buildings will be destroyed, and at 1.7 miles only reinforced concrete buildings will remain. At 2.7 miles bare skeletons of buildings still stand, single-family residences have disappeared, 50 percent are dead and 40 percent severely injured.' Bricks and mortar are converted to missiles traveling at hundreds of miles an hour. Bodies have been sucked out of buildings and converted to

7 A Jackie Wu and Anuj Bapodra Production:

DDI ’08 Jackie “Awesome” Wu & A-Bomb

NMD DA 8/115

1NC CZECH SHELL 3/3 missiles themselves, flying through the air at loo miles per hour. Severe overpressures (pressure many times greater than normal atmospheric have popcorned windows, producing millions of shards of flying glass, causing decapitations and shocking lacerations. Overpressures have also entered the nose, mouth, and ears, inducing rupture of lungs and rupture of the tympanic membranes or eardrums. Most people will suffer severe burns. In Hiroshima, which was devastated by a very small bomb-13 kilotons compared to the current iooo kilotons-a child actually disappeared, vaporized, leaving his shadow on the concrete pavement behind him. A mother was running, holding her baby, and both she and the baby were converted to a charcoal statue. The heat will be so intense that dry objects-furniture, clothes, and dry wood-will spontaneously ignite. Humans will become walking, flaming torches. Forty or fifty miles from the explosion people will instantly be blinded from retinal burns if they glance at the flash. Huge firestorms will engulf thousands of square miles, fanned by winds

from the explosion that transiently exceed 1000 miles per hour. People in fallout shelters will be asphyxiated as fire sucks oxygen from the shelters. (This happened in Hamburg after the Allied bombing in WWII when temperatures within the shelters, caused by conventional bombs, reached 1472 degrees Fahrenheit.)" Most of the city and its people will be converted to radioactive dust shot up in the mushroom cloud. The area of lethal fallout from this cloud will depend upon the prevailing wind and weather conditions; it could cover thousands of square miles. Doses of 5000 rads (a rad is a measure of radiation dose) or more experienced by people close to the explosion-if they are still aliv-will produce acute encephalopathic syndrome. The cells of the brain will become so damaged that they would swell. Because the brain is enclosed in a fixed bony space, there is no room for swelling, so the pressure inside the skull rises, inducing symptoms of excitability, acute nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, severe headache, and seizures, followed by coma and death within twenty-four hours. A lower dose of 1000 rads causes death from gastrointestinal symptoms. The lining cells of the gut die, as do the cells in the bone marrow that fight infection and that cause blood clotting. Mouth ulcers, loss of appetite, severe colicky abdominal pain, nausea, vomiting, and bloody diarrhea occur within seven to fourteen days. Death follows severe fluid loss, infection, hemorrhage, and starvation. At 450 rads, 50 percent of the population dies. Hair drops out, vomiting and bloody diarrhea occurs, accompanied by bleeding under the skin and from the gums. Death occurs from internal hemorrhage, generalized septicemia, and infection. Severe trauma and injuries exacerbate the fallout symptoms, so patients die more readily from lower doses of radiation. Infants, children, and old people are more sensitive to radiation than healthy adults. Within bombed areas, fatalities will occur from a combination of trauma, burns, radiation sickness, and starvation. There will be virtually no medical care, even for the relief of pain, because most physicians work within The United States owns 103 nuclear power plants, plus many other dangerous radioactive facilities related to past activities of the cold war. A 1000- kiloton bomb (1 megaton) landing on a standard iooo megawatt reactor and its cooling pools, which contain intensely radioactive spent nuclear fuel, would permanently contaminate an .' area the size of western Germany3 The International Atomic Energy Agency now

considers these facilities to be attractive terrorist targets, ' post-September 11,2001. Millions of decaying bodies-human and animal alike-will rot, infected with viruses and bacteria that will mutate in the radioactive-environment to become more lethal. Trillions of insects, naturally ' resistant to radiation-flies, fleas, cockroaches, and lice--will transmit disease from the dead to the living, to people whose immune mechanisms have been severely compromised by the high levels of background radiation. Rodents will multiply by the millions among the corpses and shattered sewerage systems. Epidemics of diseases now controlled by immunization and good hygiene will reappear: such as measles, polio, typhoid, cholera, whooping cough, diphtheria, smallpox, plague,tuberculosis, meningitis, malaria, and hepatitis. Anyone who makes it to a fallout shelter and is not asphyxiated in it, will need to stay there for at least six months until the radiation decayssufficiently so outside survival is possible. It has been postulated that perhaps older people should be sent outside to scavenge for food because they will not live long enough to developmalignancies from the fallout (cancer and leukemia have long incubation periods ranging from five to sixty But any food that manages to grow will be toxic because plants concentrate radioactive elements.*/ Finally, we must examine the systemic global effects of a nuclear . , war. Firestorms will consume oil wells, chemical facilities, cities, and forests, covering the earth with a blanket of thick, black, radioactive , I I ' smoke, reducing sunlight to 17 percent of normal. One year or more ' ) , will be required for light and temperature to return to normal per-"r haps supernormal values, as sunlight would return to more than its , , usual intensity, enhanced in the ultraviolet spectrum by depletion of the stratospheric ozone layer. Sub freezing temperatures could destroy the biological support system for civilization, resulting in massive starvation, thirst, and hypothermia.5 To quote a 1985 SCOPE document published by the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy, "the total loss of human agricultural and societal support systems would result in the loss of almost all humans on Earth, essentially equally among combatant and noncombatant countries alike . . . this vulnerability is an aspect not currentlya part of the understanding of nuclear war; not only are the major combatant countries in danger, but virtually the entire human population is being held hostage to the large-scale use of nuclear weapons. . . .",! i The proposedSTART I11 treaty between Russia and America, even if it were implemented, would still allow 3000 to 5000 hydrogen bombs to be maintained on alert."he threshold for nuclear winter? One thousand loo-kiloton bombsblowing up loo cities7-a I c distinct possibility given current capabilities and targeting plans. On January 25,1995, military technicians at radar stations in northern Russia detected signals from an American missile that hadjust been launched off the coast of Norway carrying a US. scientific probe. Although the Russians had been previously notified of this launch, the alert had been forgotten or ignored. Aware that US. submarines could launcha missile containing eight deadly hydrogen bombs fifteen minutes from Moscow, Russian officials assumed that America had initiated a nuclear war. For

8 A Jackie Wu and Anuj Bapodra Production:

DDI ’08 Jackie “Awesome” Wu & A-Bomb

NMD DA 9/115

the first time in history, the Russian computer containing nuclearlaunch codes was opened. President Boris Yeltsin, sitting at that computer being advised on how to launch a nuclear war by his military officers, had only a threeminute interval to make a decision. At the last moment, the US.missile veered off course. He realized that Russia was not under attack.' If Russia had launched its missiles, the US. early-warning satellites would immediately have detected them, and radioed back to Cheyenne Mountain. This would have led to the notification of the president, who also would have had three minutes to make his launch decision, and America's missiles would then have been fired from their silos. We were thus within minutes of global annihilation that day. ,' Today, Russia's early-warning and nuclear command systems are deteriorating. Russia's early-warning system fails to operate up to seven hours a day because only onethird of its radars are functional, and two of the nine global geographical areas covered by its missilewarning satellites are not under surveillance for missile detection.9 TO make matters worse, the equipment controlling nuclear weapons malfunctions frequently, and critical electronic devices and computers sometimes switch to combat mode for no apparent reason. According to the CIA, seven times during the fall of 1996 operations at some Russian nuclear weapons facilities were severely disrupted when robbers tried to "mine" critical communications cables for their copper!'" This vulnerable Russian system could easily be stressed by an internal or international political crisis, when the danger of accidental or indeed intentional nuclear war would become very real. And the U.S. itself is not invulnerable to error. In August 1999, for example, when the National Imagery and Mapping Agency was installing a new computer system to deal with potential Y2K problems, this operation triggered a computer malfunction which rendered the agency "blind" for days; it took more than eight months for the defect to be fully repaired. As the New York Times reported, part of America's nuclear early-warning system was rendered incompetent for almost a year." (At that time I was sitting at a meeting in the west wing of the White House discussing potentially dangerous Y2K nuclear weapons glitches. Several Pentagon officials blithely reassured me that everything would function normally during the roll-over. But in fact, their intelligence system had already been disabled.) Such

a situation has the potential for catastrophe. If America cannot observe what the Russians are doing with their nuclear weapons-or vice versa-especially during a serious international crisis they are likely to err on the side of "caution," which could mean that something as benign as the launch of a weather satellite could actually trigger annihilation of the planet.This situation became even more significant after the September 11 attack.

9 A Jackie Wu and Anuj Bapodra Production:

DDI ’08 Jackie “Awesome” Wu & A-Bomb

NMD DA 10/115

1NC CZECH LOLCRABS Alternate SHELL 2/2 C. RUSSIANS WOULD BOYCOTT CZECH BEER IF NMD PASSES—THIS DEVASTATES THE CZECH ECONOMY

RIA News, (Russian Information and News Agenct) 7-23-08 en.rian.ru/russia/20080723/114771723.html [JWU] MOSCOW, July 23 (RIA Novosti) - A Russian boycott on Czech beer in response to the placement of a U.S. missile defense radar in the Czech Republic could deliver a serious blow to the Czech economy, a Russian analyst said on Wednesday. The U.S. plans to place a radar in the Czech Republic and 10 interceptor missiles in northern Poland as part of a U.S. missile shield for Europe and North America against possible attacks from "rogue states," including Iran. Russia strongly opposes the possible deployment of the U.S. missile shield, viewing it as a threat to its national security. "If Russian consumers refuse to drink Czech beer in protest at the deployment of a U.S. radar [in the Czech Republic]...it would be a serious response, more serious than the suspension of oil supplies or any protest note sent by the Russian Foreign Ministry," said Alexander Pikayev, director of the department of Disarmament and Conflict Resolution at the Institute of World Economy and International Relations. U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and Czech Foreign Minister Karel Schwarzenberg signed an agreement in Prague on July 8 on the deployment of a missiletracking radar in the Czech Republic. The Czech-U.S. treaty has yet to be ratified by the Czech parliament or signed by the Czech president, however. The U.S. is planning to link the early warning radar in the Czech Republic with an interceptor missile base in Poland, but negotiations with Warsaw have stalled. The Czech Republic is world famous for its beer production and consumption. Beer is ingrained in the Czech culture so much that the beer industry is considered a part of the national heritage. D. Mead, 1998 [Walter Russell Mead, Senior Fellow for U.S. Foreign Policy at the Council on Foreign Relations, The Los Angeles Times, August 23, 1998] http://global.factiva.com/ha/default.aspx Forget suicide car bombers and Afghan fanatics. It's the financial markets, not the terrorist training camps that pose the biggest immediate threat to world peace. How can this be? Think about the mother of all global meltdowns: the Great Depression that started in 1929. U.S. stocks began to collapse in October, staged a rally, then the market headed south big time. At the bottom, the Dow Jones industrial average had lost 90 percent of its value. Wages plummeted, thousands of banks and brokerages went bankrupt, millions of people lost their jobs. There were similar horror stories worldwide. But the biggest impact of the Depression on the United States -- and on world history -wasn't money. It was blood: World War II, to be exact. The Depression brought Adolf Hitler to power in Germany, undermined the ability of moderates to oppose Joseph Stalin's power in Russia, and convinced the Japanese military that the country had no choice but to build an Asian empire, even if that meant war with the United States and Britain. That's the thing about depressions. They aren't just bad for your 401(k). Let the world economy crash far enough, and the rules change. We stop playing "The Price Is Right" and start up a new round of "Saving Private Ryan." 10 A Jackie Wu and Anuj Bapodra Production:

DDI ’08 Jackie “Awesome” Wu & A-Bomb

NMD DA 11/115

1NC EUROPE NMD SHELL A. UNIQUE INTERNAL LINK EUROPE OPPOSES NMD NOW, AND INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION KEY TO PASSAGE

PBS 2K "MISSILE DEFENSE POLITICS" pbs.org/newshour/bb/military/july-dec00/nmd_824.html [JWU] And overseas, there has been a growing drumbeat of opposition. Many foreign leaders argue that a U.S. missile defense system would provoke an arms race and challenge historic understandings built on deterrence and international treaties. French President Jacques Chirac said building the system would "retrigger a proliferation of weapons, notably nuclear missiles." German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder said, "Everything that goes in the direction of proliferation is a bad direction. I'm skeptical." And the chief of foreign policy for the European Union, the former head of NATO, Javier Solana, said recently, "If the decision on deployment is taken without agreement with Russia and without help from European leaders, it will be very badly taken." They, along with the Russians and Chinese, worry that an American missile defense system would give the U.S. global military dominance. But if it's to be built, allied concurrence is essential, because radars will have to be stationed in Greenland and Great Britain, as Secretary of Defense William Cohen explained recently. WILLIAM COHEN: In order to have a technologically effective system, we need to have the support of our allies. If we don't have the support of our allies with respect to forward-deployed x-band radars, you will not have an effective technologically reliable system.

B. EUROPE ASKING U.S. TO CHANGE GAS EMISSION POLICIES WASHINGTON TIMES 5-26-08 http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2008/may/26/us-pressedfor-emissions-cuts-by-20/[JWu]

KOBE, Japan (AP) — European and developing countries urged the United States and Japan yesterday to commit to deep cuts in greenhouse-gas emissions by 2020 — a step they say is needed to defuse a coming ecological disaster caused by global warming. The calls at a meeting of environment ministers from the Group of Eight industrialized nations in Japan coincided with rising concern that momentum is draining from U.N.-led efforts to force a new climate-change agreement by a December 2009 deadline.

11 A Jackie Wu and Anuj Bapodra Production:

DDI ’08 Jackie “Awesome” Wu & A-Bomb

NMD DA 12/115

C. NMD POLICY IS QUID PRO QUO David Malone is president of the International Peace Academy in New York. AND Ramesh Thakur is vice rector of the United Nations University in Tokyo. 3-11-01 http://search.japantimes.co.jp/cgi-bin/eo20010311a2.html [JWU] There can be little doubt that the Bush administration does not incline naturally toward multilateral diplomacy and a treaty-based international security system. Nevertheless, it will not wish to alienate close allies on more than one or two issues at a time and may soon find itself engaged in give-and-take with them. Its top priority appears to be the further development and eventual deployment of a national missile defense system, a U.S. idea that has long unsettled not only Russia and China, but also key European allies and Canada. It could well decide, among other measures, that ratification of the CTBT had become useful to reassure allies and foes alike. Regardless of their views on NMD, U.S. allies and foes now need to consider their own strategies. Indefinitely stamping their feet on an issue that may be nonnegotiable in essence but negotiable in specifics and at the margins, would be self-defeating. NMD is not something the allies, Moscow or Beijing can stop. However, they could well influence the context within which NMD will be developed, its ultimate scope and its detailed aims. Their eventual consent can also be exchanged against concessions from Washington on related or different issues.

12 A Jackie Wu and Anuj Bapodra Production:

DDI ’08 Jackie “Awesome” Wu & A-Bomb

NMD DA 13/115

1NC EUROPE NMD SHELL 2/2 C. PISSES OFF RUSSIA Vladimir Volkov International Editorial Board member of WSWS 18 July 2008 http://www.wsws.org/articles/2008/jul2008/miss-j18.shtml [JWU] The US and the Czech Republic signed an agreement July 8 in Prague for the deployment of radar and anti-missile systems on the territory of this Eastern European country. The pact has become one more step in sharpening geopolitical tensions between the United States and Russia. It evoked a stormy response from Moscow. Signed by American Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and Czech Minister of Foreign Affairs Karel Schwarzenberg, the agreement is opposed by about 70 percent of Czech citizens. Its defenders justify the agreement by pointing to the need to defend Europe from possible Iranian missile attacks. However, the Russian side insists that the true target of creating an infrastructure of anti-missile defense in Eastern Europe is not Iran, but Russia. If the plan is realized, then the military and political positions of Russia would be weakened. A statement by the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs published on the next day said that “the Russian side in such a situation will take adequate measures to compensate for potential threats to its national security.” This statement referred not to “diplomatic, but military-technological methods.” Speaking on July 15 in the Kremlin at a meeting with representatives of the diplomatic corps, Russian President Dmitry Medvedev said: “Placing elements of a global anti-missile system by the US in Eastern Europe only deepens the situation, and we will be forced to react to this adequately.” He declared that Russia’s national security could not be maintained simply by the good word of its partners, and he accused Washington of “gradually undermining... the strategic stability in relations between our countries.”

D. IMPACT: US-Russian relations key to preventing nuclear terror David Kramer, Deputy Assistant Secretary for European and Eurasian Affairs, July 12, 2006, “The Future Obit of US Russian Relations”, Speech: US State Depart . David, Deputy Assistant Secretary for European and Eurasian Affairs, “The Future Orbit of US Russian Relations”, Speech: US State Department, July 2. [T-Jacob]

Our cooperation will include the physical protection of nuclear materials, suppressing illicit trafficking of those materials, responding and mitigating the consequences of any acts of nuclear terrorism, and cooperating on the development of the technical means to combat nuclear terrorism, denying safe haven to terrorists, and strengthening our national legal frameworks to ensure the prosecution of such terrorists and their supporters. This initiative serves U.S. national security interests. We have invited partner nations to meet in the fall to elaborate on and endorse a statement of principles for this initiative. It's one we hope to expand.

13 A Jackie Wu and Anuj Bapodra Production:

DDI ’08 Jackie “Awesome” Wu & A-Bomb

NMD DA 14/115

2. EXTINCTION Mohamed Sid-Ahmed, Egyptian Political Analyst, August, 26, 2004, Al-Ahram Newspaper, http://weekly.ahram.org.eg/2004/705/op5.htm | SWON. [T-Jacob] What would be the consequences of a nuclear attack by terrorists? Even if it fails, it would further exacerbate the negative features of the new and frightening world in which we are now living. Societies would close in on themselves, police measures would be stepped up at the expense of human rights, tensions between civilisations and religions would rise and ethnic conflicts would proliferate. It would also speed up the arms race and develop the awareness that a different type of world order is imperative if humankind is to survive. But the still more critical scenario is if the attack succeeds. This could lead to a third world war, from which no one will emerge victorious. Unlike a conventional war which ends when one side triumphs over another, this war will be without winners and losers. When nuclear pollution infects the whole planet, we will all be losers.

14 A Jackie Wu and Anuj Bapodra Production:

DDI ’08 Jackie “Awesome” Wu & A-Bomb

NMD DA 15/115

1NC EUROPE NMD SHELL 2/2 B C. NMD sparks global nuclear arm races Noam Chomsky, professor emeritus at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 7-18-08, “National Missile Defense System”, The American Prospect, http://www.chomsky.info/letters/20000718.htm, [CXia] I would prefer to respond to a slight reformulation of the question. The most hopeful prospect for the NMD [National Missile Defense], I think, is that the tests fail; and very clearly, because in the domain of nuclear strategy, appearance is likely to be interpreted as reality, for familiar reasons. If a system is developed that seems feasible, China will respond by strengthening its deterrent, which will impel India to do the same, and Pakistan, and . . . According to press reports, a new National Intelligence Estimate predicts that NMD deployment will trigger buildup of nuclear-armed missiles by China, India, and Pakistan, with a further spread into the Middle East. Russia will assume that such a system can be quickly upgraded and will therefore also regard it as a first-strike threat. As many have observed, Russia's "only rational response to the NMD system would be to maintain, and strengthen, the existing Russian nuclear force" (Michael Byers), undermining hopes for nuclear disarmament. The president of the Stimson Center, Michael Krepon, comments that the difference between Russian and U.S. stockpiles is so great that "the Russians are looking at a U.S. breakout level" and will be likely to react accordingly. U.S. negotiators have encouraged Russia to adopt a launch-on-warning strategy to alleviate their concerns and to induce them to accept the NMD and revision of the ABM treaty, a proposal that is "pretty bizarre," one expert commented, because "we know their warning system is full of holes" (John Steinbruner). At the UN [United Nations] conference on the Nonproliferation Treaty (NPT) in May, there was broad condemnation of the NMD on the grounds that it would undermine decades of arms control agreements and provoke a new weapons race.

D. Nuclear war Steven Lee, Professor, Ethics, Hobart and Smith College, Morality, Prudence, and Nuclear Weapons, 1993, p. 299 First, nuclear war could result from the behavior of other states, especially those that had formerly seen themselves as receiving protection from the nation's opponent under the nuclear umbrella. Some of theses states might well seek to acquire nuclear weapons, or to enlarge their arsenals if they were already nuclear powers, in order to provide better protection of their own against the opponent. Were such armament to occur, the uncertainties on all sides may make major nuclear war more likely that it was prior to the nation's unilateral nuclear disarmament

15 A Jackie Wu and Anuj Bapodra Production:

DDI ’08 Jackie “Awesome” Wu & A-Bomb

NMD DA 16/115

U: NOW IS KEY NOW IS KEY FOR NMD TALKS DW news 3/18/08 GERMAN NEWS SOURCE, "US hopeful about progress on US Missile defense plans", http://www.dw-world.de/dw/article/0,2144,3199539,00.html [JWU] Russia has for the first time signaled willingness to soften its opposition to controversial US plans for a missile defense shield in central Europe as top US officials met with Putin's successor in Moscow. On the second day of talks with top Russian officials in Moscow, US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and Defense Secretary Robert Gates spoke of an upbeat mood during their meeting with President Vladimir Putin and his protege, president-elect Dmitry Medvedev, on Monday. "We had a positive spirit yesterday.... We look forward to further work today, to having greater details so that perhaps we can strengthen our partnership and overcome some of our differences," Rice said. Russian Defense Minister Sergei Lavrov said Russia was "satisfied with the way our relations are developing" and that there was a will to minimise discord." Gates predicted the two sides could conclude a deal on disputed US missile defence plans before Bush leaves office in January 2009. NO EUROPEAN NMDS NOW FOX NEWS 12-7-07 http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,315742,00.html [JWU] The Associated Press quotes a top Czech official saying it is now harder to do his job explaining the need for a U.S. missile defense system, which U.S. officials say is needed to ward off attack from Iran. "Czech newspapers are full of headlines saying there is no longer a need for missile defense. ... It is hard for complex arguments to win against simple headlines," said Tomas Klvana, according to the AP. The administration has dispatched Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and others to try to allay European allies over the meaning of the report — chiefly Russia, which already his highly suspicious of the U.S. missile program, and other top allies France, Germany and the U.K. NOW IS KEY—IF WE DON'T ACT NOW, PRESIDENTIAL CAMPAIGN WILL MIRE NMD AFP 6-19-08 http://www.spacewar.com/reports/US_taps_Lithuania_as_alternative_to_Poland_for_missile_shie ld_plan_999.html [JWU]

Waszczykowski believes they are a "tool of pressure" to speed-up the negotiations with Poland, which have dragged on for 13 months so far, in order to strike a deal before US President George W. Bush leaves office early next year. "The United States know time is an issue," Waszczykowski said, adding policy decisions will effectively be frozen as the US presidential campaign comes into full swing this fall. 16 A Jackie Wu and Anuj Bapodra Production:

DDI ’08 Jackie “Awesome” Wu & A-Bomb

NMD DA 17/115

Perception of unilat blocks NMD Perception of unilateralism is blocking European support for NMD Lukasz Kulesa, analyst at the Polish Institute of International Affairs, April 12, 2007, “Missile Defense Dossier: The Polish Perspective,” online: http://www.frstrategie.org/barreFRS/publications/pv/defenseAntimissile/pv_20070412_e ng.pdf [Bapodra] The strategic consequences of the controversy over the European MD deployment may turn out to be much more serious. Unfortunately, many politicians and commentators across Europe saw the US proposal as an excellent opportunity to repeat their criticism of the US foreign policy in general and the current administration in particular. In the eyes of the critics, here is yet another (after Iraq) example of American unilateralism, compromising the global security. Another group of the opponents of the MD deployment in Europe point at Poland and the Czech Republic as countries which are somehow not European enough, willing to betray the unity of the continent for the promise of closer relations with Washington. Russia is skillfully providing additional arguments to all those MD critics, threatening to take ‘necessary actions’ in response (like the withdrawal form the INF treaty or putting the bases on the target list of its strategic forces) but, at the same time, expressing regret at the lack of the US willingness to adopt a ‘multilateral approach’.

17 A Jackie Wu and Anuj Bapodra Production:

DDI ’08 Jackie “Awesome” Wu & A-Bomb

NMD DA 18/115

U: CZECH UNIQUE INTERNAL LINK:

CZECH PARLIAMENT ON FENCE--PASSAGE ENSURES NMD RADIO PRAGUE 7-9-08 http://www.radio.cz/en/news/105975 [JWU] The Czech-US missile defense treaty still needs to be approved by Parliament and a vote on it is expected late this year or early next year. The issue has divided the Czech political scene and support for it in the lower house is far from certain. Public opinion is also against the radar base with 68 percent of Czechs opposing the deal. Close to two thousand people took to the streets of Prague on Tuesday to protest against the treaty. President Klaus says he would sign radar treaty with no hesitation whatsoever President Vaclav Klaus has said he would sign the Czech-American radar agreement with “no hesitation whatsoever”, if it were approved by Parliament. At a brief press conference in Prague the president said that he regarded the radar as a unifying element in the country’s partnership with the United States. Asked to comment on Russia’s angry response to the missile defense project Mr. Klaus said that Prague and Washington had to keep trying to convince Moscow that placing elements of the missile defense system in two post-communist countries posed no threat to Russia. CZECH NMD TREATY HAS BEEN STARTED, BUT FACES OPPOSITION

NEW YORK TIMES 7-9-08 nytimes.com/2008/07/09/world/europe/09shield.html?em&ex=1215748800&en=f870cb9afdaab674&ei=5087%0A [JWU]

The accord with the Czech Republic is not without its problems. The deal signed on Tuesday does not ensure that the radar system will be built immediately or that the next American administration will stick to the project. Negotiations are still taking place on a second treaty, to deal with the legal status of American troops to be deployed at the planned radar base. Both treaties require ratification by Czech legislators, many of whom are skeptical about the project, while the public is largely opposed.

18 A Jackie Wu and Anuj Bapodra Production:

DDI ’08 Jackie “Awesome” Wu & A-Bomb

NMD DA 19/115

U: POLAND POLAND ON FENCE ABOUT NMD INTERNATIONAL HERALD tribune 11-23-07 iht.com/articles/2007/11/23/opinion/edpoland.php [JWU] Poland's new government is taking a skeptical second look at the Bush administration's proposal to station 10 interceptor missiles in Poland as part of a European-based missile-defense system. Warsaw's new defense minister, Bogdan Klich, said in an interview with a Polish paper this week that his government must "weigh the benefits and costs of this project for Poland." The Poles aren't the only ones with doubts. A thousand Czechs marched through Prague demanding a referendum on whether the system's radar should be built in the Czech Republic, as Washington wants.

NMD DIALOGUE WITH POLAND AREN'T SUCCESSFUL NOW Russian Information and News Service, 8-1-08 http://en.rian.ru/world/20080801/115480478.html [JWu]

"This is one of the most important issues during the talks with Americans. Poland cannot bear financial responsibility for the use of the [U.S. missile defense] system elements, because the decision to launch an interceptor will not be made by us," he said. Poland's prime minister said on July 4 his country was not satisfied with the terms offered by the U.S. for the deployment of a missile defense base on its soil, but was ready for further dialogue. Tusk said then: "We need firm guarantees from Washington that the deployment of a missile defense base will enhance Poland's security," but that on this issue "we did not achieve a result that would be satisfactory to Poland."

19 A Jackie Wu and Anuj Bapodra Production:

DDI ’08 Jackie “Awesome” Wu & A-Bomb

NMD DA 20/115

U.S. soft power has eroded, causing Poland to block NMD Lukasz Kulesa, analyst at the Polish Institute of International Affairs, April 12, 2007, “Missile Defense Dossier: The Polish Perspective,” online: http://www.frstrategie.org/barreFRS/publications/pv/defenseAntimissile/pv_20070412_e ng.pdf [Bapodra] The discussion on the Missile Defence in Poland has confirmed a major shift in the attitudes of the public opinion vis-à-vis the United States. It is safe to assume that if the offer to host an MD base had been made in 2002-2003, it would have faced opposition only from a small fraction of the society and some radical political forces. Since then, a number of factors have contributed to the erosion of the American ‘soft power’ over the Polish public. The intervention in Iraq has turned into a prolonged and bloody confrontation, with Poland contributing troops (2,500 at the peak) and suffering casualties without, in the widely shared opinion, receiving proper ‘compensation’ from the United States, be it the abolishment of visas, new equipment for the military, or the reconstruction-related contracts. The recent arrival of the first F-16 fighters, bought from the US in 2003, was marred with the media reports showing that the much-hyped offset arrangement with Lockheed Martin brought to Poland much less investments and modern technologies than expected. At the same time, the ‘Europeanization’ of the society accelerated, with the strengthening of the European identity upon the entry to the EU, the influx of money from the structural funds and the Common Agricultural Policy, and the increased possibilities to study or work in other European countries. All of these contributed to a much more critical attitude towards the US initiative on Missile Defence. According to an opinion poll from February 2007, 55% respondents were against the establishment of the US anti-missile base in Poland, and only 28% supported the idea.

[Many of the Poland links also serve as uniqueness. Pull from there.]

20 A Jackie Wu and Anuj Bapodra Production:

DDI ’08 Jackie “Awesome” Wu & A-Bomb

NMD DA 21/115

U: RUSSIA US-RUSSIA RELATIONS ON BRINK—RUSSIA WON'T COOPERATE ON NMDS LUKE HARDING The Guardian staff writer, Moscow correspondent, 4-11-07 guardian.co.uk/world/2007/apr/11/usa.topstories3 [JWu] Defence experts say there is little doubt that the real target of the shield is Russia. "The geography of the deployment doesn't give any doubt the main targets are Russian and Chinese nuclear forces," General Vladimir Belous, Russia's leading expert on anti-ballistic weaponry, told the Guardian. "The US bases represent a real threat to our strategic nuclear forces." The threat of a new arms race comes at a time when relations between Russia and the US are at their worst for a decade. In February Mr Putin accused the Bush administration during a speech in Munich of seeking a "world of one master, one sovereign". On Friday Russia's duma, or lower house or parliament, warned that the US's plans could ignite a second cold war. "Such decisions, which are useless in terms of preventing potential or imaginary threats from countries of the middle and far-east, are already bringing about a new split in Europe and unleashing another arms race," the declaration - passed unanimously by Russian MPs - said. The same day Russia ruled out cooperating with the US over the shield. "Despite certain signals received in recent days from the US side ... I see no political foundation for it," said Sergei Ryabkov, a foreign ministry spokesman. Moscow now had little choice but to take the bases "into account in our strategic planning", he said.

RUSSIA IS ON THE FENCE ABOUT NMDS DW news 3/18/08 GERMAN NEWS SOURCE, "US hopeful about progress on US Missile defense plans", http://www.dw-world.de/dw/article/0,2144,3199539,00.html [JWU] Earlier on Monday, Putin said there was a real chance to make progress on stalled talks with the US over Washington's controversial plans to install a missile defense system on European soil. Putin said he saw an opportunity to move relations with the US forward after he received what he called a "serious document" from US President George Bush. "I recently had an opportunity to speak to the US president and I received his letter," Putin said. "It is a serious document which we have carefully analyzed. If we manage to agree on its main provisions, we will be able to say that our dialogue is progressing successfully." Dimitry Medvedev, who won a landslide election earlier this month and is to succeed Putin as president, sounded a conciliatory note after his first talks with Gates and Rice. "There are issue where we still have differences in positions," Medvedev said. "But we also have a common will and commitment to move ahead."

21 A Jackie Wu and Anuj Bapodra Production:

DDI ’08 Jackie “Awesome” Wu & A-Bomb

NMD DA 22/115

U: GERMANY GERMANY IS ON THE FENCE FOR NMDS WADE BOESE rsrch director of Arms Control Association APRIL 2001 armscontrol.org/act/2001_04/internatlnmd [JWu] Visiting Washington a week later on March 29, German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder expressed interest in Germany playing a future part in U.S. missile defenses if they were deployed. "Certainly, when it comes to the involvement and also participation in terms of industrial policy, certainly we'll be interested," Schroeder answered when asked by a reporter whether Germany would be willing to participate in a system. However, Schroeder noted there were many issues that needed to be looked into, such as whether a missile defense will work, who will be covered, and how it will impact global disarmament and relations with Russia and China. Bush described himself as "grateful" that Schroeder was interested in the U.S. point of view, and the chancellor, who has been a leading European voice expressing reservations about U.S. missile defense plans, said he was "very pleased" that the president was open to discussion about the questions he had posed.

GERMANY AND FRANCE ARE ON THE FENCE ABOUT NMD—PERSUASION WILL CAUSE THEM TO ACCEPT WADE BOESE rsrch director of Arms Control Association APRIL 2001 armscontrol.org/act/2001_04/internatlnmd [JWu] Two months into its term, the Bush administration's continued efforts to build foreign acceptance of, if not support for, U.S. deployment of a national missile defense (NMD) appear to be paying some small dividends. In mid-March, a top Chinese official, while still vehemently objecting to U.S. plans, welcomed talks with Washington on the issue. Meanwhile, Germany has edged away from its past opposition to NMD, and France has publicly quieted its criticism, although neither country has embraced the idea. Unlike the Clinton administration, which largely neglected Asia on U.S. NMD plans and upset U.S. allies by focusing first on winning Russian acquiescence while taking their support for granted, the Bush administration from the outset has promised to consult fully with all interested countries. At the same time, Bush officials have emphasized they will not be dissuaded from their objective and have expressed confidence in their ability to persuade others to eventually accept a U.S. defense.

22 A Jackie Wu and Anuj Bapodra Production:

DDI ’08 Jackie “Awesome” Wu & A-Bomb

NMD DA 23/115

U: FRANCE FRANCE IS ON THE FENCE ABOUT NMDS WADE BOESE rsrch director of Arms Control Association APRIL 2001 armscontrol.org/act/2001_04/internatlnmd [JWu] Quite vocal about its missile defense concerns last year, France has quieted its public protests following the Bush administration's promise to hold consultations with allies. A French official explained that France still has the same concerns it expressed in the past about the "potential negative effects" of missile defense but that it will raise those issues in private. Like Berlin, Paris seems to be reserving judgment on U.S. plans until it has had an opportunity to discuss them with Washington.

GERMANY AND FRANCE ARE ON THE FENCE ABOUT NMD—PERSUASION WILL CAUSE THEM TO ACCEPT WADE BOESE rsrch director of Arms Control Association APRIL 2001 armscontrol.org/act/2001_04/internatlnmd [JWu] Two months into its term, the Bush administration's continued efforts to build foreign acceptance of, if not support for, U.S. deployment of a national missile defense (NMD) appear to be paying some small dividends. In mid-March, a top Chinese official, while still vehemently objecting to U.S. plans, welcomed talks with Washington on the issue. Meanwhile, Germany has edged away from its past opposition to NMD, and France has publicly quieted its criticism, although neither country has embraced the idea. Unlike the Clinton administration, which largely neglected Asia on U.S. NMD plans and upset U.S. allies by focusing first on winning Russian acquiescence while taking their support for granted, the Bush administration from the outset has promised to consult fully with all interested countries. At the same time, Bush officials have emphasized they will not be dissuaded from their objective and have expressed confidence in their ability to persuade others to eventually accept a U.S. defense.

23 A Jackie Wu and Anuj Bapodra Production:

DDI ’08 Jackie “Awesome” Wu & A-Bomb

NMD DA 24/115

LINK: SECURITY SECURITY AND PROLIFERATION ISSUES GET EUROPE ON BOARD FOR NMD Theresa Hitchens is Research Director of BASIC. and Stuart Samuels is a Consultant to BASIC. 2k "NMD: Allied fears in focus" http://www.basicint.org/pubs/Papers/BP32.htm

May 2k No 32 [JWu] Finally, the lack of U.S. attention to European views also is troubling to many in Europe. There is a feeling among many allied governments, according to one NATO official, that the United States has not given Europeans enough time, nor enough information, to consider the ramifications of NMD. For example, some allies, led by Canada, have argued that the U.S. instead should leave the NMD issue to be discussed as part of NATO’s ongoing review of its wider role in future multinational arms control and non-proliferation efforts. That review is unlikely to finish until yearend at the earliest. When NATO foreign ministers gather in Italy, NMD will be on the agenda along with the Balkans and EU plans to create a so-called European Security and Defense Policy that includes a future military crisis management role for the European Union based on indigenous intervention capabilities. On all these issues there now exists a clear transatlantic divide. Some in Europe worry that NMD itself will harm the effort to craft a more robust common European security policy, especially the effort to build a new crisis management capability. If European governments are forced by a U.S. NMD decision to consider a role in the network, or even a European counterpart, that could serve to drain scarce resources away from building crisis competencies. At a time when European defense budgets are under pressure, spending money on expensive, high-tech NMD technologies to counter what is seen as a rather remote threat likely would prove difficult.

INTERNATIONAL SECURITY AND WEAPON CONTROL EFFORTS KEY TO GAINING NMD ACCEPTANCE CAMILLE GRAND, Institut français des Relations internationales (IFRI), Paris. Lecturer, Institut d’études politiques de Paris, and Ecole spéciale militaire, and Adviser for arms control and nonproliferation at the French Ministry of Defense. 01 "NMD and arms control: a European view." http://www.mi.infn.it/~landnet/NMD/grand.pdf [JWu]

Under certain conditions a limited NMD deployment could, hopefully, have only a limited impact on arms control and international stability, and therefore become more acceptable for the Europeans: • A strong reaffirmation by the new US administration of its commitment to negotiated arms control, for instance through a effort to resume talks at the CD on the basis of the package currently on the table or a CTBT ratification; • A genuine effort on the part of the US and Russian governments to secure a deal on the ABM treaty, preserving the basic principle of the treaty (limitations on defenses) while authorizing a limited NMD deployment; this should be combined with efforts to reduce both countries still large nuclear arsenals; • Whatever form it takes, the deal should be stable (i.e. not facilitating future major amendments) and transparent, in order to reassure Russia and other interested countries; • A

24 A Jackie Wu and Anuj Bapodra Production:

DDI ’08 Jackie “Awesome” Wu & A-Bomb

NMD DA 25/115

US diplomatic effort to engage the Chinese into a debate on the security relationship between both countries, and to meet some of their security concerns (talks on outer-space); in return China can be expected to lift its opposition to multilateral progress in Geneva;

an architecture with the less destabilizing effects:

• Choosing

increased role for TMD related technology and boost-phase intercept, limited capability (unthreatening to the Russian and the Chinese), no space-based weapons; the role assigned to outerspace capabilities is

• A broader international debate on the role of non-proliferation, arms control, deterrence and defenses in the new international security framework, avoiding both rhetoric (the Reagan way) and immobility (the Clinton way). likely to be crucial in this respect;

25 A Jackie Wu and Anuj Bapodra Production:

DDI ’08 Jackie “Awesome” Wu & A-Bomb

NMD DA 26/115

LINK: SECURITY EUROPE WANTS TO COOPERATE WITH THE U.S. OVER SECURITY ISSUES NEWSWEEK 3-20-08 http://www.newsweek.com/id/124417 [JWU] To assess the strength of the transatlantic relationship, I attended the Brussels Forum, an all-star confab orchestrated by the German Marshall Fund (GMF). The conference made it clear that relations between America and Europe have recovered significantly from the trough of 20022003. This accords with public opinion. A just-released British Council poll found that strong majorities in America and Europe want a closer partnership. Both the United States and the European Union have been humbled in recent years by missteps in the application of hard power and soft power, as Constanze Stelzenmüller pointed out in a GMF briefing paper. The rise of new state threats (Russia, Iran) and nonstate threats (see above) have led the transatlantic neighborhood to recognize that they have more common than divergent interests.

26 A Jackie Wu and Anuj Bapodra Production:

DDI ’08 Jackie “Awesome” Wu & A-Bomb

NMD DA 27/115

LINK: SECURITY—POLAND SECURITY ISSUES ARE PREVENTING NMD IN POLAND Carl Ek, Specialist in International Relations, Foreign Affairs, Defense, and Trade Division. Report to Congress by Congressional Research Service, 08 "Poland’s New Government: Background and Issues for the United States" (http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/row/RS22811.pdf)[JWu] Early in 2007, the Bush Administration began formal negotiations with Poland and the Czech Republic over a plan to establish missile defense facilities on their territory to protect against missiles from countries such as Iran; the plan would entail placing radar in the Czech Republic and interceptor launchers in Poland. Some Poles believe their country would risk being targeted by rogue state missiles and terrorist attacks because of the presence of the U.S. interceptors on their soil. In addition, many Poles are concerned over Russia’s vehement objections to the proposal. Former Polish Defense Minister Radek Sikorski reportedly pressed for a special security guarantee from the United States, as well as for Patriot missiles to shield Poland against short- and medium-range missiles.14

INCREASING POLISH SECURITY PASSES NMD AP 7-4-08 http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2008/07/04/europe/EU-Poland-US-MissileDefense.php [JWU]

Tusk stressed that Poland is open to a more generous U.S. deal. "We are ready at any time to accept changes, corrections, proposals from the U.S. side that take into consideration our demands on strengthening Poland's security," Tusk said. "That can be tomorrow, in a week, in a month." "I'm ready to close these negotiations under the one condition — an obvious one from my point of view — that the Polish side receives a real security guarantee in the event of the implementation of this project."

27 A Jackie Wu and Anuj Bapodra Production:

DDI ’08 Jackie “Awesome” Wu & A-Bomb

NMD DA 28/115

LONG TERM SECURITY IS THE ONLY FACTOR PREVENTING POLISH ACCEPTANCE OF NMD AP 7-4-08 http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2008/07/04/europe/EU-Poland-US-MissileDefense.php [JWU]

The installation of the missile shield in Poland increases above all the security of the United States. That's important for us, for the whole world," Tusk said. "However, the fact that the installation would be built on Polish territory also increases certain risks and threats for Poland." So far, "in the key issue of increasing Poland's security, we didn't achieve a result that would be satisfactory to Poland," Tusk said. "We are waiting for an answer and declaration from the U.S. side on this key demand." Poland has demanded the additional security guarantee of a short-range Patriot missile battery on its soil. Tusk said the latest U.S. offer fell short because it proposed placing a Patriot missile battery in Poland only temporarily, rather than permanently, as Warsaw has demanded. "Air defense elements that would specifically defend Polish territory are absolutely key for Poland," he said. "A temporary visit by such weapons, guaranteed only for one year, naturally does not increase our sense of security."

28 A Jackie Wu and Anuj Bapodra Production:

DDI ’08 Jackie “Awesome” Wu & A-Bomb

NMD DA 29/115

LINK: SECURITY—POLAND POLAND WANTS MILITARY SECURITY Adrian J. Erlinger is a visiting Fulbright Research Scholar at the University of Warsaw's Centre for East European Studies.7-11-08 http://www.worldpoliticsreview.com/article.aspx?id=2417[JWU] For months, it appeared that Poland would easily accept U.S. plans. Undoubtedly, Poland is a strong U.S. ally and a vital contributor to transatlantic security, contributing a sizable contingency in Afghanistan and a vocal lobby for future eastward expansion of NATO. However, seeking millions of dollars in military aid, Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk rebuffed the latest U.S. offer on July 4.

HELPING POLISH SECURITY ALLOWS NMD IN POLAND Vladimir Volkov International Editorial Board member of WSWS 18 July 2008 http://www.wsws.org/articles/2008/jul2008/miss-j18.shtml [JWU] Besides radar in the Czech Republic, deploying elements of an American anti-missile system in Eastern Europe includes placing tens of anti-missile rockets on the territory of Poland. However, talks between the US and Warsaw were halted after the Polish government proposed a number of conditions, chief among them being a request for $20 billion in aid for modernizing the Polish army and air defense. In the opinion of Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk, the deployment of elements of an antimissile system enhances the security of the US, but not that of Poland. “Key in the question of Polish negotiations with the United States has been and remains a real increase in Poland’s security through political guarantees, but also through definite military guarantees,” he stated.

29 A Jackie Wu and Anuj Bapodra Production:

DDI ’08 Jackie “Awesome” Wu & A-Bomb

NMD DA 30/115

POLAND NEEDS MILITARY SECURITY ASSURANCE TO GO AHEAD WITH THE NMD

U.S. talks over NMD now—increasing Polish security is key to acceptance AP 7-4-08 http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2008/07/04/europe/EU-Poland-US-MissileDefense.php [JWU]

WARSAW, Poland: Poland's prime minister said Friday that the latest U.S. offer to persuade his country to accept a missile defense facility is unsatisfactory, but stressed that he expects negotiations to continue. Donald Tusk said that any deal must increase Poland's security. He said his government believes that the latest offer, made earlier this week, does not fulfill that requirement. However, Tusk made clear that Warsaw's decision was not a final rejection of the U.S. plan to place 10 missile defense interceptors in Poland as part of a shield against a possible Iranian attack. "I wouldn't talk about the end, suspension, or interruption," he said at a news conference. "Negotiations, in my opinion, are continuing." In the U.S., White House spokesman Scott Stanzel also said that "discussions will continue with the Poles on missile defense and other issues."

30 A Jackie Wu and Anuj Bapodra Production:

DDI ’08 Jackie “Awesome” Wu & A-Bomb

NMD DA 31/115

LINK: ALTERNATIVE ENERGY—POLAND DIVERSIFYING AWAY FROM OIL IS POLAND'S PRIORITY REUTERS 11-23-07 http://uk.reuters.com/article/oilRpt/idUKL2310384120071123 [JWU]

WARSAW, Nov 23 (Reuters) - Poland's new Prime Minister Donald Tusk said on Friday he planned to continue his precedessors' energy diversification efforts but held open the option of adjusting them. The ousted conservatives made diversification a priority because they worried Poland's former imperial and communist master, Russia, could use its dominant position as an energy suppler to rebuild its political influence over central Europe. Poland gets 95 percent of its crude and 48 percent of its natural gas from Russia. "We judge the previous government's accomplishments in the area of supply diversification highly, but reserve ourselves the right to make corrections," Tusk said in his first address to parliament. Recent diversification projects include state-controlled gas distributor PGNiG's PGNI.WA plans to build a liquefied natural gas terminal on the Baltic coast and a pipeline to Denmark to give Poland access to Norwegian gas.

POLAND LOOKING TO DIVERSITY ENERGY AWAY FROM FOSSIL FUELS Piotr Naimski Secretary of State at the Ministry of Economy, Republic of Poland, at Columbia University. 9-27-07 "Energy diversification strategy for Poland” sipa.columbia.edu/ece/academics/regional/conf/Piotr_Naimski_at_Columbia%20University0709 17_.pdf [JWu] One of the most important challenges facing the Polish government after the recent period of reforms and economic transformation is to change the structure of energy supplies. The current one has a very negative influence on Poland’s energy security. Another challenge is the carrying out of the plan to create north-south infrastructure of energy supplies. This would help to balance the existing east-west infrastructure inherited from the era of the Soviet Union. With this in mind, we are currently working on diversification projects that I shall present here. The position of the Polish government concerning the policy for oil and natural gas industry has been framed in two official documents, both of which give the highest priority to the energy security issues3.

31 A Jackie Wu and Anuj Bapodra Production:

DDI ’08 Jackie “Awesome” Wu & A-Bomb

NMD DA 32/115

LINK: ALTERNATIVE ENERGY—POLAND POLAND LOOKING TO DIVERSIFY ENERGY FROM OIL INTERNATIONAL HERALD TRIBUNE 06 iht.com/articles/2006/10/26/business/polgas.php [JWU] WARSAW: The conservative government in Poland plans to invest well over €1 billion in the energy sector in an attempt to modernize its infrastructure, and perhaps more crucially, reduce its dependence on Russia, its main supplier of oil and gas. The plans reflect growing fears in Poland that the Russian president, Vladimir Putin, will use his country's energy clout as a political hammer, something he was judged to have done in January when Gazprom, the giant state-owned energy monopoly, cut its gas deliveries to Ukraine in a dispute over gas prices. Ukraine agreed last week to a 36 percent increase in the cost of natural gas supplied by Russia next year. Warsaw is also concerned that a Russian-German pipeline project in development will result in a loss of gas supplies to Poland. "We want to diversify because we fear that Russia will use the export of its gas as a political tool," Piotr Naimski, secretary of state in charge of energy security in Poland's Economy Ministry, said in an interview Thursday.

POLAND IS LOOKING TO DIVERSITY ITS ENERGY SUPPLY AWAY FROM RUSSIA Adrian J. Erlinger is a visiting Fulbright Research Scholar at the University of Warsaw's Centre for East European Studies.7-11-08 http://www.worldpoliticsreview.com/article.aspx?id=2417[JWU] While the United States fears a nuclear-armed Iran, Poland is weighing this risk against its own national security agenda -- to reduce its overwhelming dependence on Russian energy imports. Considering that total Polish demand for gas is expected to double to 24.4 billion cubic meters by mid-decade, the Polish government is reluctant to increase volumes of Russian gas. After a Russian-Ukrainian price dispute in January 2006 reduced Polish gas imports by 9 percent for several days, diversifying away from Russian gas sources looks more prudent.

32 A Jackie Wu and Anuj Bapodra Production:

DDI ’08 Jackie “Awesome” Wu & A-Bomb

NMD DA 33/115

POLAND IS LOOKING TO FILL ITS GAS DEMAND Adrian J. Erlinger is a visiting Fulbright Research Scholar at the University of Warsaw's Centre for East European Studies.7-11-08 http://www.worldpoliticsreview.com/article.aspx?id=2417[JWU] To make matters more complicated, Polish Petroleum and Gas Mining (PGNiG), 85 percent of which is owned by the Polish state, is looking to Tehran as a source of energy. On June 30, the Polish daily Rzeczpospolita reported that PGNiG was "close" to securing a contract to extract liquefied natural gas (LNG) from Iran's Lavan gas field. The deal is part of ongoing negotiations between PGNiG and the Iranian Offshore Oil Company after a framework agreement was signed in February. While a PGNiG spokesman denied that his company was ready to commit to a specific level of investment, Iranian media reported that the Polish side was "ready to invest $1 billion" to secure gas deposits estimated at 140 billion meters and purchase up to 7.3 billion cubic meters of sweet dry gas or LNG annually. In the meantime, PGNiG is grasping to find supply contracts for its proposed €450 million LNG terminal at Swinoujscie on the Baltic Sea. The terminal is central to PGNiG's plans to initially deliver 2.5 billion cubic meters annually to satisfy Poland's future gas demand, reduce Russia's energy monopoly and decrease Poland's dependence on its aging carbon-belching coal plants. PGNiG needs to secure an LNG contract in order to make the planned regasification terminal economically feasible.

33 A Jackie Wu and Anuj Bapodra Production:

DDI ’08 Jackie “Awesome” Wu & A-Bomb

NMD DA 34/115

LINK: ALTERNATIVE ENERGY—POLAND POLAND WANTS COOPERATION ON ALTERNATIVE ENERGY AND NEW TECHNOLOGY Piotr Naimski Secretary of State at the Ministry of Economy, Republic of Poland, at Columbia University. 9-27-07 "Energy diversification strategy for Poland” sipa.columbia.edu/ece/academics/regional/conf/Piotr_Naimski_at_Columbia%20University0709 17_.pdf [JWu] Diversification understood as an ability to provide energy from new sources, can reach far beyond the search for new directions for oil and gas supplies. Those who will possess new, ground-breaking technologies will gain an immediate advantage. Poland is ready and willing to cooperate in the field of R&D, so that diversification does not need to be limited only to current energy sources and we are open to ventures through which we could develop new ideas (Hydrogen, ITER, etc.) or improve the technologies used today (Clean Coal Technology, IGCC, better nuclear reactors, etc.). I believe that the discussion about new energy sources must be set in the framework that reaches onto unexplored grounds. In the future, different technological factors will inevitably come to the fore. It is therefore crucial that we invest in R&D and commit to cooperation in this field. As part of that effort, it might at some point be worth considering whether achieving energy security – energy security defined narrowly as undisrupted access to hydrocarbons – is not an example of the “old way of thinking” or a dead-end road altogether. Must new energy sources be hydrocarbons-related and where is the place for a new vision of energy? Discussion of those matters would certainly be an inspiration.

34 A Jackie Wu and Anuj Bapodra Production:

DDI ’08 Jackie “Awesome” Wu & A-Bomb

NMD DA 35/115

LINK: NUCLEAR PLANT LOLZ POLAND LOOKING TO COOPERATE ON BUILDING NUCLEAR PLANTS Piotr Naimski Secretary of State at the Ministry of Economy, Republic of Poland, at Columbia University. 9-27-07 "Energy diversification strategy for Poland” sipa.columbia.edu/ece/academics/regional/conf/Piotr_Naimski_at_Columbia%20University0709 17_.pdf [JWu] To begin with, Poland is most interested in participating, as a partner to the Baltic States, in a joint venture aimed at building a new power block of the Ignalina nuclear power plant in Lithuania, which is supposed to replace the old Russian one. Poland’s willingness to cooperate and initiate its own projects in this field is grounded on the conviction that the threat of a serious nuclear power plant breakdown nowadays seems to be minimal. Furthermore, the construction of water-cooled reactors in fact precludes the possibility of an explosion and the consequent release of radioactive chemicals into the environment. Recurrence of the Chernobyl disaster is nowadays impossible, especially with the state-of-theart modern reactors that we envisage to be used in any of the nuclear power plant project, in which Poland will be involved. Moreover, it is worth bringing to attention the fact, that the lack of our own nuclear power plant does not guarantee freedom from possible nuclear threat, as eleven nuclear power plants operate in the neighboring countries.18 As Poland has yet to have an open public debate on nuclear energy for the country, it is not clear how the public opinion will respond to the plans being developed. I believe that our government should initiate the public debate soon and I trust that there will be a wide support for the idea.

35 A Jackie Wu and Anuj Bapodra Production:

DDI ’08 Jackie “Awesome” Wu & A-Bomb

NMD DA 36/115

LINK: PROLIF UNIQUE LINK: CONCERNS OVER PROLIF ARE BLOCKING NMD TREATY NOW Nicola Butler, senior analyst for the Acronym Institute, 2k, "Missile defence divergence: Britain debates nmd" Disarmament Diplomacy, Issue no 48, july 2k The British Houses of Parliament went into recess at the end of July leaving key questions unanswered concerning the Government's stance on US plans for National Missile Defence (NMD). Ministers, anxious to avoid offending a key ally, have been sticking closely to the line that "it is for the United States to decide whether or not to proceed with deployment", but backbench Members of Parliament (MPs) from all sides of the House of Commons are expressing increasing concern, both about the possible impact of NMD on international stability and security, and about the Government's unwillingness to adopt a more outspoken stance. As MPs headed back to their constituencies, the Foreign Affairs Select Committee issued a report recommending that, "the Government articulate the very strong concerns that have been expressed about NMD within the UK. We are not convinced that the US plans to deploy NMD represent an appropriate response to the proliferation problems faced by the international community. We recommend that the Government encourage the USA to seek other ways of reducing the threats it perceives."1 Against a background of accusations that the Ministry of Defence (MoD) and the Foreign Office (FCO) are divided over NMD, Prime Minister Tony Blair told the Commons in July that the UK's aim was to try "to ensure that the fear that the United States has - perfectly legitimately and justifiably - is taken account of in a way that does not put at risk the substantial progress that has been made on nuclear disarmament over the past few years".2 Whilst endorsing this approach, the Foreign Affairs Committee called for "the Government, as one of the five nuclear weapon states and as a close ally of the US, to make an early public statement on its analysis of NMD's likely impact on strategic stability and its assessment of whether this would be in the overall security interests of this country."3

36 A Jackie Wu and Anuj Bapodra Production:

DDI ’08 Jackie “Awesome” Wu & A-Bomb

NMD DA 37/115

SECURITY AND PROLIFERATION ISSUES GET EUROPE ON BOARD FOR NMD Theresa Hitchens is Research Director of BASIC. and Stuart Samuels is a Consultant to BASIC. 2k "NMD: Allied fears in focus" http://www.basicint.org/pubs/Papers/BP32.htm May 2k No 32 [JWu] Finally, the lack of U.S. attention to European views also is troubling to many in Europe. There is a feeling among many allied governments, according to one NATO official, that the United States has not given Europeans enough time, nor enough information, to consider the ramifications of NMD. For example, some allies, led by Canada, have argued that the U.S. instead should leave the NMD issue to be discussed as part of NATO’s ongoing review of its wider role in future multinational arms control and non-proliferation efforts. That review is unlikely to finish until year-end at the earliest. When NATO foreign ministers gather in Italy, NMD will be on the agenda along with the Balkans and EU plans to create a so-called European Security and Defense Policy that includes a future military crisis management role for the European Union based on indigenous intervention capabilities. On all these issues there now exists a clear transatlantic divide. Some in Europe worry that NMD itself will harm the effort to craft a more robust common European security policy, especially the effort to build a new crisis management capability. If European governments are forced by a U.S. NMD decision to consider a role in the network, or even a European counterpart, that could serve to drain scarce resources away from building crisis competencies. At a time when European defense budgets are under pressure, spending money on expensive, high-tech NMD technologies to counter what is seen as a rather remote threat likely would prove difficult.

37 A Jackie Wu and Anuj Bapodra Production:

DDI ’08 Jackie “Awesome” Wu & A-Bomb

NMD DA 38/115

LINK: PROLIF U.S. NON-PROLIF EFFORTS KEY TO GET EUROPE ON BOARD EUROPE FOR NMD CAMILLE GRAND, Institut français des Relations internationales (IFRI), Paris. Lecturer, Institut d’études politiques de Paris, and Ecole spéciale militaire, and Adviser for arms control and nonproliferation at the French Ministry of Defense. 01 "NMD and arms control: a European view." http://www.mi.infn.it/~landnet/NMD/grand.pdf [JWu]

The Europeans have not suggested a unique alternative to BMD deployments as a response to missile proliferation, but they would certainly feel more at ease with an NMD that fits into a broader non-proliferation and arms control agenda. They are also ready to join the United States in diplomatic moves than could limit the spread of missiles in regions of concern (such as on the Korean Peninsula and in the Middle East), and they are hopeful that domestic political evolutions in these countries and diplomatic efforts could reduce the need for NMD. In the longer term, some governments even have already signaled their readiness to be involved in a broader missile defense covering US allies in Europe.

38 A Jackie Wu and Anuj Bapodra Production:

DDI ’08 Jackie “Awesome” Wu & A-Bomb

NMD DA 39/115

CURBING NUCLEAR PROLIF / HEG / SOFT POWER LINK MULTILATERAL ENGAGEMENT KEY TO GETTING EUROPE ON BOARD FOR NMD CAMILLE GRAND, Institut français des Relations internationales (IFRI), Paris. Lecturer, Institut d’études politiques de Paris, and Ecole spéciale militaire, and Adviser for arms control and nonproliferation at the French Ministry of Defense. 01 "NMD and arms control: a European view." http://www.mi.infn.it/~landnet/NMD/grand.pdf [JWu]

The recent report by the British House of Commons also urged “the Government to impress upon U.S. administration that it cannot necessarily assume unqualified UK co operation with U.S. plans to deploy NMD in the event of unilateral U.S. abrogation of the ABM Treaty.” Coming from the parliament of the closest U.S. ally in Europe and a country that hosts two key facilities for the NMD architecture (Fylindales and Menwith Hill); this position is worth noticing.5 Greenland’s Prime minister has warned that Greenland would refuse to upgrade the Thule radar facility “if it resulted in increased tension and world destabilization.”6 The final decision belongs to Denmark, but Copenhagen has said that local views would be taken into account. In other words, Europe would probably not oppose the deployment of missiles defenses and amendments to the ABM Treaty as long as the inner logic of treaty (limitations on defenses) and the treaty itself are preserved, and as long as amendments take place in an U.S.-Russian negotiated process. In order that the future of arms control may be preserved, Europeans do not want to see multilateral approaches to security abandoned in favor of unilateral defenses.

39 A Jackie Wu and Anuj Bapodra Production:

DDI ’08 Jackie “Awesome” Wu & A-Bomb

NMD DA 40/115

LINK: PROLIF FIGHTING PROLIF AND ARMS REDUCTION IS KEY TO GETTING EUROPEAN NMD SUPPORT CAMILLE GRAND, Institut français des Relations internationales (IFRI), Paris. Lecturer, Institut d’études politiques de Paris, and Ecole spéciale militaire, and Adviser for arms control and nonproliferation at the French Ministry of Defense. 01 "NMD and arms control: a European view." http://www.mi.infn.it/~landnet/NMD/grand.pdf [JWu]

Moreover, a U.S. shift away from arms control provides an easy justification for those who are reluctant to join—or to comply with—non-proliferation and disarmament norms. In terms of a U.S.-European cooperative fight against the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, the U.S. shift could lead either to a counterproductive division of labor or to a conceptual decoupling, whereby the United States pursues military and defense options while Europe insists on diplomatic and arms control tools. But from the perspective of European countries deeply committed to arms reductions and non-proliferation, the underlying point is that NMD could damage the ABM Treaty, thereby threatening the entire framework of arms control. The ABM Treaty is, rightly or wrongly, perceived as an essential element of international security and, in the European view, it should therefore be handled with care. This explains Europe’s clear preference for a negotiated amendment process that will avoid chain reactions in Russia and elsewhere and its desire to combine BMD-related efforts with a renewed interest in arms control and non-proliferation regimes.

40 A Jackie Wu and Anuj Bapodra Production:

DDI ’08 Jackie “Awesome” Wu & A-Bomb

NMD DA 41/115

LINK: PROLIF—POLAND SOLVING PROLIF CAUSES POLISH COOPERATION Carl Ek, Specialist in International Relations, Foreign Affairs, Defense, and Trade Division. Report to Congress by Congressional Research Service, 08 "Poland’s New Government: Background and Issues for the United States" (http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/row/RS22811.pdf)[JWu] Poland and the United States have historically close relations. Under successive governments since 9/11, Warsaw has been a reliable supporter and ally in the global war on terrorism and, as noted earlier, has contributed troops to the U.S.-led coalitions in Afghanistan and in Iraq. Poland also has cooperated with the United States on “such issues as democratization, nuclear proliferation, human rights, regional cooperation ... and UN reform.”12 During Prime Minister Jaroslaw Kaczynski’s September 2006 visit to Washington, D.C., Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice described the two countries as “the best of friends.” One month later, however, Tusk accused Kaczynski of servility toward the United States. Immediately after the elections, Tusk said he hoped for “better cooperation with the United States in which Poland will be a true partner.”13 Tusk highlighted two areas in particular: the Iraq conflict (see above) and missile defense.

41 A Jackie Wu and Anuj Bapodra Production:

DDI ’08 Jackie “Awesome” Wu & A-Bomb

NMD DA 42/115

LINK: IRAQ CURRENT IRAQ ENGAGEMENTS ARE A PROBLEM IN NMD TALKS Vanessa Gera, correspondent in the Warsaw bureau of The Associated Press, has covered central Europe for seven years. 7-3-08 http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5iikN80AfzdsEw0Ck4_2K6jjEEG2wD91MH3NO1[JWU]

"Many problems in the bilateral relationship became apparent during the missile defense talks," said Maria Wagrowska, a security expert with the Warsaw-based Center for International Relations. "And they are not only political — they are also psychological." She and other analysts agree that if the U.S. had tried to get a deal before the Iraq war, it would have been much easier. Today, Polish politicians feel burned by the Bush administration, largely because Warsaw's staunch military support for the U.S. war in Iraq failed to win substantial contracts for Polish companies in Iraq's reconstruction, as many here had expected.

INCREASED ENGAGEMENT IN THE MIDDLE EAST REVITALIZES TRANSNATIONAL COOPERATION Lily Feldman, AICGS Sr Fellow in Residence, PhD pol sci, 10-28-2004, http://www.aicgs.org/analysis/c/feldmanc2.aspx [JWU] In the past few years, several Washington think tanks, including AICGS, have issued reports emphasizing the importance of cooperation on the Middle East as a way to heal or reenergize the transatlantic relationship. Following the June 2004 G-8 summit's commitment to a "Partnership for Progress and a Common Future with the Region of the Broader Middle East and North Africa," a recent publication of the Atlantic Council went so far as to lend this region primary, agenda-setting status: "Since the end of the Cold War, events in the broader Middle East have increasingly become the principal determinants of the state of the transatlantic relationship." In the same vein, the important September 2004 Berlin "Ambassadors' Conference," bringing together German heads of mission from around the world, chose the Middle East as its main focus. Whether we accept the Middle East as the fulcrum of transatlantic relations or view it as too fragile to bear the weight of U.S.-European ties is largely irrelevant, for governments and elites will continue to consider it primary and events on the ground will continue to command response. What we can do is to point up the similarities and differences on the Middle East among Bush, Kerry and Germany (within the context of the European Union), as a way of anticipating the trajectory of transatlantic relations after the November 2nd election. A critical feature of the central components of the Greater Middle East conundrum - Iran and nuclear weapons; the Israeli-Palestinian conflict; the War in Iraq -- is their inextricable linkage, demanding attention, vision, and action on all three fronts at once.

42 A Jackie Wu and Anuj Bapodra Production:

DDI ’08 Jackie “Awesome” Wu & A-Bomb

NMD DA 43/115

LINK: IRAQ—POLAND/CZECH POLAND AND CZECH REPUBLIC ARE STRONG SUPPORTERS OF IRAQ ENGAGEMENT INTERNATIONAL COMMITTEE OF THE FOURTH INTERNATIONAL, 3-17-07 http://www.wsws.org/articles/2007/mar2007/miss-m17.shtml [JWu]

Poland and the Czech Republic are close allies of the US and belong to the “coalition of the willing,” which supported the US in its invasion and occupation of Iraq. At present, Poland has 900 soldiers stationed in Iraq, and the Czech Republic 100. Both nations are currently increasing their commitment in Afghanistan in order to relieve US troops in the country. Poland has recently sent an additional 1,000 troops, and the Czech Republic is currently preparing to supply helicopters and weapons for the occupation troops.

CHANGING IRAQ POLICIES KEY TO GAINING CZECH SUPPORT FOR NMDS

NEW YORK TIMES 7-9-08 nytimes.com/2008/07/09/world/europe/09shield.html?em&ex=1215748800&en=f870cb9afdaab674&ei=5087%0A [JWU]

Mr. Topolanek’s coalition government does not have enough seats to assure support for the plans and may need opposition votes. Legislators from the Green Party, the government’s junior coalition partner, have indicated they may block the proposals, and opposition parties have demanded a national referendum. About two-thirds of Czechs oppose the radar deployment, according to opinion polls. “Ratification will be difficult,” said Jiri Schneider, program director at the Prague Security Studies Institute. “The missile defense plan has sparked a national debate about how exposed we want to be on the international stage.” Czech political analysts said that, for the older generation, the missile defense plans had tapped into a deep suspicion of security alliances that stretched back across the past century. For the younger generation, opposition to the missile plan has become a way to express discontent with American policies, including the war in Iraq.

43 A Jackie Wu and Anuj Bapodra Production:

DDI ’08 Jackie “Awesome” Wu & A-Bomb

NMD DA 44/115

AFF LINK: CTBT COUNTRIES WILL TRADE NMD FOR CTBT David Malone is president of the International Peace Academy in New York. AND Ramesh Thakur is vice rector of the United Nations University in Tokyo. 3-11-01 http://search.japantimes.co.jp/cgi-bin/eo20010311a2.html [JWU] The new administration in Washington has taken office firmly committed to the concept of a national missile defense system, arguing that future U.S. security needs take precedence over arms-control agreements rooted in Cold War history. Its views on the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty, an agreement signed in the late 1990s with the goal of confining nuclear testing to history, are less clear-cut. If friends and allies concede on NMD in principle, they might well be able to shape the final form of NMD and persuade Washington to accept the CTBT in return.

44 A Jackie Wu and Anuj Bapodra Production:

DDI ’08 Jackie “Awesome” Wu & A-Bomb

NMD DA 45/115

LINK: ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION SECURITY, GLOBAL WARMING, ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION LINKS ___________________ IS KEY TO EUROPEAN ACCEPTANCE OF NMD

Peoples Daily, 5-18-01 http://english.people.com.cn/english/200105/18/eng20010518_70286.html)[JWu] The European Parliament Thursday called on the United States to consult with every nation in the world over its plan to deploy the national anti-missile defense shield (NMD). "The Parliament is worried over the US propositions related to a missile defense system that might become the origin of a new round of arms race and thus brings threat instead of assurance to world security," said the European Union's legislative body in a resolution on EU-U.S. transatlantic dialogue. The deputies also called on the United States to honor its engagements to the Kyoto Protocol on global climate changes, saying they hope the Americans will "give up their isolationist position toward global challenges." The resolution added that it is necessary to deepen trans- Atlantic political dialogue and the United States and the EU should work together to defend common positions in the fields of security, environmental protection, competition and anti-trust legislation.

45 A Jackie Wu and Anuj Bapodra Production:

DDI ’08 Jackie “Awesome” Wu & A-Bomb

NMD DA 46/115

LINK: CLIMATE EUROPE WANTS U.S. TO REDUCE EMISSIONS Donella H. Meadows is an adjunct professor of environmental studies at Dartmouth College, NO DATE http://www.sustainer.org/dhm_archive/index.php?display_article=vn718climateed [JWu]

Several European governments have detailed plans for cutting their economies' 1990 fossil fuel use (hence emissions of the greenhouse gas carbon dioxide) by 15 or 20 percent by the year 2005. Meanwhile the U.S. president has generously offered to get U.S. emissions back down to their 1990 level -- twice as high per capita as the European level -- by the year 2008 or 2010 or maybe 2012. Members of the European press don't ask me whether global warming is real. They take seriously the consensus of the 2400 scientists who participate in the ongoing global forum called the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. They ask "what can be done?" and "why is the United States such a laggard on this issue?"

EUROPE ASKING U.S. TO CHANGE GAS EMISSION POLICIES WASHINGTON TIMES 5-26-08 http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2008/may/26/us-pressed-for-emissions-cuts-by20/[JWu] KOBE, Japan (AP) — European and developing countries urged the United States and Japan yesterday to commit to deep cuts in greenhouse-gas emissions by 2020 — a step they say is needed to defuse a coming ecological disaster caused by global warming. The calls at a meeting of environment ministers from the Group of Eight industrialized nations in Japan coincided with rising concern that momentum is draining from U.N.-led efforts to force a new climate-change agreement by a December 2009 deadline.

46 A Jackie Wu and Anuj Bapodra Production:

DDI ’08 Jackie “Awesome” Wu & A-Bomb

NMD DA 47/115

EUROPE WANTS U.S. LEADERSHIP ON CLIMATE ISSUES TIME 6-4-07 http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1628024,00.html [JWU] Underlying the increasingly testy exchange are fundamental differences over how the climate crisis is to be addressed. The biggest worry in Europe is that the Bush Administration approach of stressing technology and voluntary targets will weaken the global effort under U.N. auspices to set mandatory targets. "America increasingly wants to use new technologies and in this way test how much carbon dioxide emissions can be decreased," Angela Merkel told the newsmagazine Der Spiegel. "We Europeans find it more compelling to agree on goals on an international level, and direct our efforts accordingly." She added: "I encourage [President Bush] to be courageous and lead the way with concrete climate protection goals." Sigmar Gabriel, the German Environment Minister, added: "What we need now is a worldwide climate change regime. We need clear aims and we have to be able to check if the contracting partners stick to the goals."

47 A Jackie Wu and Anuj Bapodra Production:

DDI ’08 Jackie “Awesome” Wu & A-Bomb

NMD DA 48/115

LINK: CLIMATE EUROPE WANTS U.S. TO CUT GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS

PEOPLES DAILY 4-1-01 http://english.people.com.cn/english/200104/04/eng20010404_66797.html [JWU] A high-level delegation from Europe has met members of the Bush administration in Washington to discuss the United States abandoning the Kyoto treaty on global warming, BBC reports Wednesday. This is the first time that senior environment officials from Europe and America have met face-to-face since the White House announced last week that it was pulling out of the Kyoto process. After the meeting, the delegation said that the dministration had restated its opposition to the treaty without offering any alternatives to lower greenhouse gas emissions.

EUROPE WANTS U.S. TO REDUCE GREENHOUSE EMISSIONS TIME 6-4-07 http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1628024,00.html [JWU]

When it comes to addressing climate change, the U.S. and Europe are like two cars racing toward each other in a game of chicken, according to Hans Joachim Schnellhuber, an adviser on climate issues to German Chancellor Angela Merkel. That may be overstating the case. But there's little chance that this week's G8 summit at the German seaside resort of Heiligendamm will resolve fundamental differences between the Bush Administration and E.U. countries led by Germany over how to combat global warming. The targets require taking steps to ensure that average temperatures on the planet increase by no more than 2 degrees celsius by the end of the century, and to slash greenhouse gas emissions to 50% of the 1990 level before 2050. But when the German draft was circulated two weeks ago in Washington, U.S. negotiators declared, in a document leaked shortly afterwards, that the German draft "crossed multiple 'red lines'" and that "there is only so far we can go, given our fundamental opposition to the German position." Then, on May 31, President George W. Bush announced his own climate change initiative, which calls on the leaders of the 15 leading producers of the heat-trapping gases to develop long term voluntary emission-reduction goals. The proposal, notably short on specifics, raised concern in Europe that Bush was trying to make an end-run around the existing United Nations process for addressing climate change, which includes the Kyoto agreement. The German environment minister warned of a possible "trojan horse" designed to sidestep an agreement in Heiligendamm and "torpedo the international climate protection process."

48 A Jackie Wu and Anuj Bapodra Production:

DDI ’08 Jackie “Awesome” Wu & A-Bomb

NMD DA 49/115

LINK: CLIMATE EUROPE WANTS THE U.S. TO CUT EMISSIONS NEW SCIENTIST, 90 http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg12517040.700-europeannations-want-action-now-on-global-warming-.html [JWU] The European countries want the industrialised nations, as a first step, to hold steady their emissions of carbon dioxide by the year 2000. Such a move would not decrease concentrations of carbon dioxide, the main greenhouse gas, in the atmosphere. Jack Jenkins, coordinator of the IPCC's science group, said that stabilising atmospheric concentrations of carbon dioxide at current levels requires a 70 per cent reduction in global emissions in the short term. To reduce concentrations to preindustrial levels would require even steeper cuts. Last week's meeting provided an opportunity for countries to present their favoured policy options to an international audience. While the European countries lobbied to speed negotiations, the developing countries made it clear they would not agree to a convention limiting emissions of greenhouse gases until the developed countries state explicitly how they would help to sustain economic development in countries of the Third World. They reiterated their view that the developed world is responsible for climate change and that the developing world should not suffer as a result. Godwin Obasi, head of the World Meteorological Organisation, also appealed for funds to help developing countries to buy equipment to monitor emissions of greenhouse gases. The GAO's criticism of the US's lack of

national policy on global warming came in a report to a congressional committee. The GAO says that officials from international environmental organisations feel uncertain about the authority of the US's representatives at meetings. It complains that the Bush administration has not appointed any agency to act as 'the administration's voice on global climate change'.

LINK—EUROPE PUSHING FOR U.S. TO REDUCE EMISSIONS AP 7-8-08 http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080708/ap_on_re_as/g8_climate_change [JWU] The decision on climate change split some of the differences between Bush and other G-8 members. Japan and European members have been pressing for setting a long-term goal of a 50 percent reduction in global greenhouse emissions by 2050. Other members, including the U.S., Russia and Canada, have been less enthusiastic about such a target. Bush has long said that China and India and other big, growing economies must share in the pain in reaching such a goal. The Europeans have pushed harder for rich countries to reinvigorate talks by making unilateral commitments. Germany, for instance, has pledged to cut emissions by 20 percent by 2020, and by 30 percent if other countries join the effort.

49 A Jackie Wu and Anuj Bapodra Production:

DDI ’08 Jackie “Awesome” Wu & A-Bomb

NMD DA 50/115

LINK: CAP AND TRADE EUROPE LIKES CAP AND TRADE

International herald tribune 6-4-07 http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/06/04/business/carbon.php [JWu]

Europe is moving toward far reaching changes to its emissions-trading system that could force large-scale polluters to pay for most, or even all, permits to produce climatechanging gases, European officials said Monday. Although the European carbon-trading arrangement is the world's most functional, the countries that administer it acknowledged in a meeting this weekend in Essen, Germany, that the system was shadowed by some major flaws, including a government-credit allocation plan that allows companies to profit by lobbying for additional pollution permits. According to a statement issued by the German presidency, European Union governments plan to ask the European Commission to propose modifying the current framework, known as "cap and trade," by including auction and benchmarking components that would reduce corporate influence over pollution permits after 2012, when a crucial period of the present system expires. "Though it has been a success, we have undergone a steep learning curve and we have seen some windfall profits being made by power companies," said Barbara Helfferich, a spokeswoman for the European Environment Commissioner, Stavros Dimas.

50 A Jackie Wu and Anuj Bapodra Production:

DDI ’08 Jackie “Awesome” Wu & A-Bomb

NMD DA 51/115

LINK: MULTILATERAL ANYTHING MULTILATERAL ACTIONS KEY TO GETTING EUROPE ON BOARD FOR NMD Nicola Butler, senior analyst for the Acronym Institute, 2k, "Missile defence divergence: Britain debates nmd" Disarmament Diplomacy, Issue no 48, july 2k Both opponents and proponents of NMD oppose trends in the United States towards unilateralism in international affairs. The Missile Proliferation Study Group believes that "European opposition to… a decision [by the US to withdraw from the ABM Treaty] could damage the [NATO] alliance and lead either to US isolationism or unilateralism."37 Most MPs, however, see NMD itself as symptomatic of a new and highly dangerous form of unilateralism. Menzies Campbell highlights Senate rejection of the CTBT, unwillingness to endorse the International Criminal Court, procrastination over the land mines ban and determination to press ahead with NMD regardless of the ABM Treaty as "disturbing and destabilizing features of a determination on the part of the Americans to go it alone". Malcolm Savidge shares this concern that "there is the danger of a new unilateralism in the United States, which could completely undermine nuclear disarmament".38

CURBING NUCLEAR PROLIF / HEG / SOFT POWER LINK MULTILATERAL ENGAGEMENT KEY TO GETTING EUROPE ON BOARD FOR NMD CAMILLE GRAND, Institut français des Relations internationales (IFRI), Paris. Lecturer, Institut d’études politiques de Paris, and Ecole spéciale militaire, and Adviser for arms control and nonproliferation at the French Ministry of Defense. 01 "NMD and arms control: a European view." http://www.mi.infn.it/~landnet/NMD/grand.pdf [JWu]

The recent report by the British House of Commons also urged “the Government to impress upon U.S. administration that it cannot necessarily assume unqualified UK co operation with U.S. plans to deploy NMD in the event of unilateral U.S. abrogation of the ABM Treaty.” Coming from the parliament of the closest U.S. ally in Europe and a country that hosts two key facilities for the NMD architecture (Fylindales and Menwith Hill); this position is worth noticing.5 Greenland’s Prime minister has warned that Greenland would refuse to upgrade the Thule radar facility “if it resulted in increased tension and world destabilization.”6 The final decision belongs to Denmark, but Copenhagen has said that local views would be taken into account. 51 A Jackie Wu and Anuj Bapodra Production:

DDI ’08 Jackie “Awesome” Wu & A-Bomb

NMD DA 52/115

In other words, Europe would probably not oppose the deployment of missiles defenses and amendments to the ABM Treaty as long as the inner logic of treaty (limitations on defenses) and the treaty itself are preserved, and as long as amendments take place in an U.S.-Russian negotiated process. In order that the future of arms control may be preserved, Europeans do not want to see multilateral approaches to security abandoned in favor of unilateral defenses.

LINK: MULTILATERAL ANYTHING LINK: MULTILATERAL COOPERATION KEY TO GETTING EUROPEAN NMD SUPPORT CAMILLE GRAND, Institut français des Relations internationales (IFRI), Paris. Lecturer, Institut d’études politiques de Paris, and Ecole spéciale militaire, and Adviser for arms control and non-proliferation at the French Ministry of Defense. 01 "NMD and arms control: a European view." http://www.mi.infn.it/~landnet/NMD/grand.pdf [JWu] Just as in the United States, a wide variety of views have been expressed in Europe concerning the impact of the proposed U.S. national missile defense (NMD) on arms control. Most Europeans are genuinely concerned that the country that invented arms control and non-proliferation is showing a mounting distrust, if not outright contempt, for bilateral and multilateral regimes and treaties. Coming after the U.S. Senate’s rejection of the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty, the determined pursuit of national missile defense is another signal of a growing U.S. preference for unilateral responses to global issues. At a time when major arms control negotiations are facing a stalemate (the Biological Weapons Convention protocol and the fissile material cutoff treaty to name two examples about which Europeans care very much), this trend worries many U.S. friends and allies.

52 A Jackie Wu and Anuj Bapodra Production:

DDI ’08 Jackie “Awesome” Wu & A-Bomb

NMD DA 53/115

53 A Jackie Wu and Anuj Bapodra Production:

DDI ’08 Jackie “Awesome” Wu & A-Bomb

NMD DA 54/115

LINK: AIR POWER / MILITARY—POLAND UNIQUE LINK:

POLAND AND U.S. ARE DISCUSSING NMDS NOW—KEY ISSUE IS PROVIDING AIR SECURITY WARSAW BUSINESS JOURNAL, 7-21-08 http://www.wbj.pl/article-41943-missiledefense-shield-talks-yield-progress.html?typ=wbj [JWu]

Poland and the US are closer in their efforts in negotiating a deal to place anti-missile defense on Polish soil, said Polish Foreign Minister Radosław Sikorski after his meeting with US Assistant Undersecretary of State Dan Fried. "This was a positive discussion, which brought the two sides closer together regarding the anti-missile defense," said Sikorski after the meeting. However, he did not reveal any details of the talk. Piotr Paszkowski, spokesman to Sikorski said that further talks will take place in Warsaw on Wednesday. Fried arrived in Warsaw to attend the funeral of Bronisław Geremek, but before the ceremony, the two politicians sat down and talked about issues crucial to PolishAmerican relations. The Bush administration wants to install 10 interceptor missiles in Poland as part of its anti-missile defense plan that aims to protect the US and its European allies from possible attacks by rogue states. In return for the project, Poland has asked the US for large investments that are meant to upgrade its air force. The CzechRepublic has signed an accord with the US to place a tracking radar on its soil, as part of the plan.

POLAND ASKING FOR AIR SUPPORT, IN EXCHANGE FOR NMD NYTIMES 7-9-08 http://www.statesman.com/news/content/news/stories/world/07/09/0709missiledefense.ht ml [JWU] Rice is on a European tour that includes Bulgaria and Georgia but not Poland. The United States hopes to base 10 interceptor missiles in Poland, but Warsaw and Washington have failed to reach agreement on the terms. Poland's government has taken a tough negotiating stance. In return for hosting the interceptors, Poland has asked the United States to modernize Polish air defenses so that the country can defend itself against incoming short- and medium-range missiles.

54 A Jackie Wu and Anuj Bapodra Production:

DDI ’08 Jackie “Awesome” Wu & A-Bomb

NMD DA 55/115

LINK: AIR POWER / MILITARY—POLAND AIR POWER EXPANSION ALLOWS POLAND TO RATIFY NMD ALJAZEERA 2-2-08 http://english.aljazeera.net/news/europe/2008/02/2008525135912344656.html [JWu]

Sikorski did not outline the terms of the deal, but in a joint appearance with Condoleezza Rice, the US secretary of state, the two officials suggested that the US would help with Polish air defenses, which Poland has asked for in the deal. Rice said: "We understand that there is a desire for defense modernisation in Poland, and particularly for air defense modernization in Poland. "This is something that we support because it will make our ally, Poland, more capable, it will make Poland, as the foreign minister has said, more able to operate with us." Sikorski said that negotiators would continue to work on the details of an agreement that would allow the US to install 10 interceptors as part of a long range European missile defense system. He said: "We are not at the end of the road as regards negotiations. We are in the middle of the road. We have an agreement in principle."

HELPING POLISH SECURITY ALLOWS NMD IN POLAND Vladimir Volkov International Editorial Board member of WSWS 18 July 2008 http://www.wsws.org/articles/2008/jul2008/miss-j18.shtml [JWU] Besides radar in the Czech Republic, deploying elements of an American anti-missile system in Eastern Europe includes placing tens of anti-missile rockets on the territory of Poland. However, talks between the US and Warsaw were halted after the Polish government proposed a number of conditions, chief among them being a request for $20 billion in aid for modernizing the Polish army and air defense. In the opinion of Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk, the deployment of elements of an antimissile system enhances the security of the US, but not that of Poland. “Key in the question of Polish negotiations with the United States has been and remains a real increase in Poland’s security through political guarantees, but also through definite military guarantees,” he stated.

55 A Jackie Wu and Anuj Bapodra Production:

DDI ’08 Jackie “Awesome” Wu & A-Bomb

NMD DA 56/115

LINK: AFGHANISTAN Story: they read cards saying x is key to solving Afghanistan, meaning Polish troops aren't needed. Poland pulls out troops and which the public likes, bolstering support for the NMD. Carl Ek, Specialist in International Relations, Foreign Affairs, Defense, and Trade Division. Report to Congress by Congressional Research Service, 08 "Poland’s New Government: Background and Issues for the United States" (http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/row/RS22811.pdf)[JWu] Over the past three years, Poland has contributed a significant number of troops to the U.S.-led operation in Iraq. Observers note that the deployment is providing the Polish military with invaluable experience, not the least of which includes commanding a multinational division. However, Poland’s presence in Iraq remains unpopular at home — a recent poll showed 85% opposition to the deployment. To date, 21 Polish soldiers have died in Iraq. During the fall election campaign, candidate Tusk pledged to pull out Polish troops if elected; Jaroslaw Kaczynski countered that Poles were not “deserters or cowards.” On December 18, 2007, the new government requested that Poland’s 900troop presence in Iraq be extended until October 2008, at which time the soldiers would be withdrawn. Poland also has 1200 soldiers in Afghanistan — the new government proposes an additional 400 be dispatched there, although polls show clear public disapproval of the mission.7

56 A Jackie Wu and Anuj Bapodra Production:

DDI ’08 Jackie “Awesome” Wu & A-Bomb

NMD DA 57/115

INTERNAL: NMD TRADING DEMANDS FOR NMD WOULD BE QUID PRO QUO RADIO PRAGUE 5-25-08 http://www.radio.cz/en/article/79280 [JWU] That's the military-technical side of it. On a political level, we've just seen the Czechs dealt a very embarrassing blow after the US Senate voted to effectively exempt Poles from visas, but not Czechs - despite months of lobbying by Czech Foreign Minister Cyril Svoboda. How much appetite is there in the Foreign Ministry to even contemplate allowing the US to build missile bases in this country? What's in it for the Czechs?

"That's effectively a very sensitive part of any US request. Should they decide to ask formally the Czech Republic for permission to establish a US missile defence base on Czech territory, they would have to immediately bring something in exchange, so to speak. And the most likely issue would then by either a visa-free regime, or a much more flexible and almost visa-free regime, because that's the only issue that bothers the Czech public. And that could be seen as a beneficial trade

off."

57 A Jackie Wu and Anuj Bapodra Production:

DDI ’08 Jackie “Awesome” Wu & A-Bomb

NMD DA 58/115

INTERNAL LINK: TAKING INTO ACCOUNT EUROPEAN DEMANDS KEY TO NMD ACCEPTANCE James Nagelberg, Law Clerk at U.S. Department of Justice, Foreign Affairs Officer at U.S. Department of State, National Security Analyst at Computer Sciences Corporation 2k "pushing the wedge: nmd and US alliances" http://www.basicint.org/pubs/Notes/2000pushingwedge.htm [JWu] The change in threat perception has caused a shift in American policy that at times has excluded European interests. "In defense policy, you tend to avoid areas of stability, so America isn’t worried about Europe as much as Asia. In other words, no threats equals no attention," said Valasek. In fact, the Asian drift in Washington has been a gradual one. According to Stanley R. Sloan, a private consultant and retired senior specialist with the Congressional Research Service, "In [President Bill] Clinton’s first year of office, the administration attempted to use a tilt in policy toward Asia to gain leverage in diplomatic dealings with Europe. That turned out to be a bad strategy that upset our allies." After realizing the flaws in this strategy, policy-makers began to change how they deal with the European allies. "The administration is finally having consultations with the European allies now, but they’re falling short of accomplishing the administration’s goals," said Dr. Sean Kay, a Politics and Government professor at Ohio Wesleyan University. A large part of the failure in American diplomatic efforts in Europe on NMD has been the seemingly deaf ear of the administration and Congress. The tunnel vision created by a threat analysis aimed at Asia has allowed European views to go disregarded. "We’ve certainly overlooked the European position on NMD because we’re so focused on threats from Iran, Iraq and Korea," said Valasek. Sloan added that, "Too many members of Congress are dismissive to European attitudes. In terms of strategy, what the Europeans think should play a larger role in decision-making for Congress and the administration." The dismissive response from U.S. leaders over NMD and an array of other issues has contributed to European feelings of neglect. "Had we prioritized conversations with our allies a year ago, we might not be having this open debate on NMD right now. The administration was handing down decisions without making a true dialogue of it," said Kay. Leaders from virtually all of America’s European and NATO allies have expressed their frustration in dealing with the United States on NMD. "Unilateral efforts to build defenses against the dangers [of missile attacks] are unlikely to provide lasting security and might quite possibly increase insecurity," said Canadian Foreign Minister Lloyd Axworthy.[4] Following the release of a negative report on the U.S. NMD proposal by the Foreign Affairs Committee in the U.K. House of Commons, Committee Chairman Donald Anderson said, "We should make crystal clear to the U.S. that it cannot take our cooperation for granted."[5]

58 A Jackie Wu and Anuj Bapodra Production:

DDI ’08 Jackie “Awesome” Wu & A-Bomb

NMD DA 59/115

INTERNAL: NMD TRADING—POLAND *****QUID PRO QUO NEGOTATIONS ARE KEY TO NMD Vanessa Gera, correspondent in the Warsaw bureau of The Associated Press, has covered central Europe for seven years. 7-3-08 http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5iikN80AfzdsEw0Ck4_2K6jjEEG2wD91MH3NO1[JWU]

As a result, Warsaw has decided that if it is going to link its fate to another major American military project, it's going to get what it wants beforehand — and in writing. "Poland took an idealistic approach when it decided to support the U.S. in Iraq," Wagrowska said. "Now there is a much more reasonable, commercial approach because of the disappointment that we didn't earn anything in Iraq." As part of a missile defense deal, Poland has asked for billions of dollars worth of military investment from the U.S. to upgrade its air defenses, including Patriot ground-toair missiles. What Poland will get is not known. The government of Prime Minister Donald Tusk has been driving a hard bargain in part because the Polish public strongly opposes the proposed base. For its own survival, the government must show voters that it is not Washington's lapdog, and that it is securing some tangible benefits in exchange. "Poland doesn't have very much money and I think that we deserve something from the Americans if only because of our participation in the Iraq war," said Danuta Zegarska, 54, a stay-at-home mother relaxing in a Warsaw park on Thursday. Tusk has acknowledged that his government "is not acting like a naive enthusiast, but like a hard negotiator."

POLAND WILL RATIFY THE NMD IN EXCHANGE FOR U.S. CONCESSIONS Agata Wadowska received her MA at University of Lodz in Poland in international relations, specializing in Middle Eastern and Arab studies as well as in Polish contemporary history. 9-4-07 http://www.dailyestimate.com/article.asp?id=10887

Commenting on the result, Deputy Foreign Minister Paweł Kowal said the poll was "interesting" but added, "I wouldn't care about it too much." He also expressed strong opposition to organizing a referendum on the issue. For most Polish supporters of the defense shield, the issue is a political question rather than a military one. Although they may not share the US threat perception with regard to Iran, they are willing to go along with the country's plans in order to obtain other benefits from Washington. Hope that visa requirements to travel to the US will be lifted is one of these sought-after benefits.

59 A Jackie Wu and Anuj Bapodra Production:

DDI ’08 Jackie “Awesome” Wu & A-Bomb

NMD DA 60/115

INTERNAL: SUPPORT KEY EUROPEAN SUPPORT OF U.S. POLICIES KEY TO NMD

British American Security Information Council , 5 (based on most recent date), http://www.basicint.org/nuclear/NMD/main.htm[JWu] Support from European governments and the public is vital for the Bush administration's successful development of a National Missile Defense (NMD) system. The need for agreement among the allies is a practical consideration, since the United States must use radars at sites in Greenland and the United Kingdom to make the system operational. However, agreement with allies is complicated by expansive plans to deploy a system to protect the United States from ballistic missile attack. U.S. President George W. Bush and his administration plan deployment of land-, sea-, and space-based interceptors as soon as technically possible. Bush's decision to abandon the ABM Treaty, which restricts development of missile defenses, casts a long shadow over the future of multilateral arms control and international law, threatening good relations with its European allies and unity within NATO.

EUROPEAN SUPPORT KEY TO NMD Tomas Valasek, Senior Analyst, Center for Defense Information, 6-8-2k (www.cdi.org/weekly/2000/issue23.html )[JWu]

But for Europe, the choices are less clear. Senior politicians in Germany, Italy, and France did speak out against NMD. But their main criticism is that it will weaken U.S. -European strategic links by fostering a siege mentality in the United States. Implicitly, the European NATO allies make it clear they want to remain under the United States' protective umbrella. This makes it unlikely that they will wholeheartedly embrace Russian proposals and disregard the possible rift with Washington. Russia's dreams of teaming up with Europe to counterbalance the United States are likely to remain just that. As the war in Chechnya demonstrated, the EU's values and interests lie much closer to those of the United States than to Russia's. Regardless of Russia's overtures, Washington can ill-afford to ignore Europe' s reservations. The EU's outright opposition to U.S. deployment of an NMD system -- a possibility, although not yet a reality, as the EU has not formulated a joint position on NMD -- would put in doubt the future of NATO. But there is another very practical consideration: NMD, especially in its later stages, simply won't work without cooperation from Europe.

60 A Jackie Wu and Anuj Bapodra Production:

DDI ’08 Jackie “Awesome” Wu & A-Bomb

NMD DA 61/115

EUROPEAN FAVOR KEY TO NMDs Theresa Hitchens is Research Director of BASIC. and Stuart Samuels is a Consultant to BASIC. 2k "NMD: Allied fears in focus" http://www.basicint.org/pubs/Papers/BP32.htm May 2k No 32 [JWu] It would be interesting to consider what the U.S. reaction would be if the tables were turned. Imagine that the European Union were to push ahead with its own version of an assertive and independent security and defense policy, backed by an independent military force without any tie to NATO — while waving off legitimate U.S. security concerns as unwarranted. The response from Washington likely would be pyrotechnic.

61 A Jackie Wu and Anuj Bapodra Production:

DDI ’08 Jackie “Awesome” Wu & A-Bomb

NMD DA 62/115

INTERNAL: Poland key to European support Poland is a key player for U.S. to access NMD Lukasz Kulesa, analyst at the Polish Institute of International Affairs, April 12, 2007, “Missile Defense Dossier: The Polish Perspective,” http://www.frstrategie.org/barreFRS/publications/pv/defenseAntimissile/pv_20070412_e ng.pdf [Bapodra] The attitude of the public opinion has to be taken into account by the political class. The title of a recent article published in The Washington Post by the former Defence Minister Radek Sikorski puts it neatly: ‘Don’t Take Poland for Granted’. Even though the referendum on the issue is unlikely, any future agreement with the United States will need to be approved by the Parliament. Many politicians have already voiced their concerns about the MD deployment, with the junior coalition partner League of Polish Families and oppositional Alliance of Democratic Left going openly against it (the second lambasting the government for lack of credible information on the issue). Other main players, including the largest opposition party, the Civic Platform, decided to wait with the final judgment, noting that they could support the agreement only if Poland’s position would be substantially strengthened as a result. Both the President and the Prime Minister also stipulated that they would only accept an outcome of the negotiations which would ‘increase the level of security’ of Poland. Needless to say, the intentional vagueness of such statements is supposed to give the Polish negotiators room for maneuver in the talks with the United States.

62 A Jackie Wu and Anuj Bapodra Production:

DDI ’08 Jackie “Awesome” Wu & A-Bomb

NMD DA 63/115

NMD BAD—ARMAMENT NMD CAUSES NUCLEAR PROLIF AND ARMAMENT Theresa Hitchens is Research Director of BASIC. and Stuart Samuels is a Consultant to BASIC. 2k "NMD: Allied fears in focus" http://www.basicint.org/pubs/Papers/BP32.htm

May 2k No 32 [JWu] Furthermore, the more effective any NMD system is, the more difficult it will be to make further reductions in the numbers of nuclear warheads around the world. Many European Non-Nuclear Weapon States are keenly supportive of nuclear disarmament, and see NMD as an obstacle to that goal. "What if, for instance, some countries come to the conclusion that an arsenal of less than 1,000 nuclear warheads could someday become ineffective because of advanced NMD systems?" asks Otfried Nassauer, director of the Berlin Information-centre for Transatlantic Security (BITS). "They could thus conclude that treaties limiting their arsenals to 1,000 or fewer warheads would not be in their national interest. This, in turn, could result in Nuclear Weapon States deciding it was not in their interest to fulfill their obligations to eventually eliminate nuclear weapons according to Article VI of the NPT." In fact, Nassauer explained, there already has been a debate within the NPT context about whether Nuclear Weapon States should agree not to increase their nuclear posture in the future. However, China can no longer be expected to sign such an agreement, since the planned U.S. NMD system would be able to counter China’s entire strategic arsenal. The British and French militaries, with their small nuclear arsenals, also might feel themselves in a very uncomfortable position. Grant, in the April-May issue of the Centre for European Reform Bulletin, noted that "if NMD prompted Russia and China to improve their ABM systems, the British and French deterrents could be devalued."

NMD WILL KILL RELATIONS WITH RUSSIA AND CAUSE ARMAMENT

Peoples Daily 5-24-2k http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/library/news/china/2000/000524-prcpd1.htm [JWu]

First, they worry that this practice of the United States would worsen US-Russian relations and hamper the process of US-Russian nuclear disarmament. The Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty reached between the United States and the former Soviet Union in 1972 stipulates that both sides should not develop and deploy missile defense system. The present practice of the United States has obviously violated this treaty. If the United States insists on deployment or unilaterally withdraws from this treaty, it is bound to force Russia to develop and deploy the "missile defense system". This, on the one hand, will cause Britain, France and other European countries to lose "nuclear deterrent capability", rendering their nuclear weapons into useless "toys"; on the other hand, it will cause renewed tension in the US-Russian and European-Russian relations. In addition, it will adversely affect the US-Russian third-stage negotiation on cutting down on strategic weapons. The Russian military has indicated that if the United States withdraws from or does not abide by the disarmament accord already reached between both sides, Russia will withdraw from all disarmament negotiations and disarmament agreements. Although such an expression of attitude contains the "factor of threat", its negative effect on US-Russian nuclear disarmament is evident. 63 A Jackie Wu and Anuj Bapodra Production:

DDI ’08 Jackie “Awesome” Wu & A-Bomb

NMD DA 64/115

NMD BAD: KILLS RUSSIAN RELATIONS NMD WILL KILL RELATIONS WITH RUSSIA AND CAUSE ARMAMENT

Peoples Daily 5-24-2k http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/library/news/china/2000/000524-prcpd1.htm [JWu]

First, they worry that this practice of the United States would worsen US-Russian relations and hamper the process of US-Russian nuclear disarmament. The Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty reached between the United States and the former Soviet Union in 1972 stipulates that both sides should not develop and deploy missile defense system. The present practice of the United States has obviously violated this treaty. If the United States insists on deployment or unilaterally withdraws from this treaty, it is bound to force Russia to develop and deploy the "missile defense system". This, on the one hand, will cause Britain, France and other European countries to lose "nuclear deterrent capability", rendering their nuclear weapons into useless "toys"; on the other hand, it will cause renewed tension in the US-Russian and European-Russian relations. In addition, it will adversely affect the US-Russian third-stage negotiation on cutting down on strategic weapons. The Russian military has indicated that if the United States withdraws from or does not abide by the disarmament accord already reached between both sides, Russia will withdraw from all disarmament negotiations and disarmament agreements. Although such an expression of attitude contains the "factor of threat", its negative effect on US-Russian nuclear disarmament is evident.

NMDS WOULD PISS OFF RUSSIA LUKE HARDING The Guardian staff writer, Moscow correspondent, 4-11-07 guardian.co.uk/world/2007/apr/11/usa.topstories3 [JWu] In an interview with the Guardian, the Kremlin's chief spokesman, Dmitry Peskov, said Moscow felt betrayed by the Pentagon's move. "We were extremely concerned and disappointed. We were never informed in advance about these plans. It brings tremendous change to the strategic balance in Europe, and to the world's strategic stability." He added: "We feel ourselves deceived. Potentially we will have to create alternatives to this but with low cost and higher efficiency." Any response would be within "existing technologies", he said. As well as military counter-measures, Russia's president, Vladimir Putin, also wanted "dialogue" and "negotiations", he added.

NMD DESTROY U.S. RELATIONS WITH RUSSIA AND E.U. WADE BOESE rsrch director of Arms Control Association APRIL 2001 armscontrol.org/act/2001_04/internatlnmd [JWu] Russia has continued to voice its opposition to U.S. plans, and on March 6, Swedish Foreign Minister Anna Lindh, a critic of missile defenses, noted after a meeting with Powell that she had not changed her position. Lindh also said that the European Union presidency, which Sweden currently occupies, does not want to see the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty threatened. 64 A Jackie Wu and Anuj Bapodra Production:

DDI ’08 Jackie “Awesome” Wu & A-Bomb

NMD DA 65/115

NMD BAD: KILLS RUSSIAN RELATIONS NMD KILLS RUSSIAN RELATIONS ALEX LANTIER, 5-22-08 "Russia, China denounce US missile shield at summit meeting" http://www.wsws.org/articles/2008/may2008/chin-m24.shtml [JWU] The US’ planned nuclear missile shield is a complex set of airbases and defenses, which aims to locate and shoot down nuclear missiles fired at the US or its allies in Europe. It is in early design stages and not thought currently to be effective as a defense. However, potential adversaries of the US must keep in mind the possibility that it might one day become effective; moreover, with the US planning to station many of the shield’s defensive bases in Eastern European countries near Russia (e.g., Poland, the Czech Republic), the missile shield has become a major source of tensions in US-Russia relations.

65 A Jackie Wu and Anuj Bapodra Production:

DDI ’08 Jackie “Awesome” Wu & A-Bomb

NMD DA 66/115

NMD BAD: WAR WITH CHINA CHINA FEARS NMD AS A BREACH TO ITS SECURITY—WILL CAUSE ARMS RACE WADE BOESE rsrch director of Arms Control Association APRIL 2001 armscontrol.org/act/2001_04/internatlnmd [JWu] While declaring that China does not want a confrontation with the United States over missile defenses, the ambassador warned that China will "not allow its legitimate means of self-defense to be weakened" and that Beijing wants to preserve "existing mutual deterrence" between China and the United States. Currently, China, which possesses roughly 20 ICBMs capable of reaching the United States, fears a U.S. national missile defense, no matter how limited, could negate its small arsenal, making China vulnerable to a U.S. first strike or eliminating its ability to deter the United States from intervening militarily in Asia, particularly with regard to Taiwan. Like the Clinton administration did, Bush officials have declared that the system will not be directed at China, but at other states, such as North Korea and Iran, that are pursuing long-range ballistic missiles. Sha rejected this assurance, saying the United States has "over-exaggerated" such threats. Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld has said that only those who would threaten the United States or its friends and allies should be concerned about a U.S. defense. Sha repeated long-standing Chinese charges that a U.S. missile defense could start another arms race, including one extending into outer space, and could possibly spur increased missile proliferation. Sha said that for those reasons China, which is already known to be modernizing its strategic forces, hoped Washington would abandon its plans. He added that China "should have reason to be confident that we can deal with it" if there is a U.S. deployment. NMDS CAUSE INTERNATIONAL BACKLASH, NUCLEAR ARMS RACE, AND CHINA AGRESSION

PBS 2K "MISSILE DEFENSE POLITICS" http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/military/julydec00/nmd_8-24.html [JWU] JEFFREY KAYE: Critics say a U.S. defensive shield might encourage hostile nations to acquire even more long-range weapons to try to overwhelm U.S. missile defenses. Their fears were reinforced by a classified national intelligence estimate. According to newspaper reports, the estimate says China will probably expand its nuclear arsenal from 20 to 200 warheads in response to the U.S. deploying a missile shield. John Pike of the Federation of American Scientists opposes a missile defense system because of the potential, in his view, of an arms race. JOHN PIKE: The Chinese are looking at the plan. They are saying to themselves, "we have about 20 long-range missiles that can get to America. The Clinton administration plans to build a system that can intercept about 20 missiles. We are the only country that has just exactly the number that this system is designed to counter. This thing looks like it's aimed at us." Other countries gauge their standing in the world by what countries like China and Russia are doing, and if these countries are not building down their arsenal or they're building up their arsenal, other countries are going to follow suit.

66 A Jackie Wu and Anuj Bapodra Production:

DDI ’08 Jackie “Awesome” Wu & A-Bomb

NMD DA 67/115

NMD BAD: NUCLEAR ARMS RACE NMD CAUSES NUCLEAR ARMS RACE WITH RUSSIA LUKE HARDING The Guardian staff writer, Moscow correspondent, 4-11-07 guardian.co.uk/world/2007/apr/11/usa.topstories3 [JWu] Russia is preparing its own military response to the US's controversial plans to build a new missile defence system in eastern Europe, according to Kremlin officials, in a move likely to increase fears of a cold war-style arms race. The Kremlin is considering active counter-measures in response to Washington's decision to base interceptor missiles and radar installations in Poland and the Czech Republic, a move Russia says will change "the world's strategic stability". The Kremlin has not publicly spelt out its plans. But defence experts said its response is likely to include upgrading its nuclear missile arsenal so that it is harder to shoot down, putting more missiles on mobile launchers, and moving its fleet of nuclear submarines to the north pole, where they are virtually undetectable. Russia could also bring the new US silos within the range of its Iskander missiles launched potentially from the nearby Russian enclave of Kaliningrad, they add. NMD WILL CAUSE NUCLEAR ARMS RACE WITH RUSSIA

INTERNATIONAL COMMITTEE OF THE FOURTH INTERNATIONAL 2-8-07 http://www.wsws.org/articles/2007/feb2007/miss-f08.shtml [JWu]

However, neither Iran, which has not carried out a nuclear detonation test, nor North Korea, whose nuclear weapons capability is very crude, are credible targets for such a vast and complicated defensive system. The primary intention of the US shield is to disable the attack capabilities of those rival countries that actually have missile delivery systems capable of striking the United States or seriously threatening its major forward bases—i.e., Russia and China. Commenting on the announcement by the Czech government that it was hosting the US radar base, Russia’s Defence Minister Sergei Ivanov said, “Russia is not worried. Its strategic nuclear forces can assure in any circumstance its safety. Since neither Tehran nor Pyongyang possess intercontinental missiles capable of threatening the USA, from whom is this new missile shield supposed to protect the West? All it actually amounts to is that Prague and Warsaw want to demonstrate their loyalty to Washington.” Despite the bravado of the Russian government regarding its military capabilities, the Kremlin is acutely aware of the threat posed to it by the accelerating nuclear arms race being pushed by the US. General Yuri Baluyevsky, Russian chief of general staff, described the deployment of parts of the missile shield into Europe as an “unfriendly move, to put it mildly.” “Its interception range will cover a significant portion of the European part of Russia, and its integration with US information resources will further strengthen the anti-Russian potential of this facility. We would be forced to search for countermeasures which would be asymmetrical and clearly much cheaper,” the general said. 67 A Jackie Wu and Anuj Bapodra Production:

DDI ’08 Jackie “Awesome” Wu & A-Bomb

NMD DA 68/115

NMD BAD—ARMS RACE, CHINA NMDS CAUSE INTERNATIONAL BACKLASH, NUCLEAR ARMS RACE, AND CHINA AGGRESSION

PBS 2K "MISSILE DEFENSE POLITICS" http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/military/julydec00/nmd_8-24.html [JWU] JEFFREY KAYE: Critics say a U.S. defensive shield might encourage hostile nations to acquire even more long-range weapons to try to overwhelm U.S. missile defenses. Their fears were reinforced by a classified national intelligence estimate. According to newspaper reports, the estimate says China will probably expand its nuclear arsenal from 20 to 200 warheads in response to the U.S. deploying a missile shield. John Pike of the Federation of American Scientists opposes a missile defense system because of the potential, in his view, of an arms race. JOHN PIKE: The Chinese are looking at the plan. They are saying to themselves, "we have about 20 long-range missiles that can get to America. The Clinton administration plans to build a system that can intercept about 20 missiles. We are the only country that has just exactly the number that this system is designed to counter. This thing looks like it's aimed at us." Other countries gauge their standing in the world by what countries like China and Russia are doing, and if these countries are not building down their arsenal or they're building up their arsenal, other countries are going to follow suit.

68 A Jackie Wu and Anuj Bapodra Production:

DDI ’08 Jackie “Awesome” Wu & A-Bomb

NMD DA 69/115

Terminal Impacts: Russian retaliation Deploying Bush’s Missile Defense in Europe means U.S.-Russian accidental nuclear war and extinction Mike Whitney, frequent contributor to the Centre for Research on Globalization, December 20, 2007, “Putin Agonistes: Missile Defense will not be Deployed,” CRG, online: http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=7659 [Bapodra]

Bush's Missile Defense system has restarted the nuclear arms race. Welcome to the new Cold War. Finally, Russia Chief of Staff, General Yuri Balyevsky warned: “A possible launch of a US interceptor missile from Central Europe may provoke a counterattack from intercontinental ballistic missiles....If we suppose that Iran wants to strike the United States , then interceptor missiles which would be launched from Poland will fly towards Russia and the shape and flight trajectory are very similar to ICBMs” (Novosti Russian News Agency) Balyevsky's scenario of an “accidental” World War 3 is more likely than ever now that Bush is pressing ahead with his plans for Missile Defense. Russia's automated missile warning systems can be triggered automatically when foreign missiles enter Russian air space. Its a dangerous game and potentially fatal every living thing on the planet. To great extent, the American people have no idea of the reckless policy that is being carried out in their name. The gravity of the proposed Missile Defense system has been virtually ignored by the media and Russia's protests have been dismissed as trivial. But hostilities are steadily growing, military forces and weaponry are being put into place, and the stage is set for a major conflagration. This is every bit as serious as the Cuban Missile Crisis, only this time Russia cannot afford to stand down.

69 A Jackie Wu and Anuj Bapodra Production:

DDI ’08 Jackie “Awesome” Wu & A-Bomb

NMD DA 70/115

Deployment of the European missile defense causes Russian retaliation with nuclear weapons London Times, June 4, 2007 (Seriously… it’s a newspaper [Bapodra]) President Putin has warned the US that its deployment of a new anti-missile network across Eastern Europe would prompt Russia to point its own missiles at European targets and could trigger nuclear war. In an exclusive interview with The Times, the Russian leader says: “It is obvious that if part of the strategic nuclear potential of the US is located in Europe and will be threatening us, we will have to respond. “This system of missile defence on one side and the absence of this system on the other ... increases the possibility of unleashing a nuclear conflict.” Russia has been alarmed at America’s plans to install a network of defences in Eastern Europe to shoot down incoming missiles it fears that Iran might launch. Mr Putin expressed scepticism of this motive, arguing that “There are no such missiles – Iran does not have missiles with the range”. The US was insisting, he said, that the defence system was to be “installed for the protection from something that does not exist. Is it not sort of funny? It would be funny if it were not so sad.” He speculated that the US’s real motive was to provoke Russia’s retaliation and so “to avoid further closeness of Russia and Europe”. Mr Putin’s tough warning comes days before the start of the G8 meeting of the world’s most powerful industrialised economies. His uncompromising stand on America’s missile defence, Kosovo, Iran and climate change was partly blamed for the failure of last month’s summit between Russia and the European Union. Mr Putin had warm words for the “cordial reception” that Tony Blair had given him, and for Gordon Brown, “a high-class specialist”. But he offered little room for compromise on Britain’s request for the extradition of Andrei Lugovoy, the former intelligence officer, wanted on charges of the murder of dissident former agent Alexander Litvinenko by radioactive poisoning in London. “No matter from what angle we look at this problem, it’s all stupid, stupid nonsense”, he said of Britain’s extradition request. “I will not see any single positive component. It’s complete nonsense.” Russian authorities were investigating the case and if enough evidence were found, the case would “certainly be sent to court”, he said. In theory, he added, “there are possible circumstances” in which Russia would comply with the extradition “but it would require an amendment to the Constitution.” But Britain had not provided justification for such a dramatic move, he said. If heads of British law enforcement agencies “did not know that the constitution prohibits the extradition of Russian citizens to foreign states then their competence is questionable” and “they should work for parliament or newspapers” because the request was at heart “only a political public relations step”. He also gave no quarter on the cases of Shell and BP, the British oil giants, who have recently seen the terms of their investments in Russia rewritten because of alleged breaches of their licences. Mr Putin insisted that he wants “cooperation not confrontation”, repeatedly blaming the US for its intransigence. But of all the potential clashes at the G8 meeting, which begins on Wednesday in Germany, it is his warnings on Russian retaliation to the US missile defence plans that are likely to cause the greatest friction. He called on “our American friends to rethink their decision” and warned that ”We cannot be responsible for our reciprocal steps because it is not us who are initiating an arms race in Europe”. He added: “We will need to establish such systems which would be able to penetrate the [US] missile defence systems... What kind of means will be used to hit the targets that our military believe are potential threats – ballistic missiles, or cruise missiles, or some kind of new weapons system – this is a purely technical issue?

70 A Jackie Wu and Anuj Bapodra Production:

DDI ’08 Jackie “Awesome” Wu & A-Bomb

NMD DA 71/115

NMD invades Russian Sphere of Influence/ Disrupts Relations Deploying NMD in Europe causes an unprecedented crash in U.S.-Russia relations Philip Coyle, Senior Adviser to the World Security Institute, and Victoria Swanson, Professor in the graduate International Relations program at St. Mary's University and analyst at the Center for Defense Information, Spring 2008, “Missile Defense Malfunction: Why the Proposed U.S. Missile Defenses in Europe Will Not Work,” Ethics & International Affairs, Vol. 12, No. 1 [Bapodra]

Moreover, the proposed missiles exacerbate U.S.-Russian relations to the point of creating a volatile situation that did not previously exist. In October 2007, Russian President Vladimir Putin drew the analogy between the current situation and the 1962 Cuban missile crisis, when the Soviet Union based missiles in Cuba that could easily reach the United States. "The situation is quite similar technologically for us," said Putin. "We have withdrawn the remains of bases from Vietnam and Cuba, but such threats are being created near our borders."7 Just as forty-six years ago America saw Russian missiles in Cuba as an alarming threat, Russia clearly feels that the proposed U.S. missile defenses in Poland and the Czech Republic are too close for comfort. True, the Soviet missiles in Cuba were offensive, and the planned U.S. interceptors in Poland are to be defensive. Nevertheless, the U.S. proposal is in direct violation of the joint declaration issued in conjunction with the Strategic Offensive Reductions Treaty—also known as the Moscow Treaty—signed by Presidents Bush and Putin on May 24, 2002.8 The joint declaration calls for joint research and development on missile defense technologies and U.S.-Russian cooperation on missile defense for Europe. The Bush proposal to establish U.S. missile defenses in Europe was neither joint nor cooperative, and was initiated unilaterally almost before the ink had dried on the joint declaration.

71 A Jackie Wu and Anuj Bapodra Production:

DDI ’08 Jackie “Awesome” Wu & A-Bomb

NMD DA 72/115

NMD in Poland undermines Russia’s sphere of influence and draws the US into taking sides against Russia Eastern European Review, 12-11, 2007, “Poland, Iran, Russia, and the Polish Missile Shield Base,” online: http://www.masterpage.com.pl/outlook/200712/iranpolandrussia.html, [Bapodra]

History has shown that Poland cannot depend on Europe to defend it. And given the current military might of the countries in Europe, future defense ability might be plausibly questioned. Germany - The Soft Underbelly of Europe But a base in Poland is a US asset that will be defended by the US against any aggressor. It fixes Poland position as not under the Russian sphere of influence. That is if the US Congress agrees to build it. So Tusk has to balance many evils before him. Is it better to have a foreign military base that is not wanted by his countrymen or take his chances with a rogue missile and/or a resurgent Russia? What are his risks and rewards? Tusk is in a difficult position. He will surely make a decision that he thinks best for Poland. And whatever that decision is, there will be unhappy people and long term consequences for Poland. Its not just about Poland. Its about Poland, Europe, Iran and Russia with the US waiting for a decision and having to make a decision of its own.

72 A Jackie Wu and Anuj Bapodra Production:

DDI ’08 Jackie “Awesome” Wu & A-Bomb

NMD DA 73/115

U.S. Russian Relations Brink Card New Russian military deployments and ICBM developments are aimed specifically at the U.S. Philip Coyle, Senior Adviser to the World Security Institute, and Victoria Swanson, Professor in the graduate International Relations program at St. Mary's University and analyst at the Center for Defense Information, Spring 2008, “Missile Defense Malfunction: Why the Proposed U.S. Missile Defenses in Europe Will Not Work,” Ethics & International Affairs, Vol. 12, No. 1 [Bapodra]

Russia seems to be going through a new period of nationalistic assertiveness, one expression of which is the display of military accomplishments. For example, Russia has announced the successful development of new ICBMs, warned that its nuclear weapons might have to be aimed at Europe, put its strategic bombers back in the air on training flights, and announced that Russia has suspended its participation in the treaty restricting deployments of conventional forces in Europe. Some might say that these displays are more to impress Russian voters than to impress America, as well as to secure Putin's future should he decide to run for president again after sitting out for a term, as can be done under Russian law. Undoubtedly, Putin would not mind if he impressed Russian voters, but we would argue that these developments are primarily aimed at the United States.

73 A Jackie Wu and Anuj Bapodra Production:

DDI ’08 Jackie “Awesome” Wu & A-Bomb

NMD DA 74/115

Impact Module: Joint Data Exchange Center/Accidental Launch A. NMD in Europe causes Russia to pull out of the Joint Data Exchange Center Philip Coyle, Senior Adviser to the World Security Institute, and Victoria Swanson, Professor in the graduate International Relations program at St. Mary's University and analyst at the Center for Defense Information, Spring 2008, “Missile Defense Malfunction: Why the Proposed U.S. Missile Defenses in Europe Will Not Work,” Ethics & International Affairs, Vol. 12, No. 1 [Bapodra]

Other bilateral agreements between the United States and Russia, such as the Joint Data Exchange Center (JDEC), could also suffer due to relations distressed by a U.S. missile defense site in Europe. This was to be a spin-off of the successful Y2K center created at the turn of the century to ensure that there would not be any unexpected misunderstandings due to Y2K glitches. From Peterson Air Force Base, Colorado, both Russian and U.S. officials monitored missile launches globally. The JDEC was to continue this effort at cooperation with the aim of creating "an uninterrupted exchange of information on launches of ballistic missiles and space launch vehicles from the early warning systems of the United States of America and the Russian Federation."28 However, it has been stunted in talks almost from its June 2000 inception, largely due to concerns about liability and tax issues, and the program currently is in limbo. If missile defense negatively affects relations, it will not help the JDEC progress. B. JDEC key to prevent accidental launch Pavel Podvig, Center for International Security and Cooperation, Stanford University, February 2005, “Reducing the risk of accidental launch: Time for a new approach?,” online: http://russianforces.org/podvig/eng/publications/forces/20050204ponars.shtml [Bapodra]

Other projects that were discussed in the context of reducing risk of an accidental launch suggested providing Russia with independent early-warning information, which was supposed to complement the data received by the Russian system. The most advanced of these proposals called for establishment of a Joint Data Exchange Center (JDEC), which would provide both sides with access to their counterpart?s early-warning information. The logic of the project was that in a case of conflicting information from early-warning satellites and radars, the United States and Russia could demonstrate to each other that no attack is underway. Cooperation like this would probably have helped to determine what happened during the January 1995 incident, but it is not certain if it would be of any help in a serious crisis, when each side would have reasons to doubt information provided by its counterpart.

74 A Jackie Wu and Anuj Bapodra Production:

DDI ’08 Jackie “Awesome” Wu & A-Bomb

NMD DA 75/115

C. Accidental launch causes global escalation and nuclear war, killing billions PR Newswire, 4-29-98 [Bapodra]

An 'accidental' nuclear attack would create a public health disaster of an unprecedented scale, according to more than 70 articles and speeches on the subject, cited by the authors and written by leading nuclear war experts, public health officials, international peace organizations, and legislators. Furthermore, retired General Lee Butler, Commander from 1991-1994 of all U.S. Strategic Forces under former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Colin Powell, has warned that from his experience in many "war games" it is plausible that such an attack could provoke a nuclear counterattack that could trigger full-scale nuclear war with billions of casualties worldwide. The authors describe the immediate effects of an " accidental" launch from a single Russian submarine that would kill at least six to eight million people in firestorms in eight major U.S. cities. With hospitals destroyed and medical personnel killed, and with major communications and transportation networks disrupted, the delivery of emergency care would be all but impossible, according to Forrow and his colleagues.

75 A Jackie Wu and Anuj Bapodra Production:

DDI ’08 Jackie “Awesome” Wu & A-Bomb

NMD DA 76/115

Impact- Intermediate Range Nuclear Forces Treaty A. NMD in Europe would cause Russia to pull out of the INF treaty and deploy tactical nuclear weapons, leading the U.S. to follow suit Philip Coyle, Senior Adviser to the World Security Institute, and Victoria Swanson, Professor in the graduate International Relations program at St. Mary's University and analyst at the Center for Defense Information, Spring 2008, “Missile Defense Malfunction: Why the Proposed U.S. Missile Defenses in Europe Will Not Work,” Ethics & International Affairs, Vol. 12, No. 1 [Bapodra]

Also linked to the proposed U.S. missile defenses are Russia's vague threats over the past several years to pull out of the 1987 Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty. This treaty banned a whole range of ballistic missiles (those with ranges of 500 to 5,500 kilometers, as well as ground-launched cruise missiles), and has held up even after the Soviet Union dissolved into its separate republics. Again, this is an idea that has been floated by Russian officials for the past several years, but also again, they seem to be latching on to the U.S. missile defense system in Europe as their primary motivating factor. The initial reason for the INF Treaty was that intermediate-range missiles were considered highly destabilizing, as their short flight times meant they could wreak devastation very quickly and made a retaliatory response almost automatic. Because of the specific dangers inherent in intermediate-range ballistic missiles, there has even been talk about internationalizing the INF Treaty and trying to get other countries in unstable parts of the world to sign it as a way of creating confidence-building measures. However, if Russia pulls out of the INF, it would be almost impossible to convince other countries to sign onto the treaty, and the U.S. incentive to continue to follow its provisions would be vastly reduced. B. The result is escalation to full-scale nuclear war Jan Lodal, Former Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Policy, National Security Council, The Price of Dominance: The New Weapons of Mass Destruction and Their Challenge to American Leadership, 2001, p. 23 [Bapodra]

Many of the 12,000 US and 20,000 Soviet tactical nuclear weapons were more powerful than the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombs. A tactical nuclear war would have killed tens or perhaps hundreds of millions, even without escalating to an all-out strategic nuclear exchange. But such a war probably would have escalated. Tactical nuclear weapons would not have led to a decisive outcome on the battlefield, but their use would have broken the taboo against nuclear weapons. At some point, one side would begin to lose the tactical nuclear war. With a large strategic nuclear force in reserve, the losing side would have a strong incentive to escalate the war and use strategic forces in an attempt to regain the military initiative.

76 A Jackie Wu and Anuj Bapodra Production:

DDI ’08 Jackie “Awesome” Wu & A-Bomb

NMD DA 77/115

Impact- Accidental Space Arms Race A. NMD in Europe sparks a U.S.-Russian race to weaponize space Philip Coyle, Senior Adviser to the World Security Institute, and Victoria Swanson, Professor in the graduate International Relations program at St. Mary's University and analyst at the Center for Defense Information, Spring 2008, “Missile Defense Malfunction: Why the Proposed U.S. Missile Defenses in Europe Will Not Work,” Ethics & International Affairs, Vol. 12, No. 1 [Bapodra]

A crack in relations between the United States and Russia could have longterm consequences for emerging national security issues, such as space weaponization. Until China's ASAT test in January 2007 there had been only two countries that had tested space weapons: the United States and the Soviet Union. During the Cold War, the two adversaries tested ASATs fifty-three times.29 Right now the official U.S. policy is to eschew weaponizing space, but the new U.S. national space policy released in October 2006 culminated several years of policy papers by the U.S. Air Force and indicated that it was becoming much more open to the idea.30 Furthermore, the U.S. military has seized upon China's ASAT test as all the more reason for the weaponization of space. USA-193, the NRO satellite that was shot down by the United States in February 2008, had been launched in December 2006 and almost immediately was unresponsive to ground control and began to deorbit outside the Pentagon's control. Pentagon officials claimed that the satellite was shot down out of health concerns, in order to prevent its hydrazine-filled fuel tank from crashing into a populated area (although these concerns appear to have been exaggerated). They have further alleged that it was a one-time event involving modifications to the software and mode of the three SM-3 missiles that were pulled aside for the mission (only one was used), and that the software and the other two SM-3 missiles were immediately changed back to their missile defense mode. However, one cannot be certain which version of the SM-3 has been deployed from then on: is it the sort used for ballistic missile defense or is it the antisatellite kind such as was used to shoot down USA-193? Russia and the United States are major space players, and both have much to lose if the new international norm were to target satellites or to allow for the free creation of space debris that could damage or destroy expensive space assets. There is a movement to create some sort of space "rules of the road," which would not be a treaty but rather codes of conduct by which all space-faring nations could abide. If the United States and Russia have a rift in their relationship due to missile defense, this cooperative effort will not succeed. China, as a growing space power, would have to be included in these talks, and if the United States and Russia were not able to work together, we could see a repeat of the Cold War dynamic whereby one country would try to pit other countries against each other.

77 A Jackie Wu and Anuj Bapodra Production:

DDI ’08 Jackie “Awesome” Wu & A-Bomb

NMD DA 78/115

B. Accidental Nuclear war results due to false early satellite alarms Marko Beljac, Professor at the University of Melbourne, 4-1, 2008, “Arms Race in Space,” Foreign Policy In Focus, online: http://www.fpif.org/fpiftxt/5113 [Bapodra]

Though the latest Russian and Chinese space arms control proposal is flawed, because of the clumsy definition of what constitutes a “space weapon,” this doesn’t mean that space arms control is not possible in principle. A global space arms control regime would protect U.S., Russian, Chinese, and even Australian space assets. An arms race in space will eventually lead other states to catch up with the United States and thereby placing Washington's commercial satellites at risk. Space weaponization may well have cataclysmic consequences given the link between space weapons and nuclear weapons strategy. This is because Russia, and the United States, to a certain extent rely on satellites for early warning of nuclear attack. As other space nations with nuclear weapons develop their space capacity it is expected that they will follow suit. The deployment of space weapons means that the first shot in a nuclear war would be fired against these early warning satellites. Currently strategic planners in Moscow have about 10 minutes between warning of an attack and the decision to launch nuclear weapons in response before they impact. Weapons in space would lower this in certain scenarios down to seconds. This would also apply for weapons placed in space that would be considered to be defensive such as say a space based BMD interceptor or a “counter-ASAT” weapon. On occasion, ground warning radars falsely show that a nuclear attack has been launched. In the 1990s a false alarm went all the way up to President Boris Yeltsin and was terminated after approximately eight minutes. We are still here, noted analysts believe, because warning satellites would have given Moscow real time information showing the alarm to be false. Should such a false alarm coincide with an accident involving an early warning satellite when space weapons are known to exist, an accidental nuclear exchange could result. The risk would increase if the false alarm occurred during a crisis. Space weapons could lead to itchy fingers on nuclear triggers. They would therefore significantly increase the importance nuclear weapon states place upon nuclear deterrence.

78 A Jackie Wu and Anuj Bapodra Production:

DDI ’08 Jackie “Awesome” Wu & A-Bomb

NMD DA 79/115

Impact- U.S. Russian Relations Key to Iran A. European NMD kills cooperation with Russia over Iran, which is key to solve prolif Philip Coyle, Senior Adviser to the World Security Institute, and Victoria Swanson, Professor in the graduate International Relations program at St. Mary's University and analyst at the Center for Defense Information, Spring 2008, “Missile Defense Malfunction: Why the Proposed U.S. Missile Defenses in Europe Will Not Work,” Ethics & International Affairs, Vol. 12, No. 1 [Bapodra]

There are two serious nuclear proliferation issues facing the world today that require a united response, something that is unlikely if hostilities are increased between the United States and Russia as a result of the U.S. missile defense plans. The first is Iran's nuclear program. While the November 2007 NIE acknowledged that as far as the U.S. intelligence community knew, Iran had stopped work on its nuclear weapons program in 2003, it still indicated that Iran's nuclear intentions are unknown. Furthermore, no one doubts that Iran continues to enrich uranium, possibly to the point where it will become weapons-grade fissile material. Iran is a signatory to the NPT, so in theory it admits there are limits to what it can do with its nuclear materials (although Iranian officials defiantly aver that they are free to do what they wish). This is all to say that the international community can still work together to lessen the threat of an Iranian nuclear weapons program. In fact, the NIE states that Iran's nuclear weapons work "probably was halted primarily in response to international pressure."23 Russia in particular has a strong relationship with Iran and has been one of the holdouts against strengthening international sanctions against Iran. Furthermore, Russia still indicates that it is holding fast to the option of finishing a nuclear power plant in Bushehr, Iran.24 Clearly, Russia is a key component to any solution to the Iranian nuclear question. Given how much Iran factors in the justification for extending the U.S. missile defense system to Europe, this cannot be ignored.

79 A Jackie Wu and Anuj Bapodra Production:

DDI ’08 Jackie “Awesome” Wu & A-Bomb

NMD DA 80/115

B. Iranian proliferation sets off an arms race in the Middle East, culminating in nuclear war Norman Podhoretz, Senior Fellow at the Hudson Institute, June 2007, Commentary, online: http://www.commentarymagazine.com/cm/main/viewArticle.html?id=10882, [Bapodra]

But there is, it has been reported, another consideration that is driving Bush. According to a recent news story in the New York Times, for example, Bush has taken to heart what “[o]fficials from 21 governments in and around the Middle East warned at a meeting of Arab leaders in March”—namely, “that Iran’s drive for atomic technology could result in the beginning of ‘a grave and destructive nuclear arms race in the region.’” Which is to say that he fears that local resistance to Iran’s bid for hegemony in the greater Middle East through the acquisition of nuclear weapons could have even more dangerous consequences than a passive capitulation to that bid by the Arab countries. For resistance would spell the doom of all efforts to stop the spread of nuclear weapons, and it would vastly increase the chances of their use.

80 A Jackie Wu and Anuj Bapodra Production:

DDI ’08 Jackie “Awesome” Wu & A-Bomb

NMD DA 81/115

C. Nuclear war in the Middle East means extinction Ian Hoffman, The San Francisco Chronicle, December 12, 2006, online: http://www.insidebayarea.com/oaklandtribune/localnews/ci_4824262 [Bapodra]

Researchers at the American Geophysical Union's annual meeting warned Monday that even a small regional nuclear war could burn enough cities to shroud the globe in a black smoky shadow and usher in the manmade equivalent of the Little Ice Age. "Nuclear weapons represent the greatest single human threat to the planet, much more so than global warming," said Rutgers University atmospheric scientist Alan Robock. By dropping imaginary Hiroshima-sized bombs into some of the world's biggest cities, now swelled to tens of millions in population, University of Colorado researcher O. Brian Toon and colleagues found they could generate 100 times the fatalities and 100 times the climate-chilling smoke per kiloton of explosive power as all-out nuclear war between the United States and former Soviet Union. For most modern nuclear-war scenarios, the global impact isn't nuclear winter, the notion of smoke from incinerated cities blotting out the sun for years and starving most of the Earth's people. It's not even nuclear autumn, but rather an instant nuclear chill over most of the planet, accompanied by massive ozone loss and warming at the poles. That's what scientists' computer simulations suggest would happen if nuclear war broke out in a hot spot such as the Middle East, the North Korean peninsula or, the most modeled case, in Southeast Asia. Unlike in the Cold War, when the United States and Russia mostly targeted each other's nuclear, military and strategic industrial sites, young nuclear-armed nations have fewer weapons and might go for maximum effect by using them on cities, as the United States did in 1945. "We're at a perilous crossroads," Toon said. The spread of nuclear weapons worldwide combined with global migration into dense megacities form what he called "perhaps the greatest danger to the stability of society since the dawn of humanity."

81 A Jackie Wu and Anuj Bapodra Production:

DDI ’08 Jackie “Awesome” Wu & A-Bomb

NMD DA 82/115

Impact- Pre-Emptive Nuke Strike A. Missile defense in Europe would provide cover for the U.S. to launch preemptive wars Lukasz Kulesa, analyst at the Polish Institute of International Affairs, April 12, 2007, “Missile Defense Dossier: The Polish Perspective,” online: http://www.frstrategie.org/barreFRS/publications/pv/defenseAntimissile/pv_20070412_eng.pdf [Bapodra]

The public debate which followed that announcement revealed divergent opinions on the issue within the Polish strategic community – analysts and foreign policy experts. The critics pointed to the dangers of aligning Poland’s security policy too closely with the United States in such a way. Development of the missile defence system was portrayed as a sign of the US willingness to secure strategic domination against present and future opponents. It was argued that the system’s characteristics might be defensive, but its presence would encourage the United States to try offensive strategies, possibly involving the use of force, in the confrontations with states armed with ballistic missiles and WMD capabilities. Since the MD facilities is a logical target for an enemy’s first strike, Poland would find itself in grave danger on account of the US deployment. Bilateral arrangements on the Missile Defence would also, according to the critics, put into question Poland’s credentials as a member of NATO and the European Union, not to mention the unavoidable deterioration of the relations with Russia. It was argued that any benefits obtained from the Americans could not compensate for the overall worsening of the security of Poland.

82 A Jackie Wu and Anuj Bapodra Production:

DDI ’08 Jackie “Awesome” Wu & A-Bomb

NMD DA 83/115

B. The result is preemptive nuclear strikes that escalate to global nuclear war Michel Chossudovsky, frequent contributor to the Centre for Research on Globalization, February 17, 2006, “The Dangers of a Middle East Nuclear War,” online: http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=20060217&articleId=1988 [Bapodra]

The Bush administration's new nuclear doctrine contains specific "guidelines" which allow for "preemptive" nuclear strikes against "rogue enemies" which "possess" or are "developing" weapons of mass destruction (WMD). (2001 Nuclear Posture Review (NPR) and Doctrine for Joint Nuclear Operations (DJNO)). The preemptive nuclear doctrine (DJNO), which applies to Iran and North Korea calls for "offensive and defensive integration". It explicitly allows the preemptive use of thermonuclear weapons in conventional war theaters. In the showdown with Tehran over its alleged nuclear weapons program, these Pentagon "guidelines" would allow, subject to presidential approval, for the launching of punitive bombings using "mini-nukes" or tactical thermonuclear weapons. While the "guidelines" do not exclude other (more deadly) categories of nukes in the US and/or Israeli nuclear arsenal, Pentagon "scenarios" in the Middle East are currently limited to the use of tactical nuclear weapons including the B61-11 bunker buster bomb. This particular version of the bunker buster is a thermonuclear bomb, a so-called Nuclear Earth Penetrator or NEP. It is a Weapon of Mass Destruction in the real sense of the word. Its utilization by the US or Israel in the Middle East war theater would trigger a nuclear holocaust.

83 A Jackie Wu and Anuj Bapodra Production:

DDI ’08 Jackie “Awesome” Wu & A-Bomb

NMD DA 84/115

NUCLEAR PROLIF NMD CAUSES NUCLEAR PROLIF Peoples Daily 5-24-2k http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/library/news/china/2000/000524-prcpd1.htm [JWu] Third, they worry that the "Non-proliferation treaty of nuclear weapon" will generate negative effect. A total of 187 countries participate in the treaty, its basic contents are: apart from the five nuclear countries, other nations are not allowed to possess nuclear weapons. In 1995 when the treaty was postponed indefinitely, the five nuclear powers undertook the obligation of stopping nuclear tests, continuing nuclear disarmament and ultimately destroying all nuclear weapons. US Congress refused to ratify the treaty on stopping nuclear tests, thus letting down the non-nuclear countries; at the UN disarmament conference, with the exception of China, other four nuclear powers opposed setting up a committee for destroying all nuclear weapons, thus once again disappointing the non-nuclear countries; at the same time, India and Pakistan openly conducted tests of nuclear weapons, setting a bad precedent.

Under such circumstances, if US deployment of the "missile defense system" leads to stagnation in US-Russian nuclear disarmament, this would possibly spur some countries to develop and test nuclear weapons and thus rendering the non-proliferation treaty into a mere scrap of paper.

NMD CAUSES PROLIF ALEX LANTIER, 5-22-08 "Russia, China denounce US missile shield at summit meeting" http://www.wsws.org/articles/2008/may2008/chin-m24.shtml [JWU] The joint statement by Hu and Medvedev said: “Both sides believe that creating a global missile defense system, including deploying such systems in certain regions of the world, or plans for such cooperation, do not help support strategic balance and stability, and harm international efforts to control arms and the non-proliferation process.”

84 A Jackie Wu and Anuj Bapodra Production:

DDI ’08 Jackie “Awesome” Wu & A-Bomb

NMD DA 85/115

NMD HURT PROLIF AND DISARMAMENT Theresa Hitchens is Research Director of BASIC. and Stuart Samuels is a Consultant to BASIC. 2k "NMD: Allied fears in focus" http://www.basicint.org/pubs/Papers/BP32.htm May 2k No 32 [JWu] Furthermore, the more effective any NMD system is, the more difficult it will be to make further reductions in the numbers of nuclear warheads around the world. Many European Non-Nuclear Weapon States are keenly supportive of nuclear disarmament, and see NMD as an obstacle to that goal. "What if, for instance, some countries come to the conclusion that an arsenal of less than 1,000 nuclear warheads could someday become ineffective because of advanced NMD systems?" asks Otfried Nassauer, director of the Berlin Information-centre for Transatlantic Security (BITS). "They could thus conclude that treaties limiting their arsenals to 1,000 or fewer warheads would not be in their national interest. This, in turn, could result in Nuclear Weapon States deciding it was not in their interest to fulfill their obligations to eventually eliminate nuclear weapons according to Article VI of the NPT." In fact, Nassauer explained, there already has been a debate within the NPT context about whether Nuclear Weapon States should agree not to increase their nuclear posture in the future. However, China can

no longer be expected to sign such an agreement, since the planned U.S. NMD system would be able to counter China’s entire strategic arsenal. The British and French militaries, with their small nuclear arsenals, also might feel themselves in a very uncomfortable position. Grant, in the AprilMay issue of the Centre for European Reform Bulletin, noted that "if NMD prompted Russia and China to improve their ABM systems, the British and French deterrents could be devalued."

Proliferation leads to extinction. Victor Utgoff, Deputy Director of Strategy, Forces, and Resources Division of Institute for Defense Analysis, Summer 02, “Proliferation, Missile Defence and American Ambitions”, Survival, p.87-90. [Bapodra] The war between Iran and Iraq during the 1980s led to the use of chemical weapons on both sides and exchanges of missiles against each other’s cities. And more recently, violence in the Middle East escalated in a few months from rocks and small arms to heavy weapons on one side, and from police actions to air strikes and armoured attacks on the other. Escalation of violence is also basic human nature. Once the violence starts, retaliatory exchanges of violent acts can escalate to levels unimagined by the participants before hand. Intense and blinding anger is a common response to fear or humiliation or abuse. And such anger can lead us to impose on our opponents whatever levels of violence are readily accessible. In sum, widespread proliferation is likely to lead to an occasional shoot-out with nuclear weapons, and that such shoot-outs will have a substantial probability of escalating to the maximum destruction possible with the weapons at hand. Unless nuclear proliferation is stopped, we are headed toward a world that will mirror the American Wild West of the late 1800s. With most, if not all, nations wearing nuclear ‘six-shooters’ on their hips, the world may even be a more polite place than it is today, but every once in a while we will all gather on a hill to bury the bodies of dead cities or even whole nations.

85 A Jackie Wu and Anuj Bapodra Production:

DDI ’08 Jackie “Awesome” Wu & A-Bomb

NMD DA 86/115

NMD GOOD—DETERRANCE NUCLEAR WEAPONS NO LONGER DETER—NMD IS KEY TO DETERRING FUTURE WARS Nicola Butler, senior analyst for the Acronym Institute, 2k, "Missile defence divergence: Britain debates nmd" Disarmament Diplomacy, Issue no 48, july 2k In contrast, a number of NMD advocates argue that a missile shield is needed because nuclear weapons are no longer credible as a deterrent to "rogue states". Curiously, some of the strongest advocates of nuclear deterrence now say that Trident "does not constitute a credible threat in a range of possible scenarios." Although still arguing forcefully for Trident to be retained indefinitely, a report from the conservative Missile Proliferation Study Group states that it would be "a great mistake" to regard Trident "as a deterrent for all seasons." Dismissing the deterrence strategy of Mutually Assured Destruction as a "Cold War dogma of assured vulnerability", the group rejected "misplaced faith" in the ABM Treaty. Welcoming the report's publication, former Conservative Prime Minister Lady Thatcher said: "We must do all we can to encourage and assist the urgent creation of a global ballistic missile defence system by the United States." 33

NMDS KEY TO U.S. DEFENSE—DETERS CONFLICT PBS 2K "MISSILE DEFENSE POLITICS" http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/military/julydec00/nmd_8-24.html [JWU] JEFFREY KAYE: Cohen and other missile defense advocates say that despite foreign opposition, the system is crucial for U.S. defense. They argue that North Korean missiles could be ready to be launched against the U.S. by 2005. And they say if work isn't started soon, the system won't be operational by then, and the U.S. will be vulnerable. They also worry about the capability of Iran and Iraq to threaten the United States with long-range missiles. Beyond self-defense, U.S. military planners have another purpose for a missile defense system. With it, the United States military would be able to act overseas without facing the threat of a missile attack on its own soil, according to U.S. Defense Department Undersecretary Jacques Gansler. JACQUES GANSLER, Undersecretary of Defense: By having this defense system, the United States is more likely to come to the aid of our allies in third world conflicts, regional conflicts, because they will not be able to deter us from entering by threatening to launch a missile against us. If we have a defense capability, then we can say, "well, we can still go into that region and help you, in a conflict that you might have in your local region." If we didn't have a defense capability, they may be able to deter us enough from coming in.

86 A Jackie Wu and Anuj Bapodra Production:

DDI ’08 Jackie “Awesome” Wu & A-Bomb

NMD DA 87/115

NMD GOOD: PREVENT WAR NMD KEY TO PREVENT SINO-INDIAN WAR

ASIA TIMES 7-22-08 "A DEAL BREAKER FOR INDIA" http://www.atimes.com/atimes/South_Asia/JG22Df01.html [JWU] Ideologically speaking, they are convinced that India is a "natural ally" of the US. They envisage that the deal makes the India-US "strategic partnership" virtually irreversible. That is, the deal forms an integral part of a wholesome agenda. For the Indian strategic community, the deal finally opens up the door to US military technology, especially the fascinating US missile defense system, which promises the only means whereby India could hope to neutralize China's strategic capability. Indian strategists visualize that even as Delhi begins to cope with the immense challenge of coming to terms with China's phenomenal rise, it needs US support and protection.

MISSILE DEFENSE KEY TO PREVENT WORLD WAR III

Weekly standard, 8-7-6 http://www.weeklystandard.com/Utilities/printer_preview.asp?idArticle=12514&R=13AEAD1E2 [JWU] The need for an antimissile shield was underscored this summer not only by North Korea's missile tests and Iran's race to build nuclear weapons, but by the potential emergence of a worldwide threat. North Korea is believed to have a small nuclear arsenal and is an exporter of weapons. Iran, the world's leading sponsor of terrorists, is developing long-range missiles as well as nukes. If it produces a nuclear weapon, other Middle Eastern nations are likely to follow. Pakistan, an Islamic country with a fragile pro-West government, plans to build more nuclear weapons. And the United States would have no defense in the unlikely event that China or Russia, onetime enemies, unleashed a missile attack.

87 A Jackie Wu and Anuj Bapodra Production:

DDI ’08 Jackie “Awesome” Wu & A-Bomb

NMD DA 88/115

NMD GOOD: WEAPON PROLIF NMD WILL MAKE NUCLEAR WEAPONS OBSOLETE—THIS CURBS WEAPONS PROLIF CAMILLE GRAND, Institut français des Relations internationales (IFRI), Paris. Lecturer, Institut d’études politiques de Paris, and Ecole spéciale militaire, and Adviser for arms control and nonproliferation at the French Ministry of Defense. 01 "NMD and arms control: a European view." http://www.mi.infn.it/~landnet/NMD/grand.pdf [JWu]

Some problems — such as WMD and missile proliferation in the MiddleEast, South Asia, and North-East Asia; China’s strategic modernization and opposition to arms control; Russia’s temptation to increase reliance on its nuclear capabilities — are already on the table. They insist rightfully, that it would be unfair to blame the current deadlock on multilateral arms control negotiations on NMD only. Moreover, supporters of NMD argue that NMD will allow further cuts in nuclear arsenals. Many suggest that as part of the US-Russia deal on the ABM Treaty; the reductions of strategic arsenals could take leap forward, down to 1500 or less warheads. Even if it is on the basis of unilateral statements, this would meet an old Russian objective. Some proponents of deep cuts even argue that deep cuts are only possible with missile defenses, since these contribute to the marginalization of nuclear weapons. Last but not least, proponents of missiles defenses suggest that BMD offer a major contribution to the fight against WMD and missile proliferation, as they contribute to convince “states of concern” that proliferation is useless.

88 A Jackie Wu and Anuj Bapodra Production:

DDI ’08 Jackie “Awesome” Wu & A-Bomb

NMD DA 89/115

NMD "GOOD"—WIN WARS U.S. WOULD WIN WARS AGAINST RUSSIA AND CHINA UNSCATHED ALEX LANTIER, 5-22-08 "Russia, China denounce US missile shield at summit meeting" http://www.wsws.org/articles/2008/may2008/chin-m24.shtml [JWU] Some of the reasons underlying Russia’s and China’s concern were indicated by a March 2006 analysis in an influential US policy journal, Foreign Affairs. In an article titled “The Rise of US Nuclear Primacy,” Keir Lieber and Daryl Press noted that—due to the deterioration of Russian nuclear weaponry after the fall of the USSR, and the relatively primitive character of China’s nuclear weapons—US military planners now believed that they could launch and win a nuclear war against both powers, by using a portion of the US nuclear arsenal to destroy all of their nuclear weapons, with enough US nuclear weapons left over to force Russia and China to surrender. In this insane and horrible world of mass slaughter envisaged by top US strategists, the US nuclear missile shield might play a significant role. Lieber and Press wrote: “The sort of missile defenses that the United States might plausibly deploy would be valuable primarily in an offensive context, not a defensive one—as an adjunct to a U.S. first-strike capability, not as a standalone shield. If the United States launched a nuclear attack against Russia (or China), the targeted country would be left with a tiny surviving arsenal —if any at all. At that point, even a relatively modest or inefficient missile-defense system might well be enough to protect against any retaliatory strikes, because the devastated enemy would have so few warheads and decoys left.”

89 A Jackie Wu and Anuj Bapodra Production:

DDI ’08 Jackie “Awesome” Wu & A-Bomb

NMD DA 90/115

NMD Good Impacts- Deters Nuclear War NMD is critical to deter countless nations from nuclear attacks on the U.S. and allies Investor’s Business Daily, 11-7, 2007 (Newspaper [Bapodra]) Is it possible that Democrats are still skeptical that a missile shield will actually work? If so, evidence that it will has reached the point that it can no longer be denied. Or is their lack of support simply due to a reflexive opposition to the military and toward symbols of what they perceive to be projections of U.S. power? Either way, their actions could leave us vulnerable to nuclear attack from a rogue nation such as Iran (see editorial at left) or North Korea, which is supposedly backing down on its nuclear weapons program but will remain a threat as long as its communist regime stays in place. The risk doesn't end, however, with those two legs of the Axis of Evil, both of which are on the State Department's list of terrorist states. Nuclear-armed Pakistan is now an ally, yet it could become an enemy depending on how its internal turmoil is resolved. Both al-Qaida and the Taliban have powerful bases in the region. What if the Musharraf government one day falls and one of those terrorist groups suddenly has the keys to a nuclear arsenal? It's just as plausible that the threat could come from any of the Mideast nations that want to keep up with Iran's nuclear program. With Egypt making its announcement last week, there are now 13 countries in the region that have in the last year said they want nuclear power. They can claim, as Iran has, that they want it merely for energy. But the step from nuclear power to nuclear weapons is not that far. Given the volatility of the region, it would be wise to make sure that all precautions — and that includes a missile defense — are taken. Even Russia, with its extensive nuclear weaponry, could be a threat. President Vladimir Putin has raised objections to America's allying with former Soviet satellites to place U.S. missile defense components in their countries. This, warns Putin in language reminiscent of the Cold War, will turn Europe into a "powder keg." For his part, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov has declared: "The arms race is starting again." Are congressional Democrats prepared to leave us only partly protected in a world where nuclear arms might soon begin to spread like a Southern California wildfire? Some have looked at the Democrats' actions and said, emphatically, yes. "Their aim," Heritage Foundation defense analyst Baker Spring said earlier this year, "is to force the U.S. to adopt a position that prohibits it from developing — much less deploying — missile defense interceptors in space under any circumstance and for all time."

90 A Jackie Wu and Anuj Bapodra Production:

DDI ’08 Jackie “Awesome” Wu & A-Bomb

NMD DA 91/115

NMD Good Impact- Deters Proliferation A. European NMD is key to deter ballistic missile and WMD prolif Peter Brookes, former Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense, is a senior fellow for National Security Affairs at the Heritage Foundation, 11-8, 2007, online: http://frontpagemagazine.com/Articles/Read.aspx?GUID=E2E0BCA0-8DDF-484C-B974-22FE89CF0715, accessed November 8, 2007 [Bapodra]

If anything, the opposite is true. Defensive weapons systems such as missile defense have a stabilizing effect on the security environment, as opposed to offensive weapons, which research has shown can be destabilizing. As a defensive capability, U.S. missile defense plans for Europe will act as a deterrent to rogue nations and nonstate actors from acquiring ballistic missiles and weapons of mass destruction. There will be less motivation for ballistic missile capability if Europe has the ability to defend against it. To make America and its allies deliberately vulnerable to attack is not only nonsensical, it is likely to incur further proliferation. As President Bush stated, "Missile defense is a vital tool for our security, it's a vital tool for deterrence and it's a vital tool for counterproliferation."[8]

91 A Jackie Wu and Anuj Bapodra Production:

DDI ’08 Jackie “Awesome” Wu & A-Bomb

NMD DA 92/115

B. Proliferation risks nuclear terrorism and nuclear war Joseph Cirincione, director of Nuclear Policy at the Center for American Progress, November 12, 2007, “Cassandra’s Conundrum,” The National Interest, online: http://www.nationalinterest.org/Article.aspx?id=15998, [Bapodra]

Let me be clear: Nuclear proliferation is a real danger. George Bush and John Kerry were correct when they agreed in a 2004 debate that it is the number one threat to America. The threat comes in four flavors. Most serious is nuclear terrorism. As terrible as another 9/11 attack would be, a nuclear 9/11 would destroy an entire city, kill hundreds of thousands, wreck the economy and change the political life of the nation, perhaps permanently. Our number one priority must be to make sure any further terrorist attack is non-nuclear. Second is the danger from existing arsenals. There are still 26,000 nuclear weapons in the world, enough to destroy the planet several times over. Even a small regional war in South Asia using one hundred weapons would trigger a nuclear winter that could devastate food crops around the world. Accidental or unauthorized use is a real risk. Consider the September flight of a B-52 with six nuclear weapons that the crew didn’t know they had. If the most sophisticated command-and-control mechanism in the world fails to stop the unauthorized possession of the equivalent of sixty Hiroshimas, what is going on in other nations? Third is the risk of new nuclear nations. I agree with Mueller that the danger here is not that Iran or North Korea would use a nuclear bomb against America or their neighbors. Deterrence is alive and well; they know what would happen next. Nor is it that these states would intentionally give a weapon they worked so hard to make to a terrorist group they could not control. Rather it is the risk of what could happen in the neighborhood: a nuclear reaction chain where states feel they must match each other’s nuclear capability. Just such a reaction is underway already in the Middle East, as over a dozen Muslim nations suddenly declared interest in starting nuclear-power programs. This is not about energy; it is a nuclear hedge against Iran. It could lead to a Middle East with not one nuclear-weapons state, Israel, but four or five. That is a recipe for nuclear war.

92 A Jackie Wu and Anuj Bapodra Production:

DDI ’08 Jackie “Awesome” Wu & A-Bomb

NMD DA 93/115

NMD Good Impact- Solves Terrorism A. NMD in Europe is key to deter and prevent nuclear terror strikes on the U.S. and allies Joe Pitts, U.S. Representative (R-PA), 11-2, 2007, online: http://www.truthnews.net/world/2007100430.htm, [Bapodra] The strange irony is that in the first decade of the 21st century the United States and its allies may be more vulnerable to the threat of nuclear weapons and ballistic missiles today than we were during the Cold War. Though there were certainly serious times of raised tensions, the dry logic of mutually assured destruction kept the major actors in the Cold War from ever actually using nuclear armed ballistic missiles. Today, rogue nations and non-state terror organizations operate outside the realm of mutually assured destruction. A terrorist organization has no territory or population it must protect. Pariah nations that chronically operate outside the realm of the international community, like North Korea, Iran, and Iraq, under the rule of Saddam Hussein, may not follow the same rational logic that prevented the U.S. and the Soviet Union from launching nuclear missiles. The United States continues to work on non-proliferation measures to keep nuclear weapons from falling into the hands of countries or groups that might use them against the United States and its allies. However, the global nuclear arms sales network of A.Q. Khan, of Pakistan, was evidence that nuclear weapons can and have been proliferated into the hands of enemies of the United States. It would take just one nuclear warhead to destroy an entire city. The toll in human lives would be massive and catastrophic. It is an issue that we should not take lightly. It is a threat that we must address. The U.S. Department of Defense began deploying long-range missile interceptors in Alaska and California in 2004. These interceptors would protect the United States from a long-range missile threat from rogue nations in Asia, such as a launch from North Korea. The United States has groundmobile and sea-based systems as well that would combat short-range ballistic missiles. What is currently missing from a global ballistic missile defense is a system that would protect our strategic interests and allies in Europe. The threat from a potentially nuclear armed Iran cannot be ignored. I believe we should continue working toward a diplomatic resolution with Iran over the issue of nuclear weapons. However, we cannot assume such a resolution will take place, and need to move forward in tandem with a plan to provide defense against a nuclear armed.

B. A nuclear attack on the U.S. would ignite WWIII, annihilating civilization Mohamed Sid-Ahmed, internationally renowned reporter and columnist in Al Ahram, 2004,“Extinction!” Al-Ahram Weekly, online: http://weekly.ahram.org.eg/2004/705/op5.htm

What would be the consequences of a nuclear attack by terrorists? Even if it fails, it would further exacerbate the negative features of the new and frightening world in which we are now living. Societies would close in on themselves, police measures would be stepped up at the expense of human rights, tensions between civilisations and religions would rise and ethnic conflicts would proliferate. It would also speed up the arms race and develop the awareness that a different type of world order is imperative if humankind is to survive. But the still more critical scenario is if the attack succeeds. This could lead to a third world war, from which no one will emerge victorious. Unlike a conventional war which ends when one side triumphs over another, this war will be without winners and losers. When nuclear pollution infects the whole planet, we will all be losers. 93 A Jackie Wu and Anuj Bapodra Production:

DDI ’08 Jackie “Awesome” Wu & A-Bomb

NMD DA 94/115

NMD Good Impact- Iran A. NMD solves Iranian prolif – it’s the most effective way of deterring nuclear development Charlie Szrom, research assistant in foreign and defense policy studies at the American Enterprise Institute, 12-21, 2007, The Weekly Standard, online: http://www.weeklystandard.com/Check.asp%3FidArticle%3D14496%26r%3Dnzhfp&cid=1125250328, [Bapodra] THE NEW NATIONAL Intelligence Estimate has led many to call for a new policy towards Iran. Sen. Hillary Clinton "vehemently disagree[s]" that "nothing in American policy has to change." Russian foreign minister Sergei Lavrov said the report confirmed the Russian view that "there is no military element in [Iran's] nuclear program." Doesn't all this mean we should drop support for missile defense? No. The threat has not changed significantly and missile defense remains one of the few options still available to lessen the power of potential Iranian nukes. The program can also turn positive relationships with Central European states into long-term, mutually-dependent alliances. Iran tested a new missile, called the 'Ashura,' as recently as late last month. This 2000-kilometer-range weapon could potentially reach U.S bases in the Middle East and parts of Eastern Europe, including such U.S. allies as Romania, Georgia, or Ukraine. The announcement may just be bluster, but the unveiling alone shows that Iran has no intention of backing down militarily. A careful reading of the NIE makes an even stronger case for a continued menace. The report admits that Iran continues to enrich uranium, that Iran "probably would be technically capable of producing enough highly-enriched uranium (HEU) for a weapon sometime during the 2010-2015 time frame," and that it "will be difficult" to convince the Iranian leadership to abandon eventual development of a nuclear capability. The basic facts remain the same; perhaps the only revelation is that Iran, if anything, has made a tactical decision to delay warhead production so it can buy enough time for the more difficult task of enriching uranium. After the marathon of amassing sufficient fuel, Tehran just has to sprint through the relatively simple process of developing warheads. Our missile defense partners recognize the enduring danger. The Czech foreign ministry stated that, "'According to the report, Iran will probably be capable of producing a sufficient quantity of nuclear material for the production of a nuclear bomb between 2010 and 2015. This corresponds with the previous estimates. By this date the European pillar of anti-missile defense should be in place.'" The threat still exists. How can we continue to pressure Iran? The report dashed hopes for any broad UN sanctions against Iran, as Russia and China, reluctant beforehand to impose serious punitive measures on Iran, now have a ready excuse. Military strikes now also seem highly unlikely, given the lack of urgency precipitated by the NIE. Those opposed to an Iranian nuclear program might still enact smart sanctions--targeting, for example, the participation of Iranian regime elements in the international financial system--in coordination with a few hardy European allies. One such ally, British Prime Minister Gordon Brown, said through a spokesman that "the report confirms we were right to be worried about Iran seeking to develop nuclear weapons." But such action will not be enough. The United States needs a response that will directly address the physical threat of Iranian nukes. Missile defense development avoids the problem of UN-based obstruction by Russia or China, and it remains one of the few remaining pressure points we can use against Iran.

B. Iranian proliferation sets off an arms race in the Middle East, culminating in 94 A Jackie Wu and Anuj Bapodra Production:

DDI ’08 Jackie “Awesome” Wu & A-Bomb

NMD DA 95/115

nuclear war Norman Podhoretz, Senior Fellow at the Hudson Institute, June 2007, Commentary, online: http://www.commentarymagazine.com/cm/main/viewArticle.html?id=10882, [Bapodra]

But there is, it has been reported, another consideration that is driving Bush. According to a recent news story in the New York Times, for example, Bush has taken to heart what “[o]fficials from 21 governments in and around the Middle East warned at a meeting of Arab leaders in March”—namely, “that Iran’s drive for atomic technology could result in the beginning of ‘a grave and destructive nuclear arms race in the region.’” Which is to say that he fears that local resistance to Iran’s bid for hegemony in the greater Middle East through the acquisition of nuclear weapons could have even more dangerous consequences than a passive capitulation to that bid by the Arab countries. For resistance would spell the doom of all efforts to stop the spread of nuclear weapons, and it would vastly increase the chances of their use. C. Nuclear war in the Middle East means extinction Ian Hoffman, The San Francisco Chronicle, December 12, 2006, online: http://www.insidebayarea.com/oaklandtribune/localnews/ci_4824262[Bapodra] Researchers at the American Geophysical Union's annual meeting warned Monday that even a small regional nuclear war could burn enough cities to shroud the globe in a black smoky shadow and usher in the manmade equivalent of the Little Ice Age. "Nuclear weapons represent the greatest single human threat to the planet, much more so than global warming," said Rutgers University atmospheric scientist Alan Robock. By dropping imaginary Hiroshima-sized bombs into some of the world's biggest cities, now swelled to tens of millions in population, University of Colorado researcher O. Brian Toon and colleagues found they could generate 100 times the fatalities and 100 times the climate-chilling smoke per kiloton of explosive power as all-out nuclear war between the United States and former Soviet Union. For most modern nuclear-war scenarios, the global impact isn't nuclear winter, the notion of smoke from incinerated cities blotting out the sun for years and starving most of the Earth's people. It's not even nuclear autumn, but rather an instant nuclear chill over most of the planet, accompanied by massive ozone loss and warming at the poles. That's what scientists' computer simulations suggest would happen if nuclear war broke out in a hot spot such as the Middle East, the North Korean peninsula or, the most modeled case, in Southeast Asia. Unlike in the Cold War, when the United States and Russia mostly targeted each other's nuclear, military and strategic industrial sites, young nuclear-armed nations have fewer weapons and might go for maximum effect by using them on cities, as the United States did in 1945. "We're at a perilous crossroads," Toon said. The spread of nuclear weapons worldwide combined with global migration into dense megacities form what he called "perhaps the greatest danger to the stability of society since the dawn of humanity."

95 A Jackie Wu and Anuj Bapodra Production:

DDI ’08 Jackie “Awesome” Wu & A-Bomb

NMD DA 96/115

NMD Good Iran Impact Extension NMD is critical to countering the threat of Iranian missiles – deployment as soon as possible is key Peter Brookes, former Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense, is a senior fellow for National Security Affairs at the Heritage Foundation, 11-8, 2007, online: http://frontpagemagazine.com/Articles/Read.aspx?GUID=E2E0BCA0-8DDF-484C-B974-22FE89CF0715, [Bapodra]

In fact, the emerging Iranian threat is nothing less than a race against the clock. Iran is involved in both a long-range missile program and a clandestine nuclear weapons program. Both programs could reach initial operating capability in the 2013-2015 timeframe or even earlier. Pending immediate approval, current projections forecast completion of the Polish and Czech "third site" installations within five years, which is only marginally ahead of Iran's estimated long-range ballistic missile capability and nuclear capability.[3] Moreover, with the possibility of a Manhattan Project-like effort by Iran, supported by countries such as North Korea, Iran's capability may well be realized even earlier than currently expected. With Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad saber-rattling and threatening to "wipe Israel off the face of the earth,"[4] it is incumbent upon the United States to take the growing Iranian threat seriously by taking steps to protect itself, its forward-deployed troops, and its friends and allies. European NMD is key to deter Iran – it’s a significant symbol of Western unity Lukasz Kulesa, analyst at the Polish Institute of International Affairs, April 12, 2007, “Missile Defense Dossier: The Polish Perspective,” online: http://www.frstrategie.org/barreFRS/publications/pv/defenseAntimissile/pv_20070412_eng.pdf, [Bapodra]

To put it simple, the Americans feel they need to have an MD system and are able to build it. The decision to field a European MD component comes directly from this logic, and it appears futile to look for some hidden motives (for example, an attempt to divide the European Union). The radar is meant to provide better tracking of Iranian missiles, and the interceptor base would give the US additional interception opportunities of an ICBM aimed at the US, plus some rudimentary level of protection for their bases in Europe and parts of European territory (excluding south-eastern part of the continent). On this last point, it is worth to point out that spending lots of money and efforts on protecting someone else’s territory makes in this case perfect strategic sense. After all, if the US is protected by the anti-missile shield, what would be the ‘next best thing’ for Iranian planners wishing to deter the West from interfering in Iran’s affairs?

96 A Jackie Wu and Anuj Bapodra Production:

DDI ’08 Jackie “Awesome” Wu & A-Bomb

NMD DA 97/115

Technical debates over the Iranian threat are irrelevant – NMD is key to demonstrate U.S. resolve and deter Iran, regardless of the exact status of their program Lukasz Kulesa, analyst at the Polish Institute of International Affairs, April 12, 2007, “Missile Defense Dossier: The Polish Perspective,” online: http://www.frstrategie.org/barreFRS/publications/pv/defenseAntimissile/pv_20070412_eng.pdf, [Bapodra]

Arguments pointing to the slow pace of the Iranian missile developments, lack of strategic rationale for Iran to build an arsenal for striking Europe or the United States when better targets are available in the neighbourhood (e.g. American bases across the Gulf), or the availability of other means of transporting WMD to the target, will have no impact on the United States. Scrapping the system would be equal with admitting the fundamental flaws of the ‘undeterrable rogue states’ doctrine. Neither this, nor any next administration seems prepared to make such a move. Of course, as with every major armaments programme, there is also the self-perpetuating internal logic of ‘we have advanced so far, and cannot stop here…’.

97 A Jackie Wu and Anuj Bapodra Production:

DDI ’08 Jackie “Awesome” Wu & A-Bomb

NMD DA 98/115

NMD Good Impact– Russian Expansionism A. European NMD is key to deter Russian expansionism – failure of negotiations would embolden Putin to destabilize Eastern Europe Peter Brookes, former Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense, is a senior fellow for National Security Affairs at the Heritage Foundation, 11-8, 2007, online: http://frontpagemagazine.com/Articles/Read.aspx?GUID=E2E0BCA0-8DDF-484C-B974-22FE89CF0715, [Bapodra] If anything, the opposite is true. Defensive weapons systems such as missile defense have a stabilizing effect on the security environment, as opposed to offensive weapons, which research has shown can be destabilizing. As a defensive capability, U.S. missile defense plans for Europe will act as a deterrent to rogue nations and non-state actors from acquiring ballistic missiles and weapons of mass destruction. There will be less motivation for ballistic missile capability if Europe has the ability to defend against it. To make America and its allies deliberately vulnerable to attack is not only nonsensical, it is likely to incur further proliferation. As President Bush stated, "Missile defense is a vital tool for our security, it's a vital tool for deterrence and it's a vital tool for counterproliferation."[8] However, the failure of third site negotiations would embolden those in Russia who believe that the United States is negotiating from a position of diplomatic and military weakness. Putin would claim-with some credibility--to have scored a diplomatic victory over the United States. Failure would also increase Russian boldness in intimidating former satellite states, adding to instability in Eastern Europe.

B. Russian military expansionism gets modeled by India and Pakistan Business Week, September 30, 2002 [Bapodra] But heightened activity in the Caucasus presents risks for the U.S., too. One is the danger that U.S. advisers in Georgia get targeted in a new flare-up of violence. America's global image could also suffer through a closer identification with aggressive Russian war methods. And a dangerous precedent could be set. If Putin mounts a larger military effort with the tacit approval of Washington, countries in other hot spots could follow his example. Analysts fear India, for example, could invoke the same argument Putin is using to launch a major strike against the part of Kashmir controlled by Pakistan. ''This has got to be very carefully controlled'' by U.S. policymakers, says Fiona Hill, an expert on the Caucasus region at the Brookings Institution. Even as Putin cooperates with the war on terror, he's posing yet another dilemma for Bush's hard-pressed anti-terrorism team.

98 A Jackie Wu and Anuj Bapodra Production:

DDI ’08 Jackie “Awesome” Wu & A-Bomb

NMD DA 99/115

C. India-Pakistan military expansion causes nuclear war Ghulam Nabi

Fai, Kashmiri American Council, July 8, 2001, Washington Times [Bapodra]

The foreign policy of the United States in South Asia should move from the lackadaisical and distant (with India crowned with a unilateral veto power) to aggressive involvement at the vortex. 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. This apocalyptic vision is no idiosyncratic view. The director of central intelligence, the Defense Department, and world experts generally place Kashmir at the peak of their nuclear worries. Both India and Pakistan are racing like thoroughbreds to bolster their nuclear arsenals and advanced delivery vehicles. Their defense budgets are climbing despite widespread misery amongst their populations. Neither country has initialed the Nuclear Non- Proliferation Treaty, the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty, or indicated an inclination to ratify an impending Fissile Material/Cut-off Convention.

99 A Jackie Wu and Anuj Bapodra Production:

DDI ’08 Jackie “Awesome” Wu & A-Bomb

NMD DA 100/115

NMD Good – Russian Expansionism Extension NMD in Europe is key to check Russian expansionism Lukasz Kulesa, analyst at the Polish Institute of International Affairs, April 12, 2007, “Missile Defense Dossier: The Polish Perspective,” online: http://www.frstrategie.org/barreFRS/publications/pv/defenseAntimissile/pv_20070412_eng.pdf, [Bapodra]

Which threat is so potent that it requires the US base as an ‘insurance policy’ against aggression? Most of the supporters of Poland’s involvement in the Missile Defence project point unanimously at Russia and the possible future course of its policy. With the new strength coming from gas and oil revenues, Russia looks determined to increase its influence not only in the ‘near abroad’ (i.e. former USSR), but also globally. At home, the Kremlin-devised concept of ‘sovereign democracy’ provides a basis for a stable system political which has most of the attributes of a democracy (e.g. periodic elections), but little of its spirit (no real choices for the voters). According to some commentators, the new over-confident Russia may, in the medium to long-term perspective, try to use not only the energy weapon, but also the threat of military force as a foreign policy tool.

100 A Jackie Wu and Anuj Bapodra Production:

DDI ’08 Jackie “Awesome” Wu & A-Bomb

NMD DA 101/115

NEG: CZECH/POLAND KEY Czech and Polish NMD key to intercepting missiles—location RADIO PRAGUE 5-25-08 http://www.radio.cz/en/article/79280 [JWU] "The Czech Republic and Poland represent a significant improvement of any US system, because they are relatively close to the Middle East, they could track very well any incoming missiles, they could provide territory for early warning radars, and should the need be so, there could also be an interceptor base located in their territory that could attempt to shoot down any such missiles that would either target Europe itself or would be just passing over Europe and heading to the United States."

Poland and Czech missile defense key RADIO PRAGUE 5-25-08 http://www.radio.cz/en/article/79280 [JWU] Why has the United States narrowed it down to these two countries, and not Slovakia, or Bulgaria, or Romania for example? "Perhaps they think that Poland and the Czech Republic are close enough, they certainly belong to the Atlanticist group within NATO, so they might be open to such negotiations. Moreover, there was at least preliminary interest expressed by the militaries and governments of both of these countries several years ago when the technical talks started. And as I mentioned, their territory is well placed enough for the entire system to work. Moreover they perhaps trust those allies with which they have more regular contacts, that is at least since March 1999, when both countries joined NATO, whereas Slovakia, Bulgaria and Romania are more recent newcomers to NATO. So, the United States may not necessarily trust them in all technical matters, in their competence to deal with such highly sophisticated systems, shall we say."

101 A Jackie Wu and Anuj Bapodra Production:

DDI ’08 Jackie “Awesome” Wu & A-Bomb

NMD DA 102/115

NEG: A2 "NMD FAILS" NEW TESTING HAS MADE NMD USEFUL—PREFER OUR EVIDENCE IT'S BASED ON THE NEWEST RESEARCH PRNEWSWIRE 7-21-08 http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story/us-validates-radarcapabilities-against/story.aspx?guid=%7BD2329A81-FEA6-4735-8D7D9F49D9751205%7D&dist=hppr [JWU] "Last Friday evening in Colorado Springs, Colorado, the United States for the first time, successfully integrated and validated four diverse tracking and discriminatory sensor radars against a three stage, long range ballistic missile dispersing countermeasures and decoys over the Pacific Ocean. The test integrated the Sea-Based X-Band Radar (SBX) in the Pacific, the Aegis Destroyer USS Milius (DD-79) with its SPY -1 radar in the northern pacific, the mobile forward based X-band Radar (AN/TPY-2 X-band) located in Juneau, Alaska and an upgraded early warning Radar located at the Beale AFB near Yuba City, California. The real time accumulation of data from the four radar sources to make the exact target coordinates of the warhead was accomplished, validating the United States capability to initially deal with complex future ballistic missile threats. This achievement affirms the current technology to track and discriminate a warhead with countermeasures and decoys of future ballistic missile configurations."

102 A Jackie Wu and Anuj Bapodra Production:

DDI ’08 Jackie “Awesome” Wu & A-Bomb

NMD DA 103/115

POLITICS—OBAMA K2 NMD OBAMA WILL DISBAND NMD; MCCAIN WILL SUSTAIN IT WASHINGTON TIMES 7-8-07 http://www.washtimes.com/news/2008/jul/08/poland-tries-tosave-us-missile-defense-deal/

Even if the Czech deal receives that final approval, many analysts - and apparently the Polish government - are looking beyond the Bush administration and focusing on what Mr. Obama or Mr. McCain might do. "While negotiations [with Poland] are 'ongoing,' I think it's clear that the decision will ultimately fall to the next administration," said Julianne Smith, Europe Program director at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. Baker Spring, national security fellow at the Heritage Foundation, said that if a deal on the interceptors is not reached by the end of the summer, "it is unlikely that the administration will be able to conclude a deal before President Bush leaves office." Mr. Sikorski's attempt to determine what Mr. McCain's and Mr. Obama's plans for the shield might be is understandable given the significant commitment Poland would be making, Mr. Spring said. Mr. McCain supports the program, but Mr. Obama does not. "I will cut investments in unproven missile-defense systems. I will not weaponize space," Mr. Obama said last year.

OBAMA WIN WOULD KILL NMD DW news 3/18/08 GERMAN NEWS SOURCE, "US hopeful about progress on US Missile defense plans", http://www.dw-world.de/dw/article/0,2144,3199539,00.html [JWU] There are also concerns the shield project could be dropped in the event of a Democratic victory in November's US presidential election. Russian political analyst Fyodor Lukyanov told news agency AFP he doubted Gates' statement that agreement on missile defense could be achieved under the Bush administration and said both sides were in a holding position dictated by domestic politics. Bush is unlikely to change his position on missile defence in his final year, and Moscow will wait for a possible Democratic victory in US presidential elections in November in the hope of a change of position, Lukyanov said.

103 A Jackie Wu and Anuj Bapodra Production:

DDI ’08 Jackie “Awesome” Wu & A-Bomb

NMD DA 104/115

2AC FRONTLINE 1/2 1. NO LINK—U.S. CAN PASS MISSILE DEFENSE WITHOUT EUROPEAN SUPPORT —EMPIRICALLY PROVEN Mr. Huessy is President of GeoStrategic Analysis. During the Reagan administration he worked to secure the deployment of the INF and Peacekeeper missiles, deploy missile defense, guest lecturer at the Joint Military Intelligence Colleg. 7-16-08 http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=27546 [JWU] On whether the European deployment divides anyone, should no US military policy be undertaken unless it receives the blessing of the foreign diplomatic community? Isn’t this an echo of the “international test” so cherished by Senator John Kerry in the 2004 Presidential campaign? Think back. There was widespread opposition to President Reagan’s deployment of Pershing and GLCM missiles in Europe in response to the Soviet deployment of SS-20s. Not only was the opposition widespread, the Soviets put some $300 million into the campaign to stop the American and allied efforts. If we had used Obama’s test, the Cold War would still be going on. There is a real problem with saying unless a US policy meets with the approval of the nuancedminded diplomats, say in Europe, it does not go forward. This isn’t just out-sourcing your foreign policy: it’s surrendering sovereignty to others. And how unanimous does the approval have to be? Do China, Russia, Iran and Zimbabwe get a vote? In short, Senator, why does US defense and military policy require the moral approval of such ethical giants as Iran and North Korea, or say a France under Chirac or Russia under Putin?

2. NO LINK—POLAND NOT INTERESTED IN QUID PRO QUO DEALS WITH U.S. Adrian J. Erlinger is a visiting Fulbright Research Scholar at the University of Warsaw's Centre for East European Studies.7-11-08 http://www.worldpoliticsreview.com/article.aspx?id=2417[JWU] Warsaw's increasingly tough negotiation style with the United States signals that the current Polish government is no longer satisfied with a quid pro quo relationship with its number one ally. In January, Prime Minister Tusk saidhttp://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/936fd89e-bfe7-11dc-80520000779fd2ac.html he was "responsible for the safety of Poles, and not the safety of the United States." 3. AUSTRILIA WILL HOST NMD ANYWAY—IMPACT INEVITABLE Hannah Middleton PhD 01 (date based on newest date in article) "the armed wings of globalisation" http://www.anti-bases.org/nmd/armed_wing_of_globalisation.htm [JWu] Australia is a front line state for US NMD plans, through the base at Pine Gap and the Australian Government is almost alone in giving strong public support to Star Wars. The National Missile Defence program involves developing a system to intercept a limited number of ballistic missiles targeted on the US. However, NMD is not a benign, defensive umbrella. It is a controversial space battle system to control space for the US alone. 104 A Jackie Wu and Anuj Bapodra Production:

DDI ’08 Jackie “Awesome” Wu & A-Bomb

NMD DA 105/115

2AC FRONTLINE 2/2 4. NMDS FAIL: WILL WASTE ITSELF KILLING DECOYS Union of Concerned Scientists, no date http://www.antibases.org/nmd/national_missile_defence.htm "A missile defense with limits" Fact Sheet [JWu] At some point in this process, the system must discriminate the actual warhead from the other objects. Otherwise, the NMD system--with a limited number of interceptors--would risk simply running out of interceptors if it attempted to fire at all the objects. Because the NMD interceptors are designed to intercept their targets above the atmosphere, where there is no air resistance and where lightweight objects travel on the same trajectory as a heavy warhead, the system would be particularly vulnerable to countermeasures that use numerous lightweight decoys.

5. LONG TIME FRAME IF WE HAD STARTED LAST YEAR, NMD TAKE UNTIL 2013 DW news 3/18/08 GERMAN NEWS SOURCE, "US hopeful about progress on US Missile defense plans", http://www.dw-world.de/dw/article/0,2144,3199539,00.html [JWU] Washington announced in Jan 2007 that it wanted to install 10 missile interceptors in Poland and a radar base in the Czech Republic to cover US territory but also some European allies, and wanted it operational by 2013. The shield is aimed at countering attacks from "rogue states" such as Iran and North Korea.

6. RUSSIAN SUPPORT KEY TO NMDS—PLAN DOESN'T CHANGE RUSSIA'S PERCEPTION

PBS 2K "MISSILE DEFENSE POLITICS" pbs.org/newshour/bb/military/july-dec00/nmd_824.html [JWU] JEFFREY KAYE: And Cohen said the allies' support is likely to depend on the Russian reaction. The allies want to maintain good relations with Russia, which opposes a U.S. missile shield. WILLIAM COHEN: So you can't get the support of the allies unless you at least try to work it out with the Russians. The Russians may see this as an opportunity to simply promote dissent and try to exploit that dissent, and therefore preclude the United States from moving forward. I think what we have to do is persuade our allies we are acting responsibly, we're dealing with the Russians.

105 A Jackie Wu and Anuj Bapodra Production:

DDI ’08 Jackie “Awesome” Wu & A-Bomb

NMD DA 106/115

AFF: OTHER NMD INEVITABLE AUSTRALIA'S BACKING NMD ANYWAY Hannah Middleton PhD 01 (date based on newest date in article) "the armed wings of globalisation" http://www.anti-bases.org/nmd/armed_wing_of_globalisation.htm [JWu] The Australian Government is backing NMD despite warnings that the system is not in Australia's interests. Classified documents from the Office of National Assessments (ONA - Australia’s peak intelligence assessment body) say “Pine Gap will be a key component of the early warning system for any US missile defence system." "Any weakening of international arms control regimes would have a negative impact on Australia's security," the ONA report says.

PINE GAP SOLVES NMD Hannah Middleton PhD 01 (date based on newest date in article) "the armed wings of globalisation" http://www.anti-bases.org/nmd/armed_wing_of_globalisation.htm [JWu] Pine Gap is one of the largest and most important US satellite ground control stations in the world. Established in 1968 as a CIA intelligence base and situated in Central Australia, 19 kms southwest of Alice Springs, Pine Gap has been used to collect data on ballistic missile launches for over 30 years. Pine Gap is in the Star Wars front line. It will be a Ground Based Relay Station for a new space based missile tracking system, called SBIRS (Space-Based Infra-Red System), planned to be operational by 2004. Pine Gap will receive from satellites and forward to the US early warning of missile launches. It will also provide information on the launch site, missile type, velocity, and what kind of warhead the missile may carry. This information is essential if the missiles are to be destroyed before they reach their targets. The SBIRS satellites monitored by Pine Gap cover the most important area of US strategic interest - China. Pine Gap is also an essential element in providing early warning and for tracking any missile launches from Iran or Iraq.

106 A Jackie Wu and Anuj Bapodra Production:

DDI ’08 Jackie “Awesome” Wu & A-Bomb

NMD DA 107/115

NMD WILL BE INSTALLED IN ISRAEL—IMPACT INEV AFP 7-30-08 http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5geXH3wo7vUf3ykhvWURm8ML9NNCA [JWU] WASHINGTON (AFP) — US Defense Secretary Robert Gates has agreed to explore deploying a powerful missile defense targeting radar in Israel, a senior US defense official said Tuesday. "The idea here is to help Israel create a layered missile defense capability to protect it from all sorts of threats in the region, near and far," said the official, who spoke on condition of anonymity. Gates discussed the Israeli request Monday in a meeting with Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak, the official said. Besides the radar, Gates also agreed to explore sharing missile early warning launch data, as well as US funding for two costly Israeli projects designed to counter short-range rockets and mortars, he said. The official said deploying the X-band radar was a near-term proposition, adding "all this is moving pretty quickly." "We are going to station this landbased system there, and the Israelis would plug into it," said the official.

107 A Jackie Wu and Anuj Bapodra Production:

DDI ’08 Jackie “Awesome” Wu & A-Bomb

NMD DA 108/115

AFF: DISAD'S NOT INTRINSIC DISAD'S NOT INTRINSIC—PARTNERSHIP SOLVES LUKE HARDING The Guardian staff writer, Moscow correspondent, 4-11-07 guardian.co.uk/world/2007/apr/11/usa.topstories3 [JWu] Analysts said there was a common feeling in Russia that the US had reneged on an agreement after the collapse of the Soviet Union to abandon cold war politics. "Cold war thinking has prevailed, especially on the western side," Yevgeny Myasnikov, a senior research scientist at Moscow's Centre for Arms Control, told the Guardian. "Russia has been deeply disappointed by what has happened after 1991. Nato started to expand, and the US started to think it had won the cold war. We had hoped for a partnership. But it didn't happen."

108 A Jackie Wu and Anuj Bapodra Production:

DDI ’08 Jackie “Awesome” Wu & A-Bomb

NMD DA 109/115

AFF: NON/U—CZECH NON-UNIQUE—CZECH REPUBLIC ALREADY ACCEPTED THE DEAL Adrian J. Erlinger is a visiting Fulbright Research Scholar at the University of Warsaw's Centre for East European Studies.7-11-08 http://www.worldpoliticsreview.com/article.aspx?id=2417[JWU] WARSAW, Poland -- To defend against the potential threat of a nuclear attack from "rogue states," the United States has been working to shore up support for deploying 10 silo-based long-range interceptors in Poland and a mid-course tracking radar in the Czech Republic by 2013. After months of shuttle diplomacy and intense negotiations, U.S. Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice inked a deal with the Czechs on July 8 but failed to convince her Polish counterparts to host the project.

109 A Jackie Wu and Anuj Bapodra Production:

DDI ’08 Jackie “Awesome” Wu & A-Bomb

NMD DA 110/115

AFF: NO LINK—POLAND POLISH SOCIAL DEMOCRATS KEY TO PASSAGE OF NMD—PLAN DOESN'T CHANGE THEIR PERCEPTION INTERNATIONAL COMMITTEE OF THE FOURTH INTERNATIONAL, 3-17-07 http://www.wsws.org/articles/2007/mar2007/miss-m17.shtml [JWu] To obtain the necessary majority in parliament for the new radar installation, the Czech government, consisting of a coalition between Topolanek’s conservative ODS, the Christian Democrats and the Greens, needs the support of at least two Social Democrat (CSSD) deputies. Officially, the CSSD is the party of opposition, but the party leadership has ensured that the party backs the right-wing government. In response, Topolanek has promised the social-democratic party chief, Jiri Paroubek, a certain influence in policymaking.

110 A Jackie Wu and Anuj Bapodra Production:

DDI ’08 Jackie “Awesome” Wu & A-Bomb

NMD DA 111/115

AFF: RUSSIAN IMPACT TURN Russian Impact Link turn: Without a shift to renewables, Russian oil conflicts go nuclear Vladimir Volkov International Editorial Board member of WSWS 18 July 2008 http://www.wsws.org/articles/2008/jul2008/miss-j18.shtml [JWU] “The world is militarizing, and hydrocarbons are the main object of global conflicts; in the struggle to possess them, the West is prepared to use all means on a broad scale, up to nuclear weapons. As a source of hydrocarbons and other resources, Russia is one of the first objectives of the new re-division of the world. A restraining element against attack on Russia is what remains of the nuclear potential of the USSR.” “A new arms race in on the march, a cold war, and, it seems, humanity is seriously preparing for a ‘hot’ war,” he stressed, demonstrating with his words the determination of Russia’s ruling elite to resort to any measures, no matter how destructive and catastrophic they might be, to defend their interests.

111 A Jackie Wu and Anuj Bapodra Production:

DDI ’08 Jackie “Awesome” Wu & A-Bomb

NMD DA 112/115

SPACE AFF TURNS 1/2 SATELLITES KEY TO NMD Union of Concerned Scientists, no date http://www.antibases.org/nmd/national_missile_defence.htm "A missile defense with limits" Fact Sheet [JWu] Although the exact architecture of the proposed NMD system is not yet finalized, its general shape is clear, and the components of the system have been chosen. The system will use groundbased interceptors topped with an Exo-atmospheric Kill Vehicle (EKV) that is designed to destroy the incoming warhead by colliding with it at high speed. This collision would take place above the atmosphere, when the warhead is in the mid-course of its trajectory. The launch of an attacking missile would first be detected by US early warning satellites. The existing satellites, known as DSP (Defense Support Program) satellites, use infrared sensors to detect the hot plume of a missile booster in the early stage of its flight. Beginning in 2004, the DSP satellites will be replaced by a new system of early warning satellites known as SBIRS-high (Space-Based Infrared System--high-earth orbit), which will also use infrared sensors to detect missile plumes but have improved capabilities. The data from the early warning satellites would be fed to the NMD Battle Management Center, to be located at Cheyenne Mountain in Colorado.

SATELLITES KEY TO NMDS—WITHOUT SATELLITE DETECTION, MISSILES FLY BLIND Union of Concerned Scientists, no date http://www.antibases.org/nmd/national_missile_defence.htm "A missile defense with limits" Fact Sheet [JWu] Still, even its staunchest backers acknowledge that the kill vehicle is blind to enemy warheads for most of its flight. Raytheon, its maker, says it can pick up the telltale heat emanations of targets only in the last 100 or so seconds before impact. So the weapon must still rely on radars and satellites to find its quarry. The needed helpers, detailed in April in a Congressional Budget Office report, and in interviews with its author, Geoffrey Forden, include these: Early-warning radars. Five existing ones would be improved and a new one built in Asia to help alert the force of interceptor missiles of enemy attack. High-resolution radars. These can better resolve targets in space to aid tracking, eliminate decoys and assess whether targeted warheads have been destroyed. Nine would be built. Missile-tracking satellites. These detect heat from newly launched missiles and can help estimate flight paths. In time, existing ones would be supplemented by five new ones, all in high orbits.

Warhead-tracking satellites. From low orbits, 24 of these new spacecraft would aid the hunt for warheads and decoys. Command centers. The main one at Cheyenne Mountain, Colo., a bunker hewn out of solid rock, would link all the data, and its officers would fight the defensive war.

In-flight relays. On the ground, radio transmitters would send navigational signals to missile interceptors heading for battle.

SPACE AFF TURNS 2/2 112 A Jackie Wu and Anuj Bapodra Production:

DDI ’08 Jackie “Awesome” Wu & A-Bomb

NMD DA 113/115

SPACE LASERS SOLVE NMD IMPACT PBS 2K "MISSILE DEFENSE POLITICS" http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/military/julydec00/nmd_8-24.html [JWU] JEFFREY KAYE: The Republican missile defense plan is much more ambitious than the one President Clinton supports. Unlike the Clinton plan, which would be limited to using land-based missiles to attack incoming warheads in space, the Bush version would use various weapons systems -- which might include missiles from land and sea, as well as lasers in space -- to shoot down warheads soon after they lift off. Richard Perle, a former Pentagon official during the Reagan administration, now an advisor to Governor Bush, says Bush is unconcerned about the ABM treaty. Bush believes the U.S. should withdraw from the treaty so that the best available technologies can be explored without constraint.

113 A Jackie Wu and Anuj Bapodra Production:

DDI ’08 Jackie “Awesome” Wu & A-Bomb

NMD DA 114/115

IRAQ ADVANTAGE LINK TURN LINK TURN: MIDDLE EASTERN ENGAGEMENT HURTS INTERNATIONAL ACCEPTANCE OF NMD ALEX LANTIER, 5-22-08 "Russia, China denounce US missile shield at summit meeting" http://www.wsws.org/articles/2008/may2008/chin-m24.shtml [JWU] Lieber and Press wrote: “The sort of missile defenses that the United States might plausibly deploy would be valuable primarily in an offensive context, not a defensive one—as an adjunct to a U.S. first-strike capability, not as a standalone shield. If the United States launched a nuclear attack against Russia (or China), the targeted country would be left with a tiny surviving arsenal —if any at all. At that point, even a relatively modest or inefficient missile-defense system might well be enough to protect against any retaliatory strikes, because the devastated enemy would have so few warheads and decoys left.” Such plans have taken on a fearsome relevance to international politics, amid the tensions released by the debacle of US attempts to militarily conquer and control the Middle East.

114 A Jackie Wu and Anuj Bapodra Production:

DDI ’08 Jackie “Awesome” Wu & A-Bomb

NMD DA 115/115

RANDOM EXTRANEOUS CARDS AFF AGAINST CONSULT WITH CHINA RELATIONS IMPACT CONSULTING ON NMDS SOLVES CHINA RELATIONS WADE BOESE rsrch director of Arms Control Association APRIL 2001 armscontrol.org/act/2001_04/internatlnmd [JWu] Starting a March 14 speech by noting, "It is no news that China is opposed to the U.S. NMD program," Chinese Ambassador Sha Zukang declared that he wanted to "make it clear that…we are ready to have a dialogue and discussion with Americans [on NMD]." The head of the Chinese Foreign Ministry's arms control and disarmament department, Sha pointed out that only through consultations could the two sides "enhance mutual understanding and narrow down the differences." Sha, who in his speech equated NMD with "drinking poison to quench thirst," said Washington and Beijing need to talk "no matter how serious [the] issue."

U.S. LOOKING TO INSTALL MISSILES IN LITHUANIA AFP 6-19-08 spacewar.com/reports/US_taps_Lithuania_as_alternative_to_Poland_for_missile_shield_ plan_999.html [JWU] The United States has begun to sound out Lithuania as a possible alternative host for a controversial missile shield as talks with Poland on the project grind on. After a Polish minister said Tuesday that talks between Washington and Vilnius were indeed underway, US officials confirmed that chief missile defence negotiator John Rood had visited Lithuania, stressing all the while there were in actual fact no negotiations with the ex-Soviet Baltic state. Pentagon spokesman Geoff Morrell, however, made it clear Poland was not the only option the United States had to host the shield. "There are several European nations that could host the (missile) interceptors and Lithuania is one of them," Morrell told reporters in Washington Tuesday.

115 A Jackie Wu and Anuj Bapodra Production: