Cut Cards Japan Neg

Kinkaid Negates Resolved: Japan should revise Article 9 of its Constitution to develop
offensive military capabilities.

IADL 09 confirms Japanese article 9 has allowed for peace in the East Asian region. Article 9 prohibits use of force. Japan cannot pose a threat to
other countries and played a role in trust relationships in the region and keeping peace for 60 years; this amounts to important conflict
prevention.

Japan’s pacifist approach to foreign affairs, due to Article 9, has pacified East Asia.
According to Tønnesson ‘17, Article 9’s Peacekeeping role has never been fully recognized. Article 9
has created a model of national peace

Unfortunately, revising article 9 is like dropping a rock in a still lake: it creates ripples and
destroys the peace. This leads to our first contention: keeping the lake still.

First is China and Noko

Rather than helping deter China and North Korea, revising Article 9 would make things worse.

Stebbing 17 writes China and Noko are threatened by Japan remilitarization and would try to expand their own capabilities. It would likely cause an arms race as
China and Noko answer Japan, paving the way to conflict.

Wadsworth 19 states an offensive Japan would cause tensions with China, which would use rearmament as an excuse to increase pressure on disputed territory.

US alliances remain strong

Mead 22 confirms Chinese policies overextending in the Pacific have actually worked to
strengthen US alliances, along with Russia’s threats to Ukraine. This reminds Europeans
why Washington is a good ally

However, Affirming signals Japan doesn’t trust America’s military

Wadsworth 19 finds an offensively capable Japan could send a signal to its neighbors of
their diminishing confidence in US defensive credibility.

This guarantees an arms race

Wadsworth 19 continues a Japan with offensive capabilities developing their own strike
capabilities would cause allies to develop their own nucear capabilities. This could start
U.S allies to hedge with China, causing a chain reaction.

This would lead to Soko prolif. Sukin 21 confirms Soko public support prolif out of concern of
relying too much on the U.S.. Many SoKo politicians support this idea as well.

This is especially daunting, considering how fast Soko could develop a nuclear weapon.
Keck 17 confirms Soko could do so in just 6 months due to the large stockpile of
plutonium, and it wouldn’t take them too much effort.

This leads to a nuclear exchange with North Korea. Sukin 21 finds a nuclear Soko could be
emboldened to respond to Noko provocations. Facing a “use or lose” pressure, Noko may be
quicker to use long-range rockets as it seeks escalation dominance.

ICAN concludes - even a single nuclear strike could kill 31.4 million people in just hours due to
the direct impact, soot, famine, and cooling.

Our second contention is Russian Escalation

Amending Constitution to add offensive weapons is a dangerous recipe for Russian
nuclear war

Lendon and Jazuka warn - Russia has warned japan of “retalitory measures” if they expand, as Moscow is
already angered because of Japanese support for Ukraine. If Japan expands offensively, Russia will
retaliate.

Japanese Offensive weapons threaten Russia because of North Island proximity to

Russia and fear of further NATO offense

Lendon & Jazuka continue - Disputes have simmered for decades, and support for
Ukraine has just turned it up. This makes Moscow jumpy, and it’s taking out frustrations
on Japan. Increased Japan-NATO relations exacerbate tensions in the Pacific. Russians
dislike the recent strength Japan has gained in recent years.

And, amending A9 kills nuclear pacafism and results in escalaton. Xinhua 22 confirms - Japans
nuclear sharing policy, allowing the US to deploy weapons on thier islands, challenge
foundational non-nuclear principles in place since the 70s.
The impact is global nuclear war - Adding Japan crosses the threshold ensuring
escalation to global nuclear war. Sagan from a week ago warns - If another nation
interferes with Russia’s activities - Russia will respond immediately, with a risk of nuclear
escalation.

Mosher concludes - even a single Russian nuclear strike would kill 91 million through the direct impact,
and it would escalate - drawing in the US and other countries, resulting in even more deaths through
nuclear winter, famine, and conflict.

Thus, we Negate.

Extension
Currently, our Tønnesson ‘17 evidence explains that Japan’s article 9 of its constitution is key in
pacifying East Asia. Unfortunately, revising article 9 is like dropping a rock in a still lake: it
creates ripples and destroys the peace.

C1 -
Right now, Chinese and Russian actions have reminded allies that the US is key. However,
revising A9 signals that Japan no longer trusts America’s capabilities, causing allies to develop
their own launch capabilities and to side with China to protect themselves. Specifically, South
Korea could build nukes in as little as 6 months with its plutonium stockpile. If soko proliferates,
it emboldens them to take an offensive stance against north korea, forcing north korea
panicking into a use it or lose it mentality and launching a nuke. Even a single nuke strike kills 30
million upon impact.

C2 -
Russia warns of retalitory measures if Japan expands offensively. Moscow is already jumpy
because of the Ukrain situation - Japan getting offensive weapons would only anger them more.
Specifically, A9 revisions would kill decades of nuclear pacaificm by allowing the US to deploy
their own nukes in Japan, crossing the threshold because of Japan’s close proximity to Russia. If
another nation interferes with Russian interests now, Putin won’t hesitate to use nukes, killing
91 million people through direct impact and taking even more lives through nuclear winter.