You are on page 1of 57


Privates CP Strike Force Alpha


Privitiztion solvency


Privates CP Strike Force Alpha


Privitzation Solvency - Generic

Private sector involvement is an imperative NASA has no funding and needs a corporate fillin Sauser 9
(Brittany, Private Space Technology Powers up
In the coming weeks the Obama administration will decide the future

of U.S. human spaceflight. A summary report by the committee tasked with reviewing NASA's current plans and providing recommendations suggests utilizing the commercial sector for unmanned, and perhaps manned, missions as a way to reduce government costs. Franklin Chang Diaz, a former NASA astronaut and founder and president of Ad Astra Rocket Company, agrees. Private companies solve empirically, they run the space program
Dobbs 10 (Greg, Why race to space when technology is inefficient? Denver Post.)
As for commercial "rocket-taxis," critics say Obama is forcing "the destruction of our human space flight program." That quote comes from Sen. Richard Shelby of Alabama. But what's his interest? Jobs, perhaps? His state hosts NASA's Marshall Space Flight Center. Two other big congressional critics are Florida's Sen. Bill Nelson (Kennedy Space Center), and Texas Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison (Johnson Space Center).

What they don't acknowledge is that commercial companies provide jobs, too. And that private firms always have played a role in the public's space program. Mercury, Gemini, Apollo, the space shuttle, none was constructed by civil servants; it was companies like Boeing andLockheed Martin. Anyway, everything still would be built
under NASA's watchful eye.George Zamka, the commander of the shuttle that's orbiting in space right now, told me, "NASA is going to have safety as its primary consideration."

Market solutions are best toward addressing the problems in the space program Ocregister, 10
(Peter Navarro: Privatization in space wise, to a point May 17, 2010|:// To his credit, Mr. Obama

is entirely correct that America's future in space can only be secured by a vibrant, free-market commercial space industry liberated from annual budget scares, quadrennial presidential campaigns and congressional meddling. Such a commercial space sector can serve as an essential catalyst to create the jobs and technologies needed to drive our economy in the 21st century.


Privates CP Strike Force Alpha


Solvency incentives

Incentives solve they foster private sector industry and tech development - Aerospace industry proves Milstein 9 (Michael, NASA Makes Space U-Turn, Opening Arms to Private Industry. Because of a new focus for NASA's strategic investments--not to mention incentives like the Ansari X Prize, which spurred the space-tourism business, and the Google Lunar X Prize, which could do the same for payloads--privatesector spaceships could be ready for government service soon, says Sam Scimemi, who heads NASA's Commercial Orbital Transportation Services program. "The industry has grown up," he tells PM. "It used to be that only NASA or the Air Force could do such things." NASA got its start in aeronautics research, kick-starting a U.S. aviation industry that came to dominate the world. NASA administrator Michael Griffin said in an interview last year with PM that he wants the agency to do the same for commercial space transportation. Incentivizing private sector investment in space solves the AFF Jobes 5
(Douglass O., president of the S p ace Settlement Institute, a think tank d ed icated to finding ways to make space settlement happen in our life times . Lunar Land Claims Recognition: Designing the Ultimate Incentive for Space Infrastructure Development. Space Times May/June 2005.) Space Administration (NASA) often interfaces with the private sector, the government cannot -- and should not -be expected to bear the entire burden for developing space. NASA's primary focus is exploration and discovery. That means a comprehensive approach to space development

depends on finding ways to make space profitable for private industry -- if possible, convincing corporations, institutions, wealthy individuals, and venture capitalists to invest billions of dollars in space. Consider the satellite industry, once the sole province of government but now a private sector success story. In 2003 the

commercial satellite industry grossed over $90 billion, according to the Satellite Industry Association. Revenue has been increasing year after year in this industry because the profits to be made outweigh the expenses of doing business. But for more ambitious ventures -- such as businesses based on the Moon and in EarthMoon space -- the financial hurdles of getting from the drawing board to profitability are much greater.

Incentives solves best- competition Lincoln 11

(Caity, staff writer at the collegian, Privatization seems best medicine for Space Race,, 2-15) This is American capitalism at its besta

little friendly competition between private and public enterprise which pushes the bounds of discovery.This new private space race certainly has investors scrambling to take advantage. The incentives may ensure a faster return to the lunar surface than if progress were solely entrusted to government agencies with their budgets and red tape. Incentives solve best- reinvigorates public interest and jumpstarts NASA Foust 10
(Jeff, foust is the editor and publisher of the space review, Review: The Privatization of Space Exploration,, 5-3) In The Privatization of Space Exploration, Lewis Solomon, a law professor at George Washington University,

makes the case for an enhanced role for private ventures in space. He links the increased interest in commercial human spaceflight to the flights of SpaceShipOne in 2004 that won the $10-million Ansari X PRIZE: it got people excited to dream again about human spaceflight. Its such commercial efforts, he argues, that can lift NASA from decades of stagnation, provided that the agency is more willing to work with such ventures than it has in the past.


Privates CP Strike Force Alpha


Solvency Constellation

Private actors provide best solution to Constellation program Associated Content, 10

(Obama's Budget Means Bad News for Space Program Rick Limpert,freelance writer and columnist. Yahoo! Contributor Network Feb 2, 2010

One bright spot I can see coming out of this is that private companies or individuals could have an open door and come in and assist NASA with financing and developing these projects and others. This new path might speed up the timetable of some of these projects because we all know private cont actors would be able to cut through the red tape and do anything our government run agencies faster and better.


Privates CP Strike Force Alpha


Solvency Asteroid Mapping

CP solves asteroid mapping the scope of the project demands private sector assistance Blankenhorn 10
(Dana, contributing editor for SmartPlanet. Maybe Obama just wants to save the Earth.;content)
Youve already seen the movie,. It was the biggest hit of 1998. Armegeddon, starring Bruce Willis, involved a mission to deflect an asteroid from striking Earth and destroying civilization. It even had a black astronaut, Michael

Clarke Duncan as Bear. The plot was not so far-fetched. In 2004 NASA announced the discovery of Apophis, an asteroid 1,050 feet across that could possibly strike Earth in 2029, or maybe 2036, with an impact similar to what wiped out the dinosaurs. Astronomers have since backed off that prediction. But its aimed at shifting Apophis orbit. American astronomers fear such a mission may do more harm than good. After the Presidents Florida announcement, which calls for relying on private space lift over the near term while boosting our deep space capability for the longer term, the
political risk was made evident. Florida would be losing jobs. They have a Senate election coming up. Then, in a panel discussion following the announcement, former NASA chief scientist John Grunfeld, newly appointed deputy director of the Space Telescope Science

still going to come close, and asteroids do strike planets, big asteroids. Ask a dinosaur the next time you fill up. Or look at the Moon. That crater called Tycho was an asteroid strike 95 million years ago. Russia was so concerned it made moves last year to launch its own mission

Institute, started talking about moving asteroids. New asteroids are being discovered every day, dozens of them, he said, by the Wide-field Infrared Survey Explorer (WISE), launched by NASA last year. Who knows when we might plot ones orbit and find it intersects with ours? Bill Nye the Science Guy, who is also vice president of the Planetary Society, quickly picked up the theme.
Its tough and risky and dangerous, yes. Then got its money quote. Youre saving all of humankind. Thats worthy, isnt it? Well, isnt it?

The same technical strategy Obama announced for Mars, bypassing a generation of low Earth orbit launchers that might get us to the Moon in 10 years in favor of systems that might reach deep space in 20, using the savings to create a private space industry, also works for asteroids, and the budget could be accelerated if WISE finds something really dangerous.


Privates CP Strike Force Alpha


Solvency - SPS

Solves SPS solar satellites can only develop alongside private technologies Medin 10
(Kristin, Chief Industrial Designer, NewSpace DesignLabs, Disruptive Technology: A Space-Based Solar Power Industry Forecast.

Development of a private spaceflight industry will parallel development of solar power satellites, since the cargo-tospace innovations needed to carry out frequent and affordable launches from earth will parallel innovations in human space transport. For example, recreational travel to space can only be developed out of accessible power sources native to space as opposed to today's method of lifting the energy needed to sustain space missions from the launch pad. Private sector solves the aff its key to commercial space development and international cooperation Roberts 99
(Lawrence , Chair of NSS Policy Committee setting forth latest position paper from Policy Committee 6/10/99, memo( An appropriate combination of public and private sector funding can encourage SPS development . In the near term, government agencies such as NASA and the Department of Energy can lower the technological risk by funding technologies such as efficient solar cells, wireless power transmission, advanced space transportation systems, and space resource utilization. Whenever feasible, existing assets such as the International Space Station can be used. As the technologies are proven, private industry can then lead the way toward commercial

development of space. SPS research and development will thus foster international cooperation in the short term, while increasing the wealth of nations and protecting the Earth's environment in the longer-term . As the quality of life on Earth improves, near-Earth space can be opened up to private citizens, while deep-space scientific missions can be made more affordable. 83 Private sector solves the launch vehicles needed to get SPS into space Hedman 8
(Eric R., chief technology officer of Logic Design Corporation. If we build it, will they come? The Space Review)

There are still definite technical hurdles to overcome, one of which is the cost of transporting the components into orbit. The SBSP study addresses the need for a low-cost launcher. It points out two possible scenarios. The first is that the
government will fund the development of a two stage to orbit vertical takeoff and horizontally landing vehicle that could if heavily used bring down the cost per pound to orbit significantly. The other scenario was that if space-based solar power was proved to be feasible, private

industry would step up and develop the launch vehicles.


Privates CP Strike Force Alpha


Solvency peaceful space development

Private actors in space solidify treaties and confidence building measures States News Service 6/13/11
(DEFINING SPACE SECURITY FOR THE 21ST CENTURY. States news service, released by the U.S. Department of State. l/n. jdl) While efforts

to adopt space TCBMs are often described as top down, they must be built upon bottom up initiatives developed by government and private sector satellite operators to ensure the long-term sustainability of spaceactivities. In particular, the United States is committed to taking a leadership role in the UN Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Spaces (COPUOS) working group on long-term sustainability. This COPUOS working group will be a key forum for international development of best practices guidelines for orbital debris mitigation and the long-term sustainability of space activities, and collaborating with others to share space situational awareness information.
*TCBMS = transparency and confidence building measures


Privates CP Strike Force Alpha


Solvency rockets

Private sector solves rocket propulsion investments allow the private sphere to overcome tech hurdles Sauser 9 (Brittany, Private Space Technology Powers up There are a lot of companies building technology for access to low earth orbit, but some still have years of development work and need funding. Can the private sector realistically get it done soon? FCD: Absolutely. Rockets are not a new invention. Reliable rockets were built in World War II, and they were perfected by NASA in the 50s and 60s, and other countries as well. Also, the technology for rocket propulsion is not rocket science anymore. However, we
do need advanced propulsion, which is a completely untapped area of research; very little work has been done, and we need to move into that realm because we are not going to get to Mars on chemical rockets. It is going to be too fragile and too dangerous [of a mission] for chemical rockets.

private sector can outcompete the government and the military - X Prize proves Worden 4
(Gen. Simon, Private Sector Opportunities and the Presidents Space Exploration Vision. George Marshall Institute. Washington Rou ndtable on Science & Public Policy) Now to give a

couple of examples, one of those investors is Elon Musk and his SpaceX Corporation. I dont know if you are familiar with this an ungodly amount of money in the Internet, while I was a mid-level officer. The jealousy seeps through. But he is not unique and he, like many of his colleagues, grew up on Star Trek and Star Wars and they want to be involved in space. He was interested in Mars and was looking at private investments to do Mars missions and quickly ran up against a problem of launch vehicles. When he looked at buying them from U.S. companies, he found that they
program, but this fellow, I think hes 32 years old, made were pretty expensive. Even for a billionaire, spending a couple hundred million dollars a pop on a launch vehicle goes through money pretty fast. I am told he also spoke to some Russian suppliers and concluded that they were a bit on the crooked side, which maybe explains why he got rich. But he

decided he could build his own booster, and that was about two years ago. He is within a couple months of flying a thousand pound to low-earth-orbit class booster, which is going to carry a Navy test satellite (Figure 1). The price that he quotes is six million dollars per vehicle. And he thinks he can make money on this. My former office was responsible for trying to keep the Government people who wanted to add bureaucracy away from him and I think we were semi-successful. So he might actually be able to meet that price. But this is just one example; there are others in the United States also building rockets with private money. Now, the next one, and the one Im sure everyone is very familiar with, is the X Prize. Figure 2 shows one of the entrants which clearly has a very good chance of winning this prize, some time this year
perhaps, but there are others as well. They will basically do what the first step of Mercury did, although it will actually do one or two things better. It will fly it again in a few days and take three people up in a suborbital flight. I dont know what the exact amount that they spent on this is, but its probably a few tens of millions or less. Thats a pretty impressive effort done privately. I do want to emphasize that the equivalent

of the Mercury program has begun privately and I know that many of these folks have thoughts of moving on to orbital capabilities.


Privates CP Strike Force Alpha


Solvency robotics transportation

Private industries solve advanced robotics their transportation technology is better than NASAs
The Engineer Online 11
(June 17, 2011. Landing craft set to deliver exploration robot to the Moon. l/n)

Private-sector space exploration is a step closer following completion of the structural assembly of a landing craft that will deliver a rover robot to the Moon. Astrobotic Technology and Carnegie Mellon University researchers have completed structural assembly of a lunar landing craft that will deliver a robot called Red Rover to the Moon in 2014. The half-ton aluminium structure will now be shipped to Boeing facilities in El Segundo, California, for shake testing to confirm its

integrity and its compatibility with the SpaceX Falcon 9 launch vehicle. Astrobotic plans to land the spacecraft, carrying the robot and a commercial payload, on the Moon's Sea of Tranquillity or on the Marius Hills next to a recently discovered 'skylight' leading down into a volcanic cave. The solarpowered Red Rover will broadcast high-definition video to Earth as the four-wheeled robot explores the Moon. Astrobotic aims to claim up to $36m (22m) in awards, one of which is from the Google Lunar X Prize, a $30m competition for the first privately funded team to send a robot to the Moon, travel 500m and transmit video, images and data back to Earth. 'This lunar lander will be a key part of our initial Moon mission

and we expect to re-use this design for a series of missions,' said William 'Red' Whittaker, CMU professor of robotics and Astrobotics' chief executive officer and chief technical officer. When the craft is completed, the deck will support four spherical fuel tanks capable of carrying almost two tons of propellant. A single main engine controlling the lander's descent will sit below the
deck and eight thrusters on the deck's periphery will provide stability. A cone-shaped structure on top of the deck will connect to the 173lb Red Rover. The lander can also carry up to 242lb of commercial payload and will have rechargeable batteries and solar panels capable of providing 500W of power during daylight. In February, Astrobotic signed a contract with SpaceX to launch its mission on a Falcon 9 rocket, the spacecraft into a lunar trajectory for a four-day cruise to the Moon.

same vehicle thatNASA will use to send supplies to the International Space Station. The Falcon 9 will throw the Astrobotic


Privates CP Strike Force Alpha


Solvency transportation

Private sector solves transportation to space safer and faster than NASA designs Melanson 11
(Donald, NASA commits to Orion-based Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle for space exploration. AOL news. May 26, 2011. l/n. jdl) NASA Announces Key Decision For Next Deep Space Transportation System WASHINGTON -- NASA

has reached an important milestone for the next U.S. transportation system that will carry humans into deep space. NASA Administrator Charles Bolden announced today that the system will be based on designs originally planned for the Orion Crew Exploration Vehicle. Those plans now will be used to develop a new spacecraft known as the Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle (MPCV). "We are committed to human
exploration beyond low-Earth orbit and look forward to developing the next generation of systems to take us there," Bolden said. "The NASA Authorization Act lays out a clear path forward for us by handing off transportation to the International Space Station to our private sector partners, so we can focus on deep space exploration. As we aggressively continue our work on a heavy lift launch vehicle, we are moving forward with an existing contract to keep development of our new crew vehicle on track." Lockheed Martin Corp. will continue working to develop the

MPCV. The spacecraft will carry four astronauts for 21-day missions and be able to land in the Pacific Ocean off the California coast. The spacecraft will have a pressurized volume of 690 cubic feet, with 316 cubic feet of habitable space. It is designed to be 10 times safer during ascent and entry than its predecessor, the space shuttle. "This selection does not indicate a business as usual mentality for NASA programs," said Douglas Cooke, associate administrator for the agency's Exploration Systems Mission Directorate in Washington. "The Orion government and industry team has shown exceptional creativity in finding ways to keep costs down through management techniques, technical solutions and innovation."


Privates CP Strike Force Alpha


Solvency solves green space travel

Private sector development yields green technologies to get us off the rock Branson 6/23/11
(Richard. Space travel can have planet-friendly grounding The West Australian. L/N. jdl) We should no longer rely on old, expensive, dirty technology to transport satellites into space. The

industry must be modernised and made more sustainable, for financial reasons and for the health of the planet. In response to this challenge, we have been developing a greener solution in Mojave, California one that will have less impact on the environment and will be more cost effective. Our two-step launch process, which does not employ rockets until the aircraft reaches the stratosphere, uses less energy than other launch systems that rely on rockets . The carrier plane, WhiteKnightTwo, flies like a plane, lifting the secondary space plane to 50,000 feet. It was built using a lightweight all-carbon-

composite design and is powered by four Pratt and Whitney Canada PW308A engines; some of the most powerful, economic and efficient available. In time, as we learn more about how best to employ these technologies we are pioneering, we and other companies

may be able to apply this knowledge in other areas of the space and airline industries. In the second step of the launch, our rocket-powered space plane, SpaceShipTwo, detaches from the carrier plane at an altitude where the air is thinner and the space plane needs far less energy to reach sub-orbital space. The hybrid rocket motor is more efficient
and flexible than previous models. The fuel is a solid rubber compound and the oxidiser (the chemical that provides the oxygen to burn the fuel) is liquid nitrous oxide. This combination of solid and liquid fuels powers an economical rocket engine that can be controlled and shut down more easily than the solid-fuel rockets used in the 20th century. Its by-products of carbon dioxide, carbon monoxide, nitrogen and water vapour are preferable to those of the solid-fuel rockets, which burn ammonium compounds and aluminium. A sustainable future includes space travel and industry in

space, and for that reason, it is worth trying to develop these technologies to be energy-efficient and as low in emissions as possible. For our planet's health, we need to reach for the skies when developing green technologies for the space industry as well.


Privates CP Strike Force Alpha


Solvency - Space tourism

Private industry solves space tourism Richmond 2

(Elliot, Commercialization of Space.
Until solar power or some other form of space manufacturing becomes more practical, the most likely source of income might be tourism. Former Apollo astronaut Edwin "Buzz" Aldrin, Jr., the second man to walk on the Moon, has formed a private foundation, the Share Space Foundation, to promote space tourism. "People have come up to me and asked, 'When do we get a chance to go?'" Aldrin says. A 1997 survey of 1,500 Americans showed that 42 percent were interested in flying on a space cruise. Space tourism was encouraged by a 1998 NASA study that concluded it could grow into a $10-billiona-year industry in a few decades. The First Space Tourist. Space tourism became a reality in 2001, at least for one wealthy individual. Dennis Tito, an investment banker from California, originally paid an estimated $20 million to the Russian Space Agency, RKK Energia, for the privilege of being transported to the Russian Space Station Mir. However, before that event could take place, the aging Mir was allowed to burn up in the atmosphere. Tito subsequently made arrangements with the Russian Space Agency to be transported to the International Space Station (ISS) as a passenger on a Russian Soyuz flight. The other agencies operating the International Space Station originally objected strongly, but when it became apparent that Russia was going to fly Tito to the Space Station in spite of their objections, they reluctantly agreed to allow him to board. On April 30, 2001, Tito officially became the world's first space tourist when he boarded the International Space Station Alpha. Tito was required to sign liability releases and to agree to pay for anything he damaged while on board. NASA argued that the presence of Tito on the space station, which was not designed to receive paying guests, would hamper scientific work. The schedule of activities on board the ISS was curtailed during Tito's visit to allow for possible disruption. In spite of these difficulties, NASA and the other agencies operating the space station anticipate further requests from paying tourists.


Privates CP Strike Force Alpha


Solvency satellites
For SATCOM Capacity,

Private sector can effectively produce satellites Clark 11 (Stephen, staff writer- Spaceflight Now, U.S Military Turns To Private Sector
", 2-17) "The

commercial marketplace for procuring commercial satellite technologies is maturing very rapidly, and in some cases may be eclipsing what the military can do," Pino said at a commercial space conference in Washington last week. Pino
said government-owned satellites should focus on nuclear-hardened communications, contested environments and anti-jamming capabilities. Commercial satellites can provide the bulk of everyday communications for the military. Military satellite communications, or

MILSATCOM, was ahead of commercial technology 15 years ago, but Pino said he believes industry can provide better benign communications than the government can today. "I used to always think the role of commercial was to augment MILSATCOM," Pino said. "I'm unlearning what I used to think I knew. Commercial is here to stay."


Privates CP Strike Force Alpha


Solvency Solar Sails

CP solves solar sail technology governments cant shoulder the risks of development Page 5
(Jeremy, Staff writer. Space ship's solar sails set out for far shores of a new world The Sunday Times. THE worlds first solar sail is due to be launched tomorrow from a Russian nuclear submarine in the Barents Sea, heralding a new era of space travel. Cosmos 1 will be launched on a converted intercontinental ballistic missile and, once in orbit, will unfurl eight ultra-thin triangular sails, each about 14 metres (45ft) long, in a windmill formation. The private US-Russian consortium that developed the craft said that photons, or light particles, bouncing off the reflective sails will propel it. If successful, the mission will be as significant a milestone for space exploration as the invention of the fabric sail was for travel on Earth. Solar sails could replace rockets on some spacecraft within a decade and, with a boost from a satellite-based laser, reach Pluto within two years and Alpha Centauri, the closest star to Earth, within 1,000. Louis Friedman, the executive director of the Planetary Society, a private group which spearheaded the project, said: The thing about solar sailing is that you dont need to carry fuel. The real hope is that it becomes a way to travel between planets. And this is the only technology that leads in the long range to interstellar flight. The project also highlights the growing role played by the private sector in space exploration, once the exclusive preserve of government agencies. Dr Friedman was in charge of developing solar sails for Nasa in the 1970s, and worked on a project to use the technology to intercept Halleys Comet. But it was shelved because it was too expensive and deemed ahead of its time. Government agencies can afford it, but they get too ambitious, so projects become more expensive, he said. Then no one wants to take the risk.

Private sector solves solar sails federally funded competitions prove the private sector has the answers to tech hurdles Gilster 6 (Paul. Solar Sail Competition A Possibility
A solar sail competition to drive research? Its a great idea, and one that has been explored in the past. Indeed, a whole variety of groups have looked into the possibility, from Frances Union pour la Promotion de la Propulsion Photonique (U3P) to Russias Space Regatta Consortium and the Aero-Club de France. And official rules for the Luna Cup were approved by the International Astronautical Federation at the World Space Congress in August of 1992, outlining a solar sail race to the Moon. Now Im looking at a NASA announcement passed along by James Benford that outlines prize competitions to be conducted under the agencys Centennial Challenges umbrella. To quote from the document, By making awards based on actual achievements instead of proposals, Centennial Challenges seeks novel and lower-cost solutions to engineering obstacles in civil space and aeronautics from new sources of innovation in industry, academia, and the public. The challenge possibilities are outlined in a NASA Request for

Comments (RFC) document that explores competitions in a number of areas, ranging from low-cost space suits to lunar night power sources. And

the one that has caught Benfords eye involves solar sails. Heres the relevant information: The Station-Keeping Solar Sail Challenge is designed to promote the development of solar sail technology and the commercial services that may result from the ability to operate in novel orbits such as artificial Lagrange points. The Station-Keeping Solar Sail Challenge has two prizes. To win Prize One and the $2,500,000 purse, a Team must be the first to deploy a solar Sailcraft, demonstrate a resultant trajectory acceleration change of at least .05 millimeters per second squared, and fly along a trajectory that will pass through a defined target located at the first Sun-Earth Lagrange point (L1). To win Prize Two and the $2,500,000 purse, a Team must enter a defined region above or below the ecliptic plane at L1 and remain there for 90 consecutive days. Weve all had an education in what prize challenges can do for technology through the success of the Ansari X Prize competition and earlier, oft invoked challenges like the Orteig Prize that Lindbergh clinched by flying the Atlantic. I also like the wonderful science fiction association with Arthur C. Clarkes The Wind from the Sun, originally published in 1964 under the title Sunjammer. Using yacht racing as the metaphor, Clarke told a bold tale of a race to the Moon using solar sails and largely introduced the sail concept to the general public (although, to be sure, Jack Vances Gateway to Strangeness and Cordwainer Smiths haunting The Lady Who Sailed the Soul had appeared several years earlier in Amazing Stories and Galaxy respectively). We must hope for keen interest in a sail competition as one way to keep the technology developing in a time of steep budget cuts. Getting private industry and academia reenergized over solar sail work (especially after the failure of the Planetary Societys Cosmos 1) cannot help but advance the state of the art, and it is becoming increasingly clear that solar sails are one area where the private sectors contribution can be immense.


Privates CP Strike Force Alpha


Solvency Asteroid Mining

CP solves asteroid mining private sector has an added incentive from space tourism ANU News 11 (4/14/11. Space Tourism to Asteroid Mining. Space tourism may be growing rapidly in the future. However, to

support the expansion human beyond Earth, outside the Earths space industry must also be developed. People should seek a profitable business model in other aspects in addition to tourism, said Stern. Bob Gigelow already have one, with commercial space station. We need 50 Bob Gigelow, said Stern. Bob Bigelow, a businessman from the United States, is now developing a commercial space station under the banner of Bigelow Aerospace. Stern said that, in addition to the space station, there are still many opportunities that exist. Humans can develop the technology to mine asteroids or extract the metals from the water on the Moon to be used as rocket fuel to be sold at fueling Private sector solves asteroid mining theyll be able to process the ores in space Richmond 2
(Elliot, Commercialization of Space. Many space entrepreneurs are also considering the possibility of mining minerals and valuable ores from Earth's Moon and the asteroid belt. There are strong hints from radar data that there may be ice caps at the lunar poles in deep craters that never receive sunlight. This discovery has raised the possibility of a partially self-sustaining Moon colony. However, the most promising commercial possibilities for mining in space may come from near-Earth asteroids (NEAs). These are asteroids that intersect Earth's orbit. Many of these asteroids are easier to reach than the Moon. Certain kinds of asteroids are rich in iron, nickel, cobalt and platinum-group metals. A two-kilometer wide asteroid of the correct kind holds more ore than has been mined since the beginning of civilization. It would be difficult, impractical, expensive, and dangerous to transport this ore to Earth's surface. Thus, asteroid ores would be processed in space, and the metals used to build satellites, spaceships, hotels, and solar power satellites. Surprisingly, the most valuable resource to be mined from the asteroids might turn out to be water. This water could be supplied to the space hotels and other satellites, or solar energy could be used to break down the water into hydrogen and oxygen that could then be used as rocket fuel. Since all of the materials are already in orbit, rockets built in space and launched using fuel from water would cost much less
than rockets launched from Earth.


Privates CP Strike Force Alpha


A2 Perm

1. Permutation links to the _______ Net Benefit. Theres no NB to the perm. 2. Involving NASA necessarily means the private sector gets pushed out they empirically cant mind their own business Krukin 6
(Jeff, Executive Director Space Frontier Foundation. Unaffordable and Unsustainable: NASAs Failing Earth -to-orbit Transportation Strategy) As reported earlier, the Presidents Commission explicitly stated that (emphasis added): NASAs role must be limited to only those areas where there is irrefutable demonstration that only government can perform the proposed activity. The Commission recommends NASA recognize and implement a far larger presence of private industry in space operations with the specific goal of allowing private industry to assume the primary role of providing services to NASA, and most immediately in accessing low-Earth orbit. Compare these statements with page 34 of the NASA ESAS report (emphasis added): One of the key requirements to enable a successful human space exploration program is the development and implementation of a vehicle capable of transporting and housing crew on LEO, lunar, and Mars missions. This statement constitutes a complete rejection by NASA of Recommendation 3-1 of the Presidents Commission. ESAS did not provide any proof or argument that only NASA could do the ISS job, let alone an irrefutable demonstration. Instead, NASA chose to ignore the Presidents Commission, and appears to be institutionally committed to continue going aroun d in circles in low Earth orbit. And indeed, the facts show that NASA is not the only entity that can, or will, fly humans and cargo to the ISS. Until last July, the Russians provided the only human flights to the ISS post-Columbia, and RSC Energia, a Russian company, has funded and flown manned flights both to the Mir space station and the ISS, including two private U.S. citizens. Several other non-U.S. groups are actively designing and building systems for ISS cargo [e.g., Europes Automated Transfer Vehicle (ATV), and Japans HII Transfer Vehicle (HTV)].


Privates CP Strike Force Alpha



Privates CP Strike Force Alpha


A2: Perm do the CP

The term its in the resolution modifies the USFG and connotes possession 11

Its adj \its, ts\ Definition of ITS : of or relating to it or itself especially as possessor, agent, or object of an action
<going to its kennel> <a child proud ofits first drawings> <its final enactment into law>

The USFG doesnt own private industries which means the permutation is severance which is a voter for fairness and education: 1. Strategy skew- not knowing whether the plan will change makes it impossible for the negative to form a cohesive strategy. 2. Ground- the affirmative can permute to do the CP which hurts competitive equity. 3. Moving target the Aff can always shift out of DA links of CP mechanisms so we can never test its desirability on substantive issues. Private industry is distinct from the United States federal government.
Eban Goodstein,

2008 (Prof., Economics, Lewis & Clark College), ECONOMICS AND THE ENVIRONMENT, 2008, 399.

Photovoltaic power is so attractive that, in the long run, it is likely to be developed by private industry regardless of U.S. government policy. The question really is when and by whom?
[get t file card]

[get its is exclusive definition]


Privates CP Strike Force Alpha


Ext its definition

Its is the possessive form of it means the AFF must be USFG action 11 (
/ts/ Its

is the possessive form of it. belonging or relating to a thing, idea, place, animal etc. when it has already been mentioned or when it is obvious which one you are referring to The chair lay on its side. We were eager to see Las Vegas and all its manyattractions. The bull had a ring through its nose. 1. Its is possessive referring to exploration and/or development by the federal government
Carol-June Cassidy,

2008 (Managing Editor), CAMBRIDGE DICTIONARY OF AMERICAN ENGLISH, 2nd Ed., 2008, 464. Its:

Belonging to or connected with the thing or animal mentioned; the possessive form of it.


Privates CP Strike Force Alpha


Ext perm kills solvency

Permutation guts solvency privatization allows effective NASA development involving the fed means NASA has to double dip

Washington Times 10
(Robert S. Walker, was chairman of the Commission on the Future of the United States Aerospace Industry, and Newt Gengrich, on the board of governors of the National Space Society. Obamas brave reboot for NASA; Privatizing isnt just for Republicans The Washington Times. Feb, 15) But the ambition of the NASA leadership is much larger. Getting the agency out of the low-earth-orbit launch business frees up budget to do other exciting and valuable things. It permits development work to start in earnest on a heavy-lift launch vehicle capable of solar-system exploration. It enables expansion of the aeronautics budget, particularly in helping develop the next-generation air-traffic-control system, a technological goal that will pay huge dividends to the United States. It will permit new investments in robotic space missions and Earth science missions. In essence, the new spending plan takes NASA back to its roots of advanced technology development,experimentation and exploration.


Privates CP Strike Force Alpha


A2 plan leads to CP

Federal involvement kills commercial development unless private sectors get a piece of the R&D pie, they will fail Hedman 8
(Eric R., chief technology officer of Logic Design Corporation. If we build it, will they come? The Space Review) Potential space commerce markets quite often fall into the chicken-and-egg conundrum. For orbital space tourism to grow beyond the current novelty market for the superrich, the cost of launching into orbit has to come way down. For businesses to invest billions in reusable high-use launchers there has to be a proven market. The National Security Space Launch Report details the potential market for space launch through 2020. It projects a steady decline in the market through this time period. There are a number of reasons for this. One reason is that satellites are being designed with higher capability and longer life requiring fewer of them. Another reason is that more telecommunications traffic has moved from satellites to fiber optic cables. The report is absolutely correct that if things continue without new markets of either tourism or new technical applications, the space launch industry will wallow for decades.


Privates CP Strike Force Alpha


A2 Private tech unsafe

There is oversight and licensing hurdles to development means the private industry tech will be safe

Washington Times 10
(Robert S. Walker, was chairman of the Commission on the Future of the United States Aerospace Industry, and Newt Gengrich, on the board of governors of the National Space Society. Obamas brave reboot for NASA; Privatizing isnt just for Republicans The Washington Times. Feb, 15) Critics likely will raise the issue of safety and reliability. However, there already are rockets in the American inventory that are trusted by our government to launch billion-dollar satellites and have proved to be quite reliable. Those vehicles can be modified to carry human crews safely.

New rockets under development have been designed from the outset with manned missions in mind, and with the assurance of NASA business, necessary large-scale development can be done so they can be added to the commercial inventory. The plan is to have bothNASA and the Federal Aviation Administration provide licensing oversight, determine safety requirements and approve all launches.

Private sector can handle accidents their safety regulations are stringent enough Sirdofsky 10 (Danny, Medill News Service. NASA leader attempts to quell fears
Astronaut safety was listed as the top priority of the Senate appropriations subcommittee that oversees NASAs budget proposals. Specifically, Sen. Barbara Mikulski, D-Md., the chairwoman, wanted to know whether the safety ratings systems would remain constant from direct NASA control of spacecraft construction to private industry management. Garver attempted to quell these fears in her speech. The bottom line is that NASA

will be there every step of the way and wont let astronauts fly in vehicles that have not successfully gone through a rigorous human rating process, period, she said. If you really want to break this down, lives already depend on commercial companies because industry is trusted to launch certain critical national security measures upon which the lives of our troops overseas depend. Further, our commercial partners have already demonstrated significant reliability. Rep. Parker Griffith, R-Al., whose district includes NASAs Marshall Space Flight Center in Huntsville,
said he is worried that private companies would not be able to stay afloat financially if an accident happened. Which company, if we turned manned space flight over to them, could survive the Columbia accident? If it were a private company, it would be bankrupted, he said. If we turn a critical component of our national security over to a company that reports to Wall Street or its hedge fund investors, and it has an accident and decides to cease development, where is America? Garver also tried to address contracting out manned spaceflight to private industry. For som e reason there is a disconnect that people are assuming that for us commercial means only entrepreneurial start-ups. It is absolutely not the case, she said. Eighty-five percent of NASAs dollars (in general, over time) go to private industry. We believe they are very mature in this field. NASA civil servants manage contractors and contractors do this work. So what we are talking about is using many of those very same contractors in a new way to have a better value to the tax payer through instead of renewing cost-plus contracting, doing fixed price contracting.


Privates CP Strike Force Alpha


NB Competitiveness

Commercialization opens up new space enterprises and bolsters competitiveness Washington Times 10
(Robert S. Walker, was chairman of the Commission on the Future of the United States Aerospace Industry, and Newt Gengrich, on the board of governors of the National Space Society. Obamas brave reboot for NASA; Privatizing isnt just for Republicans The Washington Times. Feb, 15) Reliance on commercial launch services will provide many other benefits. It will open the doors to more people having the opportunity to go to space. It has the potential of creating thousands of new jobs, largely the kind of high-tech work to which our nation should aspire. In the same way the railroads opened the American West, commercial access can open vast new opportunities in space. All of this new activity will expand the space enterprise, and in doing so, will improve the economic competitiveness of our country.


(The Washington Quarterly; Lexis)

The United States is unlikely to preserve its military and technological dominance if the U.S. economy declines seriously. In such an environment, the domestic economic and political base for global leadership would diminish and the United States would probably incrementally withdraw from the world, become inwardlooking, and abandon more and more of its external interests. As the United States weakened, others would try to fill the Vacuum. To sustain and improve its economic strength, the United States must maintain its technological lead in the economic realm. Its success will depend on the choices it makes. In the past, developments such as the
agricultural and industrial revolutions produced fundamental changes positively affecting the relative position of those who were able to take advantage of them and negatively affecting those who did not. Some argue that the world may be at the beginning of another such transformation, which will shift the sources of wealth and the relative position of classes and nations. If the United States fails to recognize the change and adapt its institutions, its relative position will necessarily worsen.

US leadership is essential to prevent global nuclear exchange.

Under the third option, the United States would seek to retain global leadership and to preclude the rise of a global rival or a return to multipolarity for the indefinite future. On balance, this is the best long-term guiding principle and vision. Such a vision is desirable not as an end in itself, but because a

world in which the United States exercises leadership would have tremendous advantages. First, the global environment would be more open and more receptive to American values -- democracy, free markets, and the rule of law. Second, such a world would have a better chance of dealing cooperatively with the world's major problems, such as nuclear proliferation, threats of regional hegemony by renegade states, and low-level conflicts. Finally, U.S. leadership would help preclude the rise of another hostile global rival, enabling the United States and the world to avoid another global cold or hot war and all the attendant dangers, including a global nuclear exchange. U.S. leadership would therefore be more
conducive to global stability than a bipolar or a multipolar balance of power system.


Privates CP Strike Force Alpha


NB Spending DA

Empirically, federal projects cost several times more than private development Gasser 6/23/11 (Andrew. Press Release: TEA Party Launches Space Platform. jdl)
Recently, a report mandated by Congress found that a private upstart company designed and built two new launch systems, and several generations of a new rocket engine all for roughly $390 million taxpayer dollars. The report estimated it would have cost NASA anywhere from $1.7 billion to $4 billion dollars to develop those same capabilities using standard NASA acquisition approaches. Constellation cost the US Taxpayer over $11 billion dollars and produced only test articles, no flown hardware. When it was cancelled last year, its schedule had already slipped by more than a year for each year it had existed. And even NASAs vaunted robotic science projects are plagued by cost overruns and delays. The James Webb Space Telescope (JWST) is suffering the same fate of Constellation. Originally priced at just under $1 billion dollars with a launch date of 2010, JWST is currently $5 billion dollars over budget and eight years behind schedule.


Privates CP Strike Force Alpha



Political will for NASA funding is dead in the water, but there is bipartisan support for funding private firms Wittington 6/14/11
(Mark R., the author of Children of Apollo and The Last Moonwalker. He has written on space subjects for a variety of periodicals, including The Houston Chronicle, The Washington Post, USA Today, the L.A. Times, and The Weekly Standard. SHMTVnews. jdl)
This drew a sharp rebuke from Gingrich, who responded: John (referring to moderator CNNs John King), you mischaracterized me. I didnt say end the space program. We built the transcontinental railroads without a national department of railroads. I said you can get into space faster, better, more effectively, more creatively if you decentralized it, got out of Washington, and cut out the bureaucracy. Its not about getting rid of the space program, its about getting to a real space program that works. Gingrich was not specific about how he proposed to do this, though in times past he has favored a series of prizes to encourage private sector exploration of the moon and Mars. Gingrich has also publicly praised Obamas plan to

provide direct subsidies for commercial space firms, according to an op-ed he co-wrote in the Washington Times. None of the candidates aside from Gingrich and Pawlenty was willing to get very specific about what their vision for space exploration is which suggests that none of them were prepared with an answer. It might behoove at least some of the candidates to formulate an answer. The Houston Chronicle gave a misleading verdict to the effect that, Republican presidential candidates agree: No more federal money for human space flight. One suspects that is not the actual position of most of not all of the candidates, even Gingrich, who prefers some kind of private sector incentive package rather than funding NASA space programs. But if the Republicans dont want to be left open for attacks by

other candidates or even President Obama for wanting to defund the space program, they need to develop their own space policies sooner rather than later.


Privates CP Strike Force Alpha




Privates CP Strike Force Alpha


A2: ptx NB private companies controversial

The use of private companies is controversial it smacks at national pride Washington Times 10
(Robert S. Walker, was chairman of the Commission on the Future of the United States Aerospace Industry, and Newt Gengrich, on the board of governors of the National Space Society. Obamas brave reboot for NASA; Privatizing isnt just for Republicans The Washington Times. Feb, 15)

The use of commercial launch companies to carry cargo and crews into low earth orbit will be controversial, but it should not be. The launch-vehicle portion of the Constellation program was so far behind schedule that the United States was not going to have independent access for humans into space for at least five years after the shutdown of the shuttle. We were going to rely upon the Russians to deliver our astronaut personnel to orbit. We have long had a cooperative arrangement with the Russians for space transportation but always have possessed our own
capability. The use of commercial carriers in the years ahead will preserve that kind of independent American access.


Privates CP Strike Force Alpha


A2: privatization NB

NASA approves of partial privatization of space. Means no crowd out of private industries. Dinerman 09 (Taylor, Consultant Department of Defense and Reporter Space Review, NASA Approves Partial Privatization of the Space
Program, 5-11,,2933,519609,00.html) Last week,

acting NASA Administrator Chris Scolese told a congressional subcommittee that the agency plans to give $150 million in stimulus-package money to private companies that design , build and service their own rockets and crew capsules spacecraft that could put astronauts in orbit while NASA finishes building the space shuttle's replacements . On Thursday, the White House ordered a top-to-bottom review of the entire manned space program, one that will be led by former Lockheed Martin CEO Norman Augustine, long considered a friend of private space ventures . Both developments show that the once-reluctant space agency and the Obama administration are ready to support commercial human spaceflight. It's a dramatic change, one that could reduce America's dependency on Russia for the next halfdecade after the space shuttle program ends, and one that could kick-start a space program that some see as having stalled for 40 years.
"Our government space program has become over-burdened with too many objectives, and not enough cash," says William Watson, executive director of the Space Frontier Foundation, a Houston-based group promoting commercial space activities . Watson said that allowing

private companies to handle routine orbital duties could free up NASA to focus on returning to the moon and going to Mars . Scolese said that $80 million of the stimulus money will be awarded to the company that demonstrates the best "crewed launch demo" a prototype, based on existing cargo-capsule designs, modified for humans. The agency was careful to note that the competition will be an open one. Two well-positioned spaceflight companies , SpaceX and Orbital Sciences, are seen as the leading contenders. Each already has a full line of rockets and cargo capsules ready to go , and each company's capsules can be converted to transport astronauts . Both firms were tight-lipped about their suddenly increased opportunities. Orbital Sciences didn't respond to queries; SpaceX said only that it was "encouraged by NASA's commercial crewed services initiative. " NASA quickly became much friendlier to commercial ventures . In late 2005, then-agency Administrator Michael Griffin announced that NASA was considering buying crew and cargo transportation services to the ISS from private industry . "We believe," he said, "that when we engage the engine of competition, these services will be provided in a more cost -

effective fashion than when the government has to do it," Griffin said. In 2006, the first round of the Commercial Orbital Transportation Services (COTS) contracts was won by SpaceX corporation of Hawthorne, Calif. , which received a contract worth $278 million, and by Rocketplane Kistler of Oklahoma City, which was supposed to get $207 million.


Privates CP Strike Force Alpha


Privates bad - ILAW

Private launches operate in a complicated legal gray zone that spurs international legal controversies
Beck 9
(Brian, THE NEXT, SMALL, STEP FOR MANKIND: FIXING THE INADEQUACIES OF THE INTERNATIONAL SPACE LAW TREATY REGIME TO ACCOMMODATE THE MODERN SPACE FLIGHT INDUSTRY 2009 Albany Law Journal of Science & Technology Albany Law Journal of Science & Technology. 19 Alb. L.J. Sci. & Tech. 1) Suppose that a private orbital spacecraft is launched from the United States and registered with the United States in 2011, carrying a pilot from the United States and two passengers from Germany and Great Britain. The ship takes off from Texas, but due to defects in the spacecraft design, lands in Jamaica or in Jamaica's territorial waters, with some debris from the ship falling off the spacecraft, destroying Jamaican buildings and killing at least one Jamaican national. The passengers on the spacecraft land safely and are rescued by the Jamaican government, but Jamaica refuses to return the astronauts until they are tried for manslaughter, believing that the disaster may have been due to the negligence of the astronauts or the corporation. Jamaica plans to imprison any convicted astronauts accordingly. n83 [*18] Such a scenario would present many dilemmas for international law, as the Rescue Agreement was never meant to handle such a scenario. The Rescue Agreement was written at a time when spacecraft

were launched by states, states were the parties solely responsible for their operation, and only Americans flew on American spacecraft while only Soviet nationals flew on Soviet spacecraft. First, there is the question of who is considered an astronaut. The Rescue Agreement uses the term, "personnel of a spacecraft" to describe those who must be returned, which may refer only to the crew of a spacecraft. n84 Astronauts are accorded a very high status under the Outer Space Treaty; they are considered "envoys of mankind." n85 The OuterSpace Treaty may even discourage paying passengers on board a spacecraft; Article I states that "outer space ... shall be free for exploration and use by all States without discrimination of any kind, on a basis of equality and in accordance with international law, and there shall be free access to all areas of celestial bodies." n86 This language may be interpreted as discouraging an industry that allows the rich easy access to space flight. It is not inconsistent with the language of the treaties for paying passengers to not be considered astronauts covered by the Rescue Agreement, in which case any claim for the return of the passengers would not be covered by the Agreement but would have to fall under other international law norms. The pilot, meanwhile, while probably a "personnel of a spacecraft," is

also put in a bind. The Rescue Agreement declares an absolute duty to return rescued astronauts to the launching authority if the landing was due to "accident, distress, emergency or unintended landing." n87 It is unclear whether a spacecraft crash caused by the pilot's negligence would be considered a landing due to, "accident, distress, emergency or unintended landing." n88 If such a crash is not covered by the Rescue Agreement, then there would be no duty to return the astronauts under the Agreement. On the other hand, if a crash caused by the pilot's negligence is "owing to accident," then there would be a duty to return the astronaut under the Rescue Agreement. The [*19] treaty is simply unclear on the issue. In other areas of transportation law, states whose nationals are victims of a crime of negligence typically have jurisdiction to prosecute the individuals responsible. In maritime law, sailors who have been charged with a form of negligent homicide have been prosecuted by the country offended rather than the state under which their ship was flagged. The Permanent Court of International Justice ("P.C.I.J.") so held in the S.S. Lotus case in 1927, in which French sailors were prosecuted for manslaughter in Turkey for causing a collision that killed eight Turkish citizens. n89 Even though the sailors had committed their crime on a French flagged ship, the court held that they were subject to Turkish jurisdiction once they stepped on Turkish soil. n90 But, the P.C.I.J. in that case did not find a general customary rule upholding a state's jurisdiction over foreign nationals for crimes committed against that state's citizens. n91 Our next problem in resolving the presented scenario is who gets to call for the return of the pilot and passengers. As with the issue of whether a nation may hold astronauts for criminal charges related to a spacecraft accident, the Rescue Agreement may override general principles of international law, but rigid application of the Rescue Agreement in its current form leads to absurdities. The Rescue Agreement requires the return of rescued astronauts "to representatives of the launching authority." n92 In the presented example, the launching authority is the United States, and if the duty to return applies, then the astronauts would have to be returned to the United States. However, if only the launching authority has rights in this scenario, then we have an odd situation where the German and British passengers can only demand return to the United States and not to their home countries, while Germany and Great Britain would have no right under the treaty to demand the return of their nationals. This state of affairs appears to conflict with basic human rights law. The

Universal Declaration of Human Rights establishes an explicit right of a person to return to his or her own country. Obviously, this right can be overridden for reasons such as criminal prosecution, but it is a [*20] basic right nonetheless. n93 It is possible to imagine a scenario here where the launching authority insists on the return of its nationals, but is unwilling to demand the return of passengers who are not citizens of the launching authority, in which case the status of the passengers becomes vague. Once again, it is a scenario where the treaty regime needs to be clarified so that private space companies can know how their personnel and passengers will be treated under international law. Absent the space law treaties, surviving passengers and pilots in the Jamaica hypothetical would be treated like any other person in the wrong country under basic international law, but it is unclear that spacefaring nations wish for astronauts to be treated like any other person. The space law treaties treat astronauts "as envoys of mankind," unique explorers deserving of special treatment from the nations of the world.
Even without this noble language, a spacecraft passenger is in less control of his landing spot in the event of an accident than an airplane passenger, and perhaps should therefore not be subject to the landing nation's whim. There are substantial arguments for treating astronauts differently from airplane pilots and airplane passengers, and for treating space explorers differently from space tourism pilots and from space tourists, and those arguments should be resolved before space tourism becomes a reality. This scenario could occur as soon as private companies

begin manned orbital launches. One company, SpaceX, is on track to begin testing its manned orbital vehicle, the Dragon, in 2009. n95 The Dragon capsule is intended to be able to fly seven passengers into orbit and dock

11 with the International Space Station. n96 One hopes that the legal situation of the passengers under international law will be resolved before a launch, and certainly before a disaster happens.

Privates CP Strike Force Alpha


International law promotes the cooperation necessary to prevent nuclear war, environmental degradation, and economic decline R. A. Mullerson, Head of the Department of International Law at the Institute of State and Law of the Academy of Sciences of the USSR, July 1989, The American Journal of International Law, 83 A.J.I.L. 494, p. 495 In spite of different class approaches to social problems and different schools of thought, there is only one worldwide science of international law. New global problems challenging humanity -- the threat of nuclear holocaust, environmental crises, economic difficulties of the Third World -- can be solved only by all states acting together, by the common efforts of all nations. In the contemporary world, interests and values common to all mankind must prevail over the interests of single nations, parties or social classes. Moreover, I think that nowadays values and interests common to all mankind cannot be contrary to the interests of individual states. Avoidance of nuclear holocaust, disarmament, the resolution of environmental problems and mutually beneficial cooperation between nations in all fields of human activity are in the interest of all. Too often, when statesmen or politicians speak of the national interest and
justify their actions by the notion of national interest, they are not talking about genuine national interest but, rather, about the self-interest of certain influential groups.


Privates CP Strike Force Alpha


Ext Ilaw impact

Upholding international law is necessary for survival the alternative is environmental collapse and global WMD wars Malaysian Medical Association, September 6, 2002, 11th September Day of Remembrance,

We call on all governments to place their foreign and domestic policies and their behaviour under the scrutiny of international law and international institutions. Each government must take primary responsibility for ending its own contribution to the cycle of violence. As citizens, we are expected to abide by the law. We expect no less from governments. This is a necessary part of honouring the lives of so many men, women and children whose deaths are commemorate. At a time when global problems should be solved by cooperating and complying with multilateral legally-binding treaties, and by embracing the rule of law as valuable instruments for building common security and safe-guarding the long-term, collective interests of humanity, there are unmistable signs that powerful states are taking unilateral action, setting aside international treaties, and undermining international law. The principle of the rule of law implies that even the most powerful must comply with the law, even if it is difficult or costly or when superior economic, military and diplomatic power may seem to make compliance unnecessary. The destruction of the symbols of American economic power and military might on 11th September is a salutary reminder that military power, including the possession of nuclear weapons, does not deter terrorists or confer security or
invulnerability. It has prompted the Bush administration to declare war on terror and convinced it that a military response is the best way to fight terrorism on a global scale, without considering alternative, more effective ways of combating terrorism, such as addressing the root causes of terrorism. The greatest betrayal of those who died on 11th September 2001 would be to not recognise that there are non-violent ways of resolving conflict. This is a difficult, uncertain path to take, whereas violence and war are easy, predictable options. The lesson of 11th September is that our

collective survival depends upon forging cooperative, just and equitable relationships with each other; in rejecting violence and war; and in pursuing non-violent resolutions to conflict. The alternative is a world perpetually divided, continually at war, and possibly destroying itself through environmental degradation or the use of weapons of mass destruction.


Privates CP Strike Force Alpha


No Solvency Incentives fail

Incentives cant overcome the massive amount of capital needed on the front -end of investment Jobes 5
(Douglass O., president of the S p ace Settlement Institute, a think tank d ed icated to finding ways to make space settlement happen in our life times . Lunar Land Claims Recognition: Designing the Ultimate Incentive for Space Infrastructure Development. Space Times May/June 2005.)

Private investment is needed to create much of the space infrastructure needed for doing business, but without the space infrastructure to allow the establishment of profitable businesses, the private investment is unlikely to happen. This is the catch-22 of space development in today's current political and economic environment. A catalyst needs to be found to motivate the private sector to invest not just millions or tens of millions but billions of dollars to build the necessary structures in space. Incentives fail no money for them in a bad economy Jobes 5
(Douglass O., president of the S p ace Settlement Institute, a think tank d ed icated to finding ways to make space settlement happen in our life times . Lunar Land Claims Recognition: Designing the Ultimate Incentive for Space Infrastructure Development. Space Times May/June 2005.)

Private industry is motivated by the potential for profit, so a considerable return on investment is needed. Some have proposed government cash prizes and even huge tax breaks for companies that help to develop space. Both of those concepts involve an obvious deal-killer: they both would drain the U.S. Treasury at a time when budget deficits have reached record levels. It is very unlikely that Congress would approve multi-billiondollar, governmentfunded space incentives.


Privates CP Strike Force Alpha


No Solvency

The enormous cost of launch vehicles makes private sector involvement difficult Richmond 2
(Elliot, Commercialization of Space. One major obstacle to commercially successful space manufacturing is the enormous cost of launching a vehicle into Earth orbit. Launch costs using either expendable rockets or the Space Shuttle are currently between $10,000 and $20,000 per kilogram. This high cost led NASA to invest in a prototype launch vehicle called the "X-33." It was hoped that this prototype would lead to a lightweight, fully reusable space plane. Lockheed Martin was building the prototype and originally planned to follow it with a commercial vehicle called the "Venture Star." However, NASA withdrew funding for the project, leaving it 75 percent complete. Instead NASA created a new program, the Space Launch Initiative, to continue research and development of reusable launch vehicles. Prizes fail-too risky Macauley 04
(Molly, Senior Fellow- Recources for the Future, Advantages and Disadvantages of Prizes in a Portfolio of Financial Incentives for Space Activities, 15-7, Much of the preceding discussion has emphasized the historical success of prizes but they have

some disadvantages. These include: no provision for up-front cash flow to defray expenses; - duplication of research effort if many individuals or groups compete; - uncertainty about whether the innovation can succeed; and - delays in the pace of innovation if a lot of time elapses before it is determined that there are no winners. In addition, prizes are unlikely to meet other social objectives that government sponsorship in general, or NASA sponsorship in particular, has traditionally pursued. For example, prizes do not necessarily further these goals that NASA has frequently set forth as success measures in its R&D policy: - increase the number of academic researchers; - increase the number of scientists and engineers; - create jobs. 8 - influence political support by way of job creation; - broaden the participation of traditionally underrepresented groups in science and technology; and - prop up a particular supplier or group of suppliers to ensure choice (say, to ensure that
a range of capacities is available in space transportation by dividing business among companies that offer different classes of vehicle lift) In addition,

there are some disadvantages of government-sponsored prizes compared with privately sponsored prizes: Government typically cannot commit to funding beyond a fiscal year, thus limiting the timing of the prize competition and cutting short the time that might be required for the technical achievement it awards. - Any uncertainty about whether the prize will actually be awarded due to government budgets or changes in administration will weaken if not eliminate incentives to compete. Intellectual property rights to the achievement may need to reside with the competitor to induce participation, even though the taxpayer, by financing the prize, could fairly claim rights.

No private sector lead on new missions even potential monetary gains dont solve..
Livingston 00
(David M., business consultant, financial advisor, and strategic planner, 8/10/2000, From Earth to Mars: A Cooperative Plan, It is also important to realize that the

private sector does not yet agree that a manned mission to Mars might offer potential benefits and profits. The private sector is simply unable to convincingly move past the cost and risk factors, the technical and engineering issues, and the precedent that an important space mission is the responsibility of the government, though the private sector may obtain lucrative government contracts for work on the project. Finally, just as government leaders must convince taxpayers, leaders in the private sector must convince their shareholders of the mission's value. The high cost of the mission will make this all the more difficult .
Shareholder value is of paramount importance, especially in our current economic climate. While it is possible to demonstrate how investing in a manned mission to Mars can contribute to shareholder and public value, such efforts are not underway at this time, largely because there is no manned mission to Mars on the planning board.


Privates CP Strike Force Alpha


Ext no solvency

Private actors have no solvency- very limited capabilities in terms of space exploration Ocregister, 10
(Peter Navarro: Privatization in space wise, to a point May 17, 2010|://

While we wholeheartedly agree with the president's privatization goals, we remain skeptical of the implementation schedule and wary of the implications for national security. While we have long been big fans of the privatesector companies working with passion in this field, we must also keep it real. At least to date, the private space sector has demonstrated very limited capability to move either cargo or crews into orbit or to dock with anything. Moreover, none is human-rated for orbital space flight while there are very difficult challenges requiring large infrastructure and access to larger investment.

Private sector investment wont spur new missions no leadership capability.

Livingston 00
(David M., business consultant, financial advisor, and strategic planner, 8/10/2000, From Earth to Mars: A Cooperative Plan,

Regarding the private sector, some of the same components are missing, such as leadership, education, commitment, and acceptance. Unfortunately, the private sector has been conditioned to believe that our space program is the proper function of government. This is to be expected since the commercial space industry of today, while highly profitable and successful, was initiated by government policy and acts of Congress. In addition, space

commercialization developed on a dual track with the military's usage of space and communication satellites, even to the extent of using military rockets for all commercial satellite launches. The private sector simply is not prepared to lead the way with something as unique,

costly, risky, and new as putting humans on Mars. It still looks to the public sector for leadership, support, and encouragement. Thus, there is no private-sector leadership that can do what public sector leadership has the opportunity to do. While the opportunity does exist for developing private-sector leadership in this field, it is not within the culture of the private sector at this time to do so. This fact needs to change before the private sector can help lead the way to putting people on Mars.


Privates CP Strike Force Alpha


Perm do the CP

1. Permutation do the CP a. The CP is normal means 85% of NASAs current budget goes directly to the private sector Sirdofsky 10 (Danny, Medill News Service. NASA leader attempts to quell fears

some reason there is a disconnect that people are assuming that for us commercial means only entrepreneurial start-ups. It is absolutely not the case, she said. Eighty-five percent of NASAs dollars (in general, over time) go to private industry. We believe they are very mature in this field. NASA civil servants manage contractors and

contractors do this work. So what we are talking about is using many of those very same contractors in a new way to have a better value to the tax payer through instead of renewing cost-plus contracting, doing fixed price contracting.


Privates CP Strike Force Alpha


India Aff Perm

Perm solves best -- US-India joint cooperation guarantees success.

Dinerman 09 - author and journalist based in New York City (6/08/09, Taylor, The Space Review, Should India and the US cooperate on
space solar power?, Fortunately both India and the US have space programs

and technologies that could, if developed together and possibly with other interested nations such as Japan, bring SSP systems into service sometime late next decade or the early 2020s. With its commitment to develop a new low cost reusable spaceplane, the India Space Research Organisation (ISRO) is already working on one of the key technologies needed for an SSP system. Indian participation in both private and public SSP programs should be welcomed by the US. the US government should make an effort to facilitate this by helping with visas and work permits for qualified Indian scientists and engineers. Recent moves towards reforming the notorious International
Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR) should include ensuring that SSP systems are covered by the Department of Commerce regulators rather than by the State Department, which has gained such a sorry reputation in this area. In the near term the new Indo-US renewable energy

partnership would seem to be the right place to start this collaboration. Together the partners can identify what will be needed in the way of technological and scientific investments over the next decade in order to make SSP a reality. India has lots of talent that can be committed to this effort and so does the US. In fact, the kind of ambitious idealism that we saw at NASA during the Apollo years could be engendered by this goal. Safe, clean,
abundant energy from the Sun is not an impossible dream. The technology has not been perfected and the need for new, low-cost Earth-to-orbit transportation systems is as urgent as ever, but there are no requirements for any scientific breakthroughs. The Space Solar Power Study released by the US National Security Space Office (NSSO) in October 2007 found that since the 1977 Reference study, there had been: (a) imp rovements in PV [photovoltaic] efficiency from about 10% (1970s) to more than 40% (2007); (b) increases in robotics capabilities from simple tele-operated manipulators in a few degrees of freedom (1970s) to fully autonomous robotics with insect-class intelligence and 30100 degrees of freedom (2007); (c) increases in the efficiency of solid state devices from around 20% (1970s) to as much as 70%90% (2007); (d) improvements in materials for structures from simple aluminum (1970s) to advanced composites including nanotechnology composites (2007) The 2007 NSSO study showed just how far the technology had come and why space solar power is now a more viable alternative for very large-scale power generation than ever before. India and the US are

natural partners in the development of this technology and the opportunity provided by the planned renewable energy partnership is a perfect place to begin.


Privates CP Strike Force Alpha


Aff CP Fails (General)

India cant solve -- launch designs, lack of credibility, and no capabilities. Kluger 10 senior writer for TIME, won First Place in the Overseas Press Club of America's Whitman

Bassow Award for best reporting in any medium on international environmental issues, staff writer for Discover magazine, writer and editor for New York Times Business World Magazine, Family Circle and Science Digest, licensed attorney, and intermittently taught science journalism at New York University, co-author, along with astronaut Jim Lovell, of Lost Moon: The Perilous Voyage of Apollo 13, (Jeffrey, Dec. 29, 2010, New Delhi, We Have a Problem: India's Space Woes,8599,2040085,00.html) "The GSLV has had only a 50% success rate," says Ajey Lele, space expert at the Institute of Defense and Security Analysis in New Delhi. "India has wanted to have the technology and the facility [to launch heavy payloads] on its own soil. Now that will not happen in the near future." But
with China, Japan, the U.S. and other countries all chasing the same global business with their own fleet of rockets, the near future may be all the time the Indian program has. India has had a big if unheralded presence in the space community for a long time. The Indian Space Research
Organization (ISRO) essentially India's NASA was established in 1969 with the mission of focusing exclusively on launching communications and Earth observation satellites, programs that have immediate benefits for people on the ground and were seen as the only legitimate business a country as poor as India had in space. ISRO did well with its limited portfolio, but things changed in 1999, when the country puffed up after a series of successful nuclear tests the year before decided to aim higher, planning for unmanned missions to the moon and manned missions into Earth orbit. In 2008, the Chandrayaan-1 lunar spacecraft made good on part of that promise, not only successfully orbiting the moon, but making a significant indeed, landmark discovery about the surprising quantity of water mixed in with the lunar soil. Meantime, the smaller predecessor of the GSLV was making a name for itself as a reliable commercial launcher , with a string of 16 successful

launches against no failures. The GSLV was seen as the next logical step in a rapidly advancing program: a three-stage, heavy-lift rocket suitable for bigger payloads and crews. But the ambitious design of the rocket may be its undoing. The problem that led to the

explosion occurred in the first stage a giant liquid-fueled engine surrounded by four, strap-on solid fuel rockets. Strap-ons, as designers know, are a great way to add oomph to a booster; the more power you need, the more solids you attach. But multiple engines mean increased complexity not to mention the need to coordinate the exact amount of thrust each motor is producing, the exact moment ignition takes place and the tricky acoustical business of controlling vibrations. The fact that it's that stage that failed this time was not surprising but it was disappointing, since in the April launch it worked perfectly; it was the second, simpler stage that failed that time. Another former ISRO chief called the nature of this most recent accident nothing short of "a national setback." For the moment it's unclear whether it's a setback the space agency can recover from in time. Sorting out multiple glitches in multiple stages is a time-consuming business, and even one more failure could irreparably destroy the GSLV's image. Ultimately, the global market for heavy-lift flight could simply leave India behind. Uncertain too will be the scheduled 2015 launch of the Chandrayaan II, a joint Indian-Russian moon mission that's intended to carry both a lunar satellite and a rover and was slated to be launched on a GSLV. Even less certain is the launch of the first Indian astronauts or vyomanauts a mission that did not yet even have a target date and is less likely than ever to get one until the big booster proves itself. India's economic and technological growth have been extraordinary over the past ten years, but as the U.S. and Russia learned over the previous fifty, there is nothing that challenges a country's scientific and industrial base like trying to take those first steps into space. The GSLV may yet recover, and vyomanauts may yet ride it to glory, but the path won't be easy. It never, ever is. The Indian space program is ridden with failure and a recent explosion derails exploration. AFP 10 (Failed rocket launch may damage India's space ambitions, say experts, December 26, The explosion of an Indian space rocket is likely to hit the country's efforts to push further into the global market for launching commercial satellites, experts warned Sunday. The unmanned Geosynchronous Satellite Launch Vehicle (GSLV) blew up live on television Saturday less than one minute after launch, at the start of a mission to put a communications satellite into orbit. The accident was the second setback for India this year following the crash in April of a rocket that was meant to showcase domestically built booster technology, from the same site in the southern state of Andhra Pradesh. On Sunday, scientists at the Indian space project began their search into the cause of the latest failure. "Teams

are looking at the data to find out the reason for what happened," Indian Space Research Organisation (ISRO) spokesman S. Satish said. "A failure analysis committee is likely to be constituted in the next one or two days." The GSLV veered from its intended flight path and was intentionally blown up 47 seconds after take-off at a height of about eight kilometres (five miles) over the Bay of Bengal. Experts called on the ISRO to go back to drawing board with the 1.75-billion-rupee (39-million-dollar) GSLV before attempting to offer the rocket as a platform for international satellite launches. They also

warned that India's ambitions to send its first manned space flight in 2016 were under threat. "Saturday's

11 failure will certainly produce delays," space scientist M.N. Vahia told the Times of India. "If my payload was being flown
on this mission using a GSLV, I would certainly want this rocket to be tested and evaluated more thoroughly. "What happened is unnerving as India's reputation as a reliable space launching country has taken a serious dent."

Privates CP Strike Force Alpha


The CP fails -- bureaucratic messiness. Singh, 4-19-2011 staff writer (Seema, April 19th, 2011, ISRO's Dead End in Space
for cure . And sadly ISRO ranks low in those departments . Take the case of the crash of GSLV-F06 (with an imported cryogenic engine) in December 2010. A Failure Analysis Committee was formed to look into it but experts associated with the exercise say they are not aware if it is completed and a cohesive report prepared. The Committee chairman, former ISRO boss G. Madhavan Nair, had given varying explanations as the work was in progress and a final report would have cleared the air. There is a larger review under way and its findings are disturbing. The GSLV Review Committee, led by another former ISRO chief K. Kasturirangan, says there is no pattern to failures, and points to a lack of rigour and attention to details . This had not been the case before. When
But then, a culture of openness, leadership and a high standard of accountability are the prescription earlier launch systems such as ASLV failed, scientists knew what they didnt know. The case of the locally made cryogenic engine is more puzzling. To understand and pinpoint the error in the April 2010 experiment, ISRO must adopt a complete mathematical model to simulate the cryogenic system through which it could test the engine under varied, even hypothetical, conditions. For instane, if the booster pump hadnt worked properly because it was submerged in liquid hydrogen, the test would have revealed it. But ISRO hasnt done such a test. Along with empirical understanding [from

experiments], you need to have physical understanding [from simulation], says B.N. Raghunandan, professor of aerospace engineering at Indian Institute of Science, Bangalore. The mishandling of situations didnt stop with technical issues. When news broke in February suggesting that ISROs marketing arm, Antrix Corporation, had entered into a deal with Devas Multimedia in 2005 to favour the latter, the space agency dithered and failed to explain the true picture to the public. All that Antrix had done was to resort to procedural shortcuts in getting the deal approved by its board. It was
done at a thinly attended meeting. Experts close to ISRO say if it had just continued with the traditional INSAT Coordination Committee meetings (it was last convened in 2005), which routinely involved all key science, technology and telecom departments, things wouldnt have come to this flashpoint. But popular belief held that the deal that involved using Devas technology to provide satellite broadband services was the mother of all scams. The whole country was then in a mood to see a scandal in everything. No Space for a Chat Of all the problems at ISRO, insiders say, the lack of communication

among its own arms is the most troubling. They really have a management issue. There are so many good people working for them but they

dont seem to communicate with each other, says Jayant Murthy, a professor at the Indian Institute of Astrophysics in Bangal ore, who worked with ISRO for three years on an aborted project. Murthy was the principal investigator for Tauvex, a joint space observatory project between Israel and India. After a four-year delay, it was finally mounted on the satellite in November 2009, but got knocked off at the last minute when ISRO realised the weight of sundry payloads on the mission exceeded the limit. Despite repeated requests, ISRO never communicated the next launch date. Tauvex was finally sent back to Israel last year. Its a result of constantly changing set of priorities at ISRO, which now works in mission mode, says Murthy, who along with his Israeli counterparts, is contemplating a Russian launch. The new thrust on commercial success may have come at a time when the focus on research is diminishing, say experts. Instead of doing research, ISRO scientists are becoming large-scale managers, says Raghunandan of IISc.


Privates CP Strike Force Alpha


Aff Ballistic Missile Prolif DA

The CP provides the pretext for Indian ballistic missile prolif, and Indias space program fails.
Rohde 04- New York Times Correspondent (1/24/04, David Rohde, The New York Times, India's Lofty Ambitions in Space Meet Earthly

The euphoria over the space program is by no means universal. In the last five years, Indian rockets have successfully launched two German, one South Korean and one Belgian satellite in orbit. But with the commercial space market flooded with heavy lift rockets from the United States, Europe and particularly Russia, the Indian program, whose rockets remain smaller, has not attracted droves of customers and has not proved the moneymaker originally promised. And privately, Indian officials concede that they remain dependent on foreign components . While India's satellites are assembled in India, a majority of electronic components for India's satellites continue to come from the United States, Europe and elsewhere, they said. Some Indian space analysts say the moon probe, which is expected to cost $84 million, is the first sign that the space program is moving away from its practical roots and becoming politicized. Reports in recent months of plans for expensive manned missions have only deepened concern. Despite an economy that is expected to grow by 8 percent this year, India is home to the world's largest concentration of poor. Three hundred million of India's one billion people live in poverty. Gopal

Raj, a journalist and the author of a history of the Indian space program, ''Reach for the Stars,'' questioned the scientific value of the moon probe. The satellite will spend two years making a three-dimensional map of the moon's surface and surveying its soil for minerals. ''Frankly, I think this has more to do with prestige than anything,'' Mr. Raj said. ''I am not convinced about anything else.'' American space experts warn of problems as

well. They accuse Indian managers of not spending the money they should on projects and leaving unnecessary debris in space. There are also questions about whether India is planning to mount a military effort in space. After China launched a man into orbit
last fall, the head of the Indian Air Force was quoted as saying that India was developing space-based weapons. Within days the country's civilian leaders forced him to retract the statement. For many years, in fact, the United States viewed the Indian program as a

proliferation and security risk, despite its civilian oversight. Remote sensing satellites that can track erosion and crop yields can also act as spy satellites. Indians vehemently deny the charge, but American analysts say rocket technology produced by the civilian space program, as well as some of its top engineers, have ended up in the military's ballistic missile program. They a rocket is a rocket.''

include even the country's president, A. P. J. Abdul Kalam. ''A space program and a missile program tend to go hand in hand,'' Theresa Hitchens, vice president of the Center for Defense Information in Washington, said in a telephone interview. ''The technologies are the same. A rocket


Guarantees South Asia escalation. CRS, 2003

[Congressional Research Service, Missile Proliferation and the Strategic Balance in South Asia, 10 -17,]
Central to an analysis of the meaning of missile proliferation in South Asia are two key questions: First, is

a strategic arms race between India and Pakistan underway? And, second, does progress in the development of missile and nuclear capabilities promote or degrade regional stability? Indian and Pakistani government officials express a desire to avoid engaging in a costly and
potentially disastrous arms race, while also asserting that no such race is afoot.23 Yet a 2001 Defense Department review of proliferation threats indicated that, Indian and Pakistani strategic programs continue to be driven by the perception of the others

effort, and that the two countries are in a period of accelerated nuclear weapons and missile development that may be termed a slow-speed arms race.24 In 2002, Director of Central Intelligence Tenet told the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence that, Both India and Pakistan are working on the doctrine and tactics for more advanced nuclear weapons, producing fissile material, and increasing their nuclear stockpiles. ... Both countries also continue development of long-range nuclear-capable ballistic missiles, and plan to field cruise missiles with a landattack capability.25 Apparent tit-for-tat ballistic missile tests in April 1999 and again in March 2003 have been viewed as evidence that an action-reaction dynamic is indeed at work.26 Many analysts argue that overt nuclear weaponization by either side most especially of their ballistic missiles could be highly destabilizing, especially if significant nuclear missile forces are deployed in the absence of secure command and control structures. If these forces are perceived as

11 being vulnerable to attack, one or both sides might adopt a launch-on-warning status, making conflict escalation even more difficult to govern.27 Ever since the 1998 nuclear tests in South Asia, it has appeared that Indias strategic decision-making is a key factor in shaping regional stability. According to the Pentagon, Indias

Privates CP Strike Force Alpha


development of [medium-range ballistic missiles (MRBMs)] ... is motivated by its desire to be recognized as a great power and strategic competitor with China.28 China seems content with its existing deterrent against India, and Pakistans limited resources appear to constrain its ability to initiate an Indo-Pakistani arms race.29 Thus, a key variable in the future evolution of South Asian nuclear proliferation is Indias

strategic intention in relation to China. One of the more dangerous scenarios is one in which India actively seeks to gain nuclear parity with China by building a larger nuclear arsenal and long-range delivery force. In the middle-term, the deployment of Agni missiles capable of striking Chinas eastern population centers could spur Beijing to re-target more nuclear forces to the south and likewise move Islamabad to seek some form of parity in this arena, thus potentially setting in motion a full-blown arms race on the Asian Subcontinent.30
Moreover, some observers suggest that U.S. sales of theater missile defense systems in Asia or the deployment of a national system covering U.S. territory could spur further ballistic missile proliferation in South Asia (see below).31

India-China goes nuclear. Kahn 9 (Jeremy, Newsweek, Why India Fears China, 10-19, 154:16, L/N)

On June 21, two Chinese military helicopters swooped low over Demchok, a tiny Indian hamlet high in the Hima-layas along the northwestern border with China. The helicopters dropped canned food over a barren expanse and then returned to bases in China. India's military scrambled helicopters to the scene but did not seem unduly alarmed. This sort of Cold War cat-and-mouse game has played out on the 4,057-kilometer India-China border for decades. But the incident fed a media frenzy about "the Chinese dragon." Beginning in August, stories about new Chinese

incursions into India have dominated the 24-hour TV news networks and the newspaper headlines. China claims some 90,000 square kilometers of Indian territory. And most of those claims are tangled up with Tibet. Large swaths of India's northern mountains were once part of Tibet. Other stretches belonged to semi-independent kingdoms that paid fealty to Lhasa. Because Beijing now claims Tibet as part of China, it has by extension sought to claim parts of India that it sees as historically Tibetan, a claim that has become increasingly flammable in recent months. Ever since the anti-Chinese unrest in Tibet last year,

progress toward settling the border dispute has stalled, and the situation has taken a dangerous turn. The emergence of videos showing Tibetans beating up Han Chinese shopkeepers in Lhasa and other Tibetan cities created immense domestic pressure on Beijing to crack down. The Communist Party leadership worries that agitation by Tibetans will only encourage unrest by the country's other ethnic minorities, such as Uighurs in Xinjiang or ethnic Mongolians in Inner Mongolia, threatening China's integrity as a nation. Susan Shirk, a former Clinton-administration official and expert on China, says that "in the past, Taiwan was the 'core issue of sovereignty,' as they call it, and Tibet was not very salient to the public." Now, says Shirk, Tibet is considered a "core issue of national sovereignty" on par with Taiwan. The implications for India's security--and the world's--are ominous. It turns

what was once an obscure argument over lines on a 1914 map and some barren, rocky peaks hardly worth fighting over into a flash point that could spark a war between two nuclear-armed neighbors. And that makes the India-China border dispute into an issue of concern to far more than just the two parties involved. The United States and Europe as well as the rest of Asia ought to take notice--a conflict involving India and China could result in a nuclear exchange. And it could suck the West in--either as an ally in the defense of Asian democracy, as in the case of Taiwan, or as a
mediator trying to separate the two sides.

So does Indo-Pak. Fai, 2001

[Ghulam, PhD, Executive Director of the Kashmiri American Council, Business Recorder, The Most Dangerous Place, Washington Times, July 8, Lexis]

The most dangerous place on the planet is Kashmir, a disputed territory convulsed and illegally occupied for more than 53 years and sandwiched between nuclear-capable India and Pakistan. It has ignited two wars between the estranged South Asian rivals in 1948 and 1965, and a third could trigger nuclear volleys and a nuclear winter threatening the entire globe. The United States would enjoy no sanctuary.


Privates CP Strike Force Alpha


Aff AT Indian Soft Power NB

Soft power is irrelevant -- India wont use it for international leverage. Gulf News, 2009
[Looking to India for Leadership, 10-8, LexisNexis] The world wants more from India than it seems ready to give at present. India is one of the three states which will dominate the world for the next century at least, along with China and the United States. It has a population of 1.2 billion, an

increasingly liberal business scene giving it growing economic strength, and solid democratic values which allow it to take a balanced and stable view of developments. It has a track record second to none among the world's major states in its commitment to

multilateral action. It has been a strong supporter of the United Nations with its peacekeeping forces, initiatives like the Millennium Development Goals, and more important than these specific points, India is committed to the cooperative spirit of the United Nations. Yet India does not offer the powerful lead in guiding the world's foreign policy councils that its size and talents would indicate it should. It is almost invisible at a national policy engagement level, since it merges its foreign policy efforts into the interwoven multilateral organisations that form the system that allows the world's nation states to work together on many fronts, such as the United Nations, the Conference on Climate Change, and the World Trade Organisation. But outside these processes, India does not offer many issues in which it takes its place as a stand-alone power, and offer an Indian-led initiative. Partly this is because India is so vast that it tends to look inward to its own affairs, rather than outwards to what the rest of the world is thinking. Within its huge population, India has a huge variety of peoples, and social issues, so that it is more concerned with solving its own problems than taking a lead on international initiatives. India's humanitarian and tolerant core values are what is needed to find answers for most of the major global issues, which are not about nation-state politics or power blocs jostling for influence.
Today's really vital issues are trans-national and are often more social or economic. They include stopping climate change, dealing with nuclear proliferation, stopping human trafficking and the drugs trade, worldwide health care and education, and taking steps to avoid serious clean water shortages. This absence of Indian engagement was strongly denied this week in Dubai by Sashi Tharoor, the new Indian Minister of State for External Affairs, who previously was a very experienced UN diplomat who ended his almost 30 year spell at the UN as Under-Secretary General. When asked

why the regional superpower was invisible in the Gulf and did not take a more dynamic role in world affairs, he first objected to the term super-power saying that India did not see itself as a "power" in those terms, and also vigorously stood up for India's record in international affairs in many forums, while also pointing specifically to its troop commitments in peacekeeping efforts over many decades as one example of putting its resources behind its rhetoric. Tharoor also described how the next few months hold important stages in different rounds of negotiations in several different
global forums. He spoke of the deadlock in the Doha Round of talks on free trade, and the approaching summit in Copenhagen on climate change, and in both cases he said that "India wants to be part of the solution to these important questions, not part of the problem". This attitude of constructive engagement based on principles, is how he saw India's foreign policy offering leadership. And while for many decades India has tended to

talk of its relations with the Arab Gulf states in terms of trade and labour relations, and has not really got involved in the state-to-state issues that the Gulf nations are pursuing, Tharoor said this was the wrong impression. He spoke
of wider engagement, and also pointed out how India had worked hard to support the UAE's successful bid to host the International Renewable Energy Agency, Irena, working with the UAE to help achieve this result. But the Gulf is looking for more from India. Although the peace process in

Palestine is already cluttered with international mediators, India's calm and humanitarian style could do a lot of good in that vexed and intractable area. The major issue in today's Gulf is the spread of Iran's influence, both through its alleged nuclear programme but also through its support for regional groups, and India could speak up more on this vital Gulf and Middle East issue. Looking closer to home, the Gulf is active in supporting the Nato mission in Afghanistan which it sees as a vital area of concern. But the Nato mission is failing, and open Indian support for an effective solution would be very helpful to Afghan, regional and Gulf interests. All rightthinking leadership in the rest of the world will be delighted to see India's humanitarian style of leadership become a more dominant force in world politics.


Privates CP Strike Force Alpha


A- Interpretation-- Increase is to become greater American Heritage Dictionary 2K (The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth
Edition Copyright 2000 by Houghton Mifflin Company, mc) Increase: To become greater or larger.

Substantially should be used in context CJS 83 (Corpus Juris Secundum, Vol. 83)
Substantially: A relative and elastic term which should be interpreted in accordance with the context in which it is used.

Substantial increase is defined as at least $2.6 billion in terms of space Alexander, 08

Alexander, Professor of history, philosophy, and history of science at Stanford, 2008 [Amir Alexander, President Signs NASA Authorization Bill October 16th, 2008, 6-29-11] On Wednesday, October 15, 2008, President Bush signed into law the NASA Authorization Bill passed by Congress last month. By authorizing NASA to spend $20.21 billion in fiscal year 2009, the bill represents a substantial increase of $2.6 billion over the administration's budget request for NASA earlier this year. $4.9 billion of the bill's total is directed towards science operations, and another $4.9 billion is authorized for exploration. An authorization bill, unlike an appropriations bill, does not actually fund programs, and the spending levels it cites are not binding on NASA. Nevertheless it does provide the agency with spending guidelines and indicates Congress's priorities.

B- ViolationThe aff doesnt increase by at least $2.6 billion C- Vote negative Makes it impossible to be negative because they can spike out of all of our links by just saying that they dont increase by that much And they underlimit the topicthey justify running affirmatives that shoot a rock into space that makes debates boring and uneducational because the negative would never be prepared to debate And we can never actually learn about what the effects of the plan really are because they arent a substantial increase Topicality is a voter


Privates CP Strike Force Alpha


Substantially 1NC

A- Interpretation-- Increase is to become greater American Heritage Dictionary 2K (The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth
Edition Copyright 2000 by Houghton Mifflin Company, mc) Increase: To become greater or larger.

Substantially should be used in context CJS 83 (Corpus Juris Secundum, Vol. 83)
Substantially: A relative and elastic term which should be interpreted in accordance with the context in which it is used.

Substantial increase is defined as at least $2.6 billion in terms of space Alexander, 08

Alexander, Professor of history, philosophy, and history of science at Stanford, 2008 [Amir Alexander, President Signs NASA Authorization Bill October 16th, 2008, 6-29-11] On Wednesday, October 15, 2008, President Bush signed into law the NASA Authorization Bill passed by Congress last month. By authorizing NASA to spend $20.21 billion in fiscal year 2009, the bill represents a substantial increase of $2.6 billion over the administration's budget request for NASA earlier this year. $4.9 billion of the bill's total is directed towards science operations, and another $4.9 billion is authorized for exploration. An authorization bill, unlike an appropriations bill, does not actually fund programs, and the spending levels it cites are not binding on NASA. Nevertheless it does provide the agency with spending guidelines and indicates Congress's priorities.

B- ViolationThe aff doesnt increase by at least $2.6 billion C- Vote negative Makes it impossible to be negative because they can spike out of all of our links by just saying that they dont increase by that much And they underlimit the topicthey justify running affirmatives that shoot a rock into space that makes debates boring and uneducational because the negative would never be prepared to debate And we can never actually learn about what the effects of the plan really are because they arent a substantial increase Topicality is a voter


Privates CP Strike Force Alpha



Privates CP Strike Force Alpha


T-Substantially 2NC

Our interpretation is that increase means to become greaterthats American Heritage Dictionary Prefer our interpretationits from the best and most qualified dictionary And, substantially has to be used in contextthats CJS And substantially must be given meaning even if arbitrary contextual uses are key Devinsky 2
(Paul, IP UPDATE, VOLUME 5, NO. 11, NOVEMBER 2002, Is Claim "Substantially" Definite? Ask Person of Skill in the Art, In reversing a summary judgment of invalidity, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit found that the district court, by failing to look beyond the intrinsic claim construction evidence to consider what a person of skill in the art would understand in a "technologic context," erroneously concluded the term "substantially" made a claim fatally indefinite. Verve, LLC v. Crane Cams, Inc., Case No. 01-1417 (Fed. Cir. November 14, 2002). The patent in suit related to an improved push rod for an internal combustion engine. The patent claims a hollow push rod whose overall diameter is larger at the middle than at the ends and has "substantially constant wall thickness" throughout the rod and rounded seats at the tips. The district court found that the expression "substantially constant wall thickness" was not supported in the specification and prosecution history by a sufficiently clear definition of "substantially" and was, therefore, indefinite. The district court recognized that the use of the term "substantially" may be definite in some cases but ruled that in this case it was indefinite because it was not further defined. The Federal Circuit reversed, concluding that the district court erred in requiring that the meaning of the term "substantially" in a particular "technologic context" be found solely in intrinsic evidence: "While reference to intrinsic evidence is primary in interpreting claims, the criterion is the meaning of words as they would be understood by persons in the field of the invention." Thus, the Federal Circuit instructed that "resolution of any ambiguity arising from the claims and specification may be aided by extrinsic evidence of usage and meaning of a term in the context of the invention." The Federal Circuit remanded the case to the district court with instruction that "[t]he question is not whether the word 'substantially' has a fixed meaning as applied to 'constant wall thickness,' but how the phrase would be understood by persons experienced in this field of mechanics, upon reading the patent documents."

That means that you have to go by the baseline for space exploration which is $2.6 billion thats Alexander An increase in 1 billion is not substantial Logsdon, 11
Space Policy Institute, Elliott School of International Affairs, George Washington University (John, A new US approach to human spaceight?, Space Policy, February, Science Direct) 3. New strategy developed and announced Working urgently and with a high level of secrecy because they realized that, if planning for a dramatic shift in strategy became known, there would be an immediate critical reaction, during January 2010 a small group of people from the Ofce and Management and Budget, Ofce of Science and Technology Policy, National Security Council, and some immediate presidential advisers, plus some of NASAs political leadership, crafted the basic features of a new approach to human spaceight. That approach closely reected the ndings of the Augustine Committee. There was agreement to increase the NASA budget by a total of $1 billion over the next ve years (rather than the more substantial increase that the Augustine Committee had prop osed) and to reallocate a large share of that budget in the next several years away from Constellation and towards investments in new technology related to propulsion and in-orbit operations that would enable future exploration. There was also agreement to jump start an industry-government partnership in carrying crews to

11 orbit with a multi-billion dollar investment in fostering that partnership. All these decisions were made without the in-depth analysis typical of the normal budget process, and the level of resources allocated to different initiatives was somewhat arbitrary. Absolutely critical to the new approach was freeing up the funds dedicated to the Constellation program; the decision was made to cancel that program in its entirety, and with it the goal of returning to the Moon by 2020.

Privates CP Strike Force Alpha


Violation they dont increase by at least 2.6 billion: Their carrol 02 evidence cites 12 tethers that doesnt come close to meeting the threshold Two main standards to this violation First, not being substantial means the plan doesnt actually deviate in a significant way from the status quo; the negative doesnt get ground for disads; satellites are launched all the time, along with different scientific devices that function in similar ways to insubstantial plans, means that the majority of things that link to the plan link to the status quo we didnt get Russian aerospace, weaponization da, soft power, earth science, Russian nationalism because they dont deviate in a substantial way from business as usual and therefore dont link; being unsubstantial means they nuke negative ground The second main standard is underlimiting the topic allowing affs below 2.6 billion allow niche affs of all sorts: satellite bandwith, dscovr, GPS-3, etc etc; every single space group in the US has their own pet project theyve published tons of lit on, explodes the aff research burden which kills debate Rowland, 84
(Robert C., Baylor U., Topic Selection in Debate, American Forensics in Perspective. Ed. Par son, p. 53-4) The first major problem identified by the work group as relating to topic selection is the decline in participation in the National Debate Tournament (NDT) policy debate. As Boman notes: There is a growing dissatisfaction with academic debate that utilizes a policy proposition. Programs which are oriented toward debating the national policy debate proposition, so-called NDT programs, are diminishing both in scope and size. This decline in policy debate is tied, many in the work group believe, to excessively broad topics. The most obvious characteristic of some recent policy debate topics is extreme breadth. A resolution calling for regulation of land use literally and figuratively covers a lot of ground. National debate topics have not always been so broad. Before the late 1960s the topic often specified a particular policy change. The move from narrow to broad topics has had, according to some, the effect of limiting the number of students who participate in policy debate. First, the breadth of topics has all but destroyed novice debate. Paul Gaske argues that because the stock issues of policy debate are clearly defined, it is superior to value debate as a means of introducing students to the debate process. Despite this advantage of policy debate, Gaske believes that NDT debate is not the best vehicle for teaching beginners. The problem is that broad topics terrify novice debaters, especially those who lack high school debate experience. They are unable to cope with the breath of the topic and experience negophobia, the fear of debating negative. As a consequence, the educational advantages associated with teaching novice through policy debate are lost: Yet all of these benefits fly out the window as rookies in their formative stage quickly experience humiliation at being caught without evidence or substantive awareness of the issues that confront them at a tournament. The ultimate result is that fewer novices participate in NDT, thus lessening the educational value of the activity and limiting the number of debaters who eventually participate in more advanced divisions of policy debate. In addition to noting the effect on novices, participants argued that broad topics also discourage experienced debaters from continued participation in policy debate. Here, the claim is that it takes so much time and effort to be competitive on a broad topic that students who are concerned with doing more than just debate are forced out of the activity. Gaske notes, that broad topics discourage participation because of insufficient time to do requisite research.

11 The final effect may be that entire programs wither cease functioning or shift to value debate as a way to avoid unreasonable research burdens. Boman supports this point: It is this expanding necessity of evidence, and thereby research, which has created a competitive imbalance between institutions that participate in academic debate. In this view, it is the competitive imbalance resulting from the use of broad topics that has led some small schools to cancel their programs.

Privates CP Strike Force Alpha


Underlimiting is also bad because we hit a different aff every round of the entire year dont research specific aspects of plans since its extremely unlikely that wed hit them again and that kills in-depth analysis and education which is superior to shallow breath, studies prove Arrington 9 (Rebecca, UVA Today, Study Finds That Students Benefit From Depth, Rather Than Breadth, in High School Science Courses March

A recent study reports that high school students who study fewer science topics, but study them in greater depth, have an advantage in college science classes over their peers who study more topics and spend less time on each. Robert Tai, associate professor at the University of Virginia's Curry School of Education, worked with Marc S. Schwartz of the University of Texas at Arlington and Philip M. Sadler and Gerhard Sonnert of the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics to conduct the study and produce the report. "Depth Versus Breadth: How Content Coverage in High School

Courses Relates to Later Success in College Science Coursework" relates the amount of content covered on a particular topic in high school classes with students' performance in college-level science classes. The study will appear in the July 2009 print edition of Science Education and is currently available as an online pre-print from the journal. "As a former high school teacher, I always worried about whether it was better to teach less in greater depth or more with no real depth. This study offers evidence that teaching fewer topics in greater depth is a better way to

prepare students for success in college science," Tai said. "These results are based on the performance of thousands of college science students from across the United States." The 8,310 students in the study were enrolled in introductory biology, chemistry or physics in randomly selected four-year colleges and universities. Those who spent one month or more studying one major topic in-depth in high school earned higher grades in college science than their peers who studied more topics in the same period of time. The study revealed that students in courses that focused on mastering a particular topic were impacted twice as much as those in courses that touched on every major topic. No risk of offense theres a topical version of the plan

Potential abuse is a voter

Ballots set a precedent accepted debate theory is made up of by what judges think is reasonable or unreasonable. Your ballot on this issue moves us closer to where abusive practices will not be done. In-round abuse is impossible to prove its hard to tell if a single argument unbalanced a particular round, but you can judge if whether it were a general principle, it would unbalance rounds. That leads to fairer theoretical rules for debate. Most objective in-round abuse makes arguments abusive sometimes and not abusive other times, so teams cant predict whether theyll be abusive or not. A potential abuse standard sets a better brightline for teams to follow.

Competing interps good

1. Easier to determine - you simply compare the aff and neg definitions rather than holding up a nebulous yardstick of reasonability or sumthin 4. Preserve fairness - the best definition standard wees out defintiions that are either too broad or too narrow 6. Increases Education - this standard is consistent with the educational process of debate, by bringing them into the analytical portion of debate 10. Feasible - we arent asking for the best definition in the language, just for the better one in the round.


Privates CP Strike Force Alpha


Few majors problems out of the 2ac: - There is no other interp even if they win our interp is bad, since there isnt an alt you have to vote for us - On top of that, theres no we meet they have no way of meeting the only interpretation in this round


Privates CP Strike Force Alpha


China Answers International Fiat Bad

International Fiat is a voting issue A.) Unpredictable-allows any number of CPs that can do any number of things-that explodes the literature base and makes it impossible for affirmatives to defend their plan against hundreds of different actors doing the plan-thats key to fairness and is a reason to reject the team B.) Education-debates about the US and its foreign policy allow for more in-depth education because most of the people here are citizens of the United States and therefore should learn about the inter-workings of our foreign policy-thats key to democratic engagement C.) Shift away from the topic-causes us to not debate about the resolved statementthats bad for education and kills any in depth form of education-talking about the merits of China doing the plan dont increase in depth education about US space policy D.) Reciprocity we only get USFG, so they should also have to use a USFG agent thats best for predictability E.) Interpretation-The judges role is to decide how the US should implement a plan and the desirability of CPs that involve the United States and entities in the government-key to in depth education about the topic that the framers presented this year


Privates CP Strike Force Alpha


Solvency Deficit China Space Program Weak

Chinas Skylab is now just matching the U.S.s 1970s space program David, space insider columnist, 11
(Leonard, Winner of this years National Space Club Press Award, Leonard David has been reporting on the space industry for more than five decades, past editor-in-chief of the National Space Societys Ad Astra and Space World magazines and has written for since 1999,, Chinas First Space Station: A New Foothold in Earth Orbit, May 6,, accessed 7/7/11) KA China's Skylab Call it "China's Skylab," said Gregory Kulacki, senior analyst and China project manager for the global security program at the Union of Concerned Scientists. Skylab was the name of the first American space station launched by NASA. "The 60-ton Chinese station is approximately the same size as America's first space station and is being launched at a comparable stage in the history of China's human space flight program," Kulacki told NASA's Skylab was lofted back in 1973. It was visited by a trio of crews, three astronauts each time. The last team to visit that U.S. station set a world record at the time for longest stay in orbit, 84 days. The 100-ton facility re-entered Earths atmosphere in 1979.

Chinas space program far behind the U.S.s program David, space insider columnist, 11
(Leonard, Winner of this years National Space Club Press Award, Leonard David has been reporting on the space industry for more than five decades, past editor-in-chief of the National Space Societys Ad Astra and Space World magazines and has written for since 1999,, Chinas First Space Station: A New Foothold in Earth Orbit, May 6,, accessed 7/7/11) KA High hopes Chinas goal for the program, Kulacki said, is equally simple: to acquire experience living and working in space. "The planned scientific and technical experiments will be informed by developments in space science since the late 1970s," he added, "and China has high hopes that their experience in space will lead to breakthroughs that can be applied back on Earth." Domestic proponents of Chinas human spaceflight program argue that America's program -- which served as a model for the Chinese -- stimulated U.S. technical and economic development, Kulacki noted. "The Chinese political leaders funding the program hope they are right." Kulacki said that Chinese opponents who question the diversion of the country's still limited human, technical and financial resources to human spaceflight argue that China is simply repeating what was accomplished decades ago, by the United States. "Moreover there is no evidence that China's accomplishments in human spaceflight provide increased political legitimacy or support for the Chinese Communist Party, despite the expansive propaganda efforts surrounding the program, Kulacki advised. Another take on what's in the offing from China comes from Dean Cheng, a Research Fellow at the Heritage Foundations Asian Studies Center and a specialist in China's military and space capabilities. Cheng said Chinas moves to deploy a space lab are a continuation of its Project 921, begun in 1992. "It reflects the long -term nature of China's space planning and underscores the persistent and consistent nature of their space efforts," Cheng said. "Nearly 20 years after the plan was first set in motion, the Chinese are still at it, in a slow, methodical fashion." Moreover, Cheng noted that the Chinese do not see themselves in a race with the United States. Or, if they do, it is a marathon, not a sprint. "They are operating according to their timelines, not in response to American efforts or out of fear that they will be left behind by the United States," Cheng said. Such an approach has the potential of creating a "frog in the pot" effect for the United States, Cheng said. "The slow, persistent Chinese approach ensures that there is not a 'Shenzhou moment' comparable to a 'Sputnik moment' until the Chinese do make a major breakthrough ? at which point, it is an open question whether they [the U.S.] will be able to catch up or not."


Privates CP Strike Force Alpha


Soft Power Net Benefit Answer Alt Cause

Alt cause to Chinese soft power developmental aid is the focus of international relations

Lum, specialist in Asian affairs at the Congressional Research Service, Morrison, specialist in Asian Trade and Finance at the Congressional Research Service, coordination specialist in Asian Affairs, 2008

(Thomas, Wayne M., Bruce, Chinas Soft Power in Southeast Asia, CRS Report for Congress, p. 2, RL34310,, January 4, accessed July 10, 2011, NS)
Chinas foreign aid has had a growing, tangible impact in many countries in Southeast Asia, although it is difficult to quantify, due to a lack of data and to the unique characteristics of Chinese assistance.12 In comparison to major bilateral donors in the region, China provides relatively little development assistance and lacks a formal system for determining development goals and allocating aid.13 The PRC administers a wider range of economic assistance that includes nondevelopment aid and lowinterest loans, as well as trade and investment agreements. According to some analysts, when these kinds of assistance are added, China becomes one of the largest bilateral aid donors in Southeast Asia. Furthermore, because China offers assistance without the conditions that other donors frequently place on aid (i.e. democratic reform, market opening, and environmental protections), it often garners appreciation disproportionate to the size of its aid, and thus has a large impact on recipient governments.14 Chinas policy of non-interference in domestic affairs often wins friends not only among Southeast Asian governments but also by many peoples in the region because it is regarded as respectful of their countries sovereignty. Although PRC assistance reportedly is often not carried out as pledged, such aid, announced at lavish receptions with toasts to the recipient countries, often carries great symbolic value.15 Many PRC aid projects, such as government buildings, infrastructure, and energy facilities, often funded by loans from the China Import-Export Bank and built by Chinese companies, are high profile efforts that primarily benefit capital cities or the governments in power. Many foreign aid experts, non-governmental organizations (NGOs), and local groups have criticized Chinese aid for failing to promote democracy, widespread, sustainable development, and environmental conservation. Chinas Aid to the Least Developed Countries in the Region Many reports of PRC aid in the region focus on Burma, Cambodia, and Laos, the poorest countries in Southeast Asia and ones that have had relatively unfriendly relations with the United States. China is considered the primary economic patron of these countries and provides an implicit security guarantee.16 China also provides considerable assistance to Vietnam, although its influence upon its former adversary appears limited compared to other countries. The United States has a major aid presence in Cambodia and Vietnam.17 However, according to data of official development assistance, which does not include China, Japan is the largest bilateral aid donor among these countries. Many observers fear that Chinas unconditional and non -transparent aid efforts and growing economic integration in Southeast Asia negate efforts by western nations to promote political and economic reform, reduce corruption, and protect the environment in mainland Southeast Asia. Others counter that, on balance, Chinese aid promotes development in Southeast Asia and that it does not exclude other countries aid programs and objectives. Furthermore, in many cases, China reportedly takes on aid projects that other donor countries have avoided due to difficulty or hardship. In recent years, China has financed many infrastructure and energy-related projects in Burma, Cambodia, and Laos that rely upon Chinese materials and technical expertise as well as labor. Often these projects help China access raw materials and oil. There are some indications that Chinese aid in this part of the region is diversifying, including support to countertrafficking in persons and counter-narcotics efforts, programs involving Chinese youth volunteers (Laos), elections (Cambodia), and historical preservation (Cambodia).18


Privates CP Strike Force Alpha


Soft Power Net Benefit Answer Soft Power Bad Global Democracy
Chinese soft power threatens global democracy Friedberg, professor of politics and international affairs at Princeton, 6/21/11
(Aaron L., professor of politics and international affairs at the Woodrow Wilson School at Princeton University, Hegemony with Chinese Characteristics, The National Interest, July-August Issue, p.4,, accessed 7/8/11) EK As China emerges onto the world stage it is becoming a source of inspiration and material support for embattled authoritarians in the Middle East, Africa and Latin America as well as Asia antidemocratic holdouts who looked to be headed for the garbage heap of history after the collapse of the Soviet Union. Americans may have long believed that growth requires freedom of choice in the economic realm (which is presumed to lead ineluctably to the expansion of political liberties), but, at least for now, the mainland has successfully blended authoritarian rule with market-driven economics. If it comes to be seen as offering an alternative model for development, Chinas continued growth under authoritarian rule could complicate and slow Americas long-standing efforts to promote the spread of liberal political institutions around the world. Fear that the United States has regime change on the brain is also playing an increasing role in the crafti ng of Chinas policies toward countries in other parts of the world. If the United States can pressure and perhaps depose the current leaders of Venezuela, Zimbabwe and Iran, it may be emboldened in its efforts to do something similar to China. By helping those regimes survive, Beijing wins friends and allies for future struggles, weakens the perception that democracy is on the march and deflects some of Americas prodigious energies away from itself. Washingtons efforts to isolate, coerce and possibly undermine dictatorial rogue states (such as Iran and North Korea) have already been complicated, if not defeated, by Beijings willingness to engage with them. At the same time, of course, Chinas actions also heighten concern in Washington about its motivations and intentions, thereby adding more fuel to the competitive fire.

Democracy solves nuclear war, terrorism, and environmental destruction Diamond, Hoover Institution, Stanford University, 95
[Larry, December, PROMOTING DEMOCRACY IN THE 1990S, 95, p. ,

Nuclear, chemical and biological weapons continue to proliferate. The very source of life on Earth, the global ecosystem, appears increasingly endangered. Most of these new and unconventional threats to security are associated with or aggravated by the weakness or absence of democracy, with its provisions for legality, accountability, popular sovereignty and openness. The experience of this century offers important lessons. Countries that govern themselves in a truly democratic fashion do not go to war with one another. They do not aggress against their neighbors to aggrandize themselves or glorify their leaders. Democratic governments do not ethnically "cleanse" their own populations, and they are much less likely to face ethnic insurgency. Democracies do not sponsor terrorism against one another. They do not build weapons of mass destruction to use on or to threaten one another. Democratic countries form more reliable, open, and enduring trading partnerships. In the long run they offer better and more stable climates for investment. They are more environmentally responsible because they must answer to their own citizens, who organize to protest the destruction of their environments. They are better bets to honor international treaties since they value legal obligations and because their openness makes it much more difficult to breach agreements in secret. Precisely because, within their own borders, they respect competition, civil liberties, property rights, and the rule of law, democracies are the only reliable foundation on which a new world order of international security and prosperity can be built.


Privates CP Strike Force Alpha


Impact Global Democracy

Democracy is key to a nuclear-free, socially just and ecologically sound world. Landy, Campaign for Peace and Democracy executive director & Scarlett, World Policy Institute fellow, 1992
(Joanne and Jennifer, Democratic Movements Can Force Disarmament, Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, May 1992, key%20to%20preventing%20global%20nuclear%20war&pg=PA29#v=onepage&q=democracy%20is%20key% 20to%20preventing%20global%20nuclear%20war&f=false, p.30-31, accessed 7/10/11) EK
What sort of world should we aim to create by 2001? A nuclear-free world is vital, but it will come only if the root political causes of nuclear proliferation and militarism are addressed. A world in which humanity has achieved a healthy relationship with the environment is critical as well. Like a nuclear-free world, a thriving global environment will be achieved only if the underlying causes of environmental destruction, including poverty, overpopulation, and sheer profit-driven greed, are addressed. A third goal is a world in which democratic movements for peaceful social change and an end to economic disparities begin to transform governments into truly accountable vehicles serving their citizens. The spread of democracy and of vigorous democratic movements in all regions is desirable in itself, and it will be instrumental in achieving a nuclear-free, socially just, and ecologically sound world. In such a world, the United Nations would no longer be accountable only to the strongest nations. Indeed, the term "superpower" would lose its meaning. The World Bank and GATT would no longer protect the narrow interests of elites, but would be organized instead to promote socially and environmentally oriented economic activity based on democratic strategic planning. A new international monetary and development fund would allocate capital and resources to poorer countries and to workers and industries in wealthier countries dislocated by foreign production or ecological retooling. How can such a world be achieved? As Americans, we can participate in and show solidarity with domestic and international democratic movements ranging from peace, trade union, and environmental groups in the United States to those who support Aristide's return in Haiti, students in China, and fledgling democracy movements in the Middle East. And we can help nourish new movements. One of the most important tasks of these movements will be to reject a zero-sum approach that pits nation against nation in the economic and military spheres, or humankind against the environment In addition, we should remember that there is strength in forming connections among movements. It was no coincidence that the threat of nuclear war diminished at the same time that large numbers of people in the Eastern bloc began to overthrow oppressive political structures. But ending the Cold War is not enough. The instabilities and uncertainties of the present moment are fostering the growth of authoritarian and xenophobic tendencies in the United States and abroad. To stem this tide, movements are needed that link democracy with environmentalism, environmentalism with disarmament, disarmament with human rights, and human rights with economic security.


Privates CP Strike Force Alpha


AT Soft Power NB Soft Power Bad Influence on Other Nations

China will use soft power to push out other nations in the South Asian region Kurlantzick, visiting scholar in the China Program at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, 6
(Joshua, special correspondent for The New Republic, Carnegie Endowment for International Peace Policy Brief, Chinas Charm: Implications of Chinese Soft Power, June 2006,, accessed: 7/10/11) KA
Chinas soft power may be only natural in Southeast Asia, its nearest neighborhood. As nations emerge into great powers, they inevitably exert growing influence. But the values and models China projects to Southeast Asiaand eventually to other developing nationscould be disastrous for a region of nascent democracies and weak civil societies. Whats more, China appears to be using its soft power to incrementally push Japan, Taiwan, and even the United States out of regional influence.

China uses its soft power to influence developing nations for their own self interest Kurlantzick, visiting scholar in the China Program at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, 6
(Joshua, special correspondent for The New Republic, Carnegie Endowment for International Peace Policy Brief, Chinas Charm: Implications of Chinese Soft Power, June 2006,, accessed: 7/10/11) KA
Meanwhile Chinas support for authoritarian regimes in Cambodia and Burma forestalls democratization or at least better governance in those nations. In Cambodia opposition politicians complain of Chinese support for the ruling party, and journalists report that when they write about subjects displeasing to China like Taiwanthe embassy harasses them. In Burma Chinas aid packages and frequent state visits have undermined U.S. and Southeast Asian efforts to push the ruling junta into a dialogue with the democratic opposition; instead, Chinas actions have encouraged other powers, like India, to move closer to Rangoon. In the Philippines, where international watchdogs have long highlighted government corruption, China has offered some $400 million in aid to a major infrastructure project, the Northrail rail line. Local activists warn that the Chinese aid was provided with no transparency in bidding and with no significant environmental impact assessment. In the worst possible case, Chinas success in delivering strong economic growth while retaining political control could serve as an example to some of the more authoritarian-minded leaders in the region, like Cambodias Hun Sen, who admires Chinas economic and political system. In controlling development from the top, of course, Beijings model rejects the idea that ordinary citizens should control countries destinies. And as Chinas power grows around the world, the influence it projects, as in Southeast Asia, could be similarly bad for a range of developing nations. As Elizabeth Economy of the Council on Foreign Relations has noted, the Chinese firm Shougang International Trade and Engineering reportedly has done little to upgrade safety at the Hierro de Peru mine it purchased in Peru in the early 1990s. Perus Labor Ministry recorded 170 accidents, including two fatal ones, at the mine in one year alone. When labor unions in Peru protested, Beijing allowed Shougang to bring imported laborers from China to work at the mine. Similarly, in Africa Chinese assistance to authoritarian states like Zimbabwe and Angola has raised concerns. International corruption watchdogs warn that Chinas aid package to Angola, reportedly as large as $6 billion and given without pressure for poverty reduction or coordination with international financial organizations, will allow the Angolan government to revert to its old habits, skimming the aid for itself.


Privates CP Strike Force Alpha


AT Soft Power NB Soft Power Bad Taiwan/U.S.

China is using its soft power to isolate Taiwan and challenge US leadership Pan, staff writer for the Council on Foreign Relations, 6
(Esther, Council on Foreign Relations, Chinas Soft Power Initiative, May 18, KA
What is China trying to achieve through its use of soft power? Experts say Beijing is trying to convince the world of its peaceful intentions, secure the resources it needs to continue its soaring economic growth, and isolate Taiwan. China plans to build more than 100 new Confucius Institutesculture and language centersaround the world. At these institutes, Chinese language students will be taught simplified Chinese characters, which are used on the mainland, instead of the classical Chinese characters used by Taiwan. "There's no doubt there's an element of competition" between China and Taiwan, Economy says. "Beijing is trying to supplant the influence of Taipei around the world." Some experts say China is also trying to set itself up as a leader on the world stage, in opposition to the West and the United States.


Privates CP Strike Force Alpha


Impact China Taiwan Conflict

China-Taiwan conflict will bring the U.S. in and will go nuclear

Kristensen, Federation of American Scientists, Nuclear Information Project, Director, 6

(Hans M., Director, Nuclear Information Project, Federation of American Scientists, Washington, D.C.; Robert S. Norris, Matthew G. McKinzie, Federation of American Scientists/ Natural Resources Defense Council, The Debate Over Chinas Nuclear Modernization, November 2006, KA

The immediate contingency referred to is a potential conflict over Taiwan, which is what most analysts fear could trigger a U.S.- Chinese military clash. As the NPR was nearing completion, the Pentagon wrote up a new war plan (Operations Plan (OPLAN) 5077) for defending Taiwan against a Chinese attack. Between 2003 and 2005, the Pentagon fine-tuned OPLAN 5077 to include maritime interception operations in the Taiwan Straits, attacks on targets on the Chinese mainland, information warfare and non-kinetic options, and even the potential use of U.S. nuclear weapons.36 In February 2006, for the first time OSD elevated China to the top of the list (above Russia) of large-scale military threats facing the United States. According to the QDR: Of the major and emerging powers, China has the greatest potential to compete militarily with the United States and field disruptive military technologies that could over time offset traditional U.S. military advantages absent U.S. counter strategies.37


Privates CP Strike Force Alpha