2011 Novice Core Files
Space Leadership Affirmative
SPACE LEADERSHIP AFFIRMATIVE
Page 1 of 32
– CASE EXPLANATION
The Space Leadership Affirmative simply states that the United States
Federal Government has cut its space programs, specifically, long-range space
exploration programs. This is stated in both the Inherency and Solvency observations.
Further, as the U.S. decreases its space exploration budget, other nations, specifically
China, are looking to fill the void, and are spending far more money on space
exploration missions. Much like the atmosphere during the Cold War, the new
recession has not only meant cut-backs in spending on federal programs, but
competition between the United States and other world powers, to prove they have the
capability to launch space missions.
The Harms observation states that space exploration is critical to U.S.
leadership, also known as hegemony. Hegemony is the amount of power a nation can
project to the world. The U.S. is currently known as a world leader, but it is known as
such because of its military capabilities, known as “hard power,” and its diplomatic
capability, known as “soft power.” Space exploration programs, as Observation II
states, are a reflection of hard power, and soft power. Space exploration demonstrates
the United States’ hard power by showing its ability to protect the nation and its allies
by using space satellites for military programs. Space exploration demonstrates U.S.
soft power because a lack of U.S. presence in space signals to the world that the U.S.
no longer has the money to run a strong space program, which can diplomatically
compete with other super powers, such as China.
The Affirmative Plan would have the U.S. Federal Government increase its
long-range space exploration programs. The goal is to compete with nations such as
China, who would hope to take over as the world super power by surpassing the U.S.
in space. Finally, the Solvency Observation states that U.S. space capability is critical
to U.S. hegemony, and that only by asserting its leadership in space, can the United
States conquer other nations militarily, as so many of the United States’ military power
is now space-based.
National Association for Urban Debate Leagues • Core Files • 2011-12
2011 Novice Core Files
Space Leadership Affirmative
Page 2 of 32
SPACE LEADERSHIP – 1AC
OBSERVATION I:
INHERENCY
A. DESPITE PRESIDENT OBAMA’S EARLY PROMISES, AMERICAN SPACE
EXPLORATION EFFORTS DRASTICALLY DECLINED
Lou Friedman, former Executive Director, The Planetary Society, March 7, 2011
[The Space Review, http://www.thespacereview.com/article/1795/1]
Eleven months ago fans of space exploration cheered as President Obama, for the first time since
John Kennedy, went on the road to support a program for a new venture of human exploration: “We’ll
start by sending astronauts to an asteroid for the first time in history. By the mid-2030s, I believe we
can send humans to orbit Mars and return them safely to Earth. And a landing on Mars will follow.”
Then Congress went to work and, today, we have no coherent human space exploration goals,
objectives, or program. We instead have a weak jobs program, spending money on a cancelled
project and ordering a new rocket-to-nowhere project. In that same speech the president said, “We
will ramp up robotic exploration of the solar system” and “We will increase Earth-based observation to
improve our understanding of our climate and our world.” In his very next budget submission last
month, with still no budget passed by Congress for the current fiscal year, he proposed elimination of
robotic precursor missions, a decrease in planetary science funding, and delays of vitally needed
Earth science missions (a need which just increased as a result of the loss of Glory). All of the
proposed increases that were submitted to Congress last year (and which they failed to act upon) are
eliminated. In addition, the budget submission ignored the James Webb Space Telescope and the
future Mars program—kicking the can of their consideration down the road. NASA is now not just
paralyzed, but its vital signs are weakening.
B. THE PRIVATE SECTOR IS NOT READY TO TAKE OVER FOR GOVERNMENT
SPACE PROGRAMS
David Freedman, science and tech journalist for 30 years, December 2010
[Scientific American December 2010, Vol 303, Issue 6]
What, then, could the Obama administration have been thinking when it announced this past
February that NASA should essentially get out of the manned-spaceship business and turn it over to
private industry? Under the plan, NASA will write off most of the $9 billion invested so far in
Constellation, the program to develop a replacement vehicle for the space shuttle capable of ferrying
astronauts and supplies to the space station and, eventually, to the moon. Instead the agency will
provide seed money to start-ups such as SpaceX, then agree to buy tickets to the space station on
their rockets. It is a naive and reckless plan, a chorus of voices charged. Among the loudest was that
of former astronaut and space icon Neil Armstrong, who was quick to scoff at the notion that the
private sector is ready to take over from NASA. "It will require many years and substantial investment
to reach the necessary level of safety and reliability," he stated. Leaving orbital ferrying in the hands
of private companies, Armstrong and others insisted, would at best be setting the clock back on
National Association for Urban Debate Leagues • Core Files • 2011-12
2011 Novice Core Files
Space Leadership Affirmative
Page 3 of 32
manned space exploration. And were private enterprise to drop the ball, perhaps even
catastrophically, as many believe it would, the entire grand enterprise of sending people into space
might come to a long-term or even permanent halt. Once NASA's massive manned-spaceflight
machine is dismantled, rebuilding it might take far more time and money than anyone would want to
spend. Yet despite these concerns, Congress reluctantly agreed to the plan this fall.
C. U.S. LEADERSHIP IN HUMAN SPACE FLIGHT MAY NOT CONTINUE
Dr. Scott Pace, Director, Space Policy Institute, GWU, May 11, 2011
[Testimony for the US-China Economic and Security Review Commission,
http://www.uscc.gov/hearings/2011hearings/written_testimonies/hr11_05_11.php]
On balance, Chinese civil space capabilities can be expected to increase in the future. China will be
able t o undertake unilateral and international space projects of increasing complexity that will in turn
increase commercial, military, and diplomatic opportunities at times and places of China’s choosing.
Today, U.S. human space flight capabilities remain considerably ahead of China by all measures or
experience, technology, industrial base, and partnerships. Unfortunately, the continuation of the
current balance is uncertain. The United States has failed to develop an assured means for U.S.
Government human access to space, the International Space Station is reliant on the Russian Soyuz
and unproven commercial providers wit h a consequent risk of loss of the Station should there be a
major accident on-orbit, and finally, the United States has failed t o engage its existing international
partners in a program of exploration beyond low Earth orbit. Plans for a human return to the Moon are
on hold and no other human exploration missions are in work. All of these factors increase t he odds
that the United States will not be a global leader in human spaceflight after the end of the
International Space Station sometime in the next ten years or so.
D. CHINA IS BEGINNING TO TAKE OVER FOR THE U.S. AND IS ACCELERATING
ITS MILITARY POWER IN SPACE
Michael Chase, The Jamestown Foundation, March 25, 2011
[http://www.jamestown.org/programs/chinabrief/single/?tx_ttnews[tt_news]=37699&tx_ttn
ews[backPid]=25&cHash=e3f0fcd233f563e2364ad7bc49425244]
In keeping with this emphasis on the importance of space systems in contemporary military
operations, China is making major strides in improving its own space capabilities. According to the
2010 DoD report, "China is expanding its space-based intelligence, surveillance, reconnaissance,
navigation, and communications satellite constellations". As China places more satellites into orbit,
the PLA’s reliance on space systems is growing. China’s military is becoming more dependent on
space capabilities for intelligence, surveillance, reconnaissance, navigation and positioning, as well
as communications.
National Association for Urban Debate Leagues • Core Files • 2011-12
2011 Novice Core Files
Space Leadership Affirmative
Page 4 of 32
SPACE LEADERSHIP – 1AC
OBSERVATION II:
HARMS
A. US LEADERSHIP PREVENTS WARS -- CHINA IS ONLY INTERESTED IN
SPACE TO DECREASE U.S. SUPERIORITY
Baohui Zhang, Director of the Center for Asia Pacific Studies, Lingnan Univ, Feb. 2011
[Asian Survey, vol. 51, number 2, p.312]
Richard J. Adams and Martin E. France, U.S. Air Force officers, contend that “Chinese interests in
space weapons do not hinge on winning a potential U.S.-Chinese ASAT battle or participating in a
space arms race.” Instead, they argue, China’s military space program is driven by a desire to
“counter the space-enabled advantage of U.S. conventional forces.” This perspective implies that
given the predicted U.S. superiority in conventional warfare, China feels compelled to continue its
offensive military space program. Inevitably, this perspective sees China as the main instigator of a
possible space arms race, whether implicitly or explicitly.
B. THE U.S. RELIES ON SPACE FOR ITS MILITARY HEGEMONY AND CHINA
IS WORKING TO CHALLENGE THAT
Everett Dolman, prof., Comparative Military Studies, US Air Force, September 2010
[The Case for Weapons in Space: A Geopolitical Assessment, September 2010, p. 29]
This is the context in which the world now exists. The relatively stable global hegemony of US
dominance since 1945, punctuated by limited wars and shifting balances of opposition, has relied on
technology-dominant global power projection. Today, that technology is wholly integrated and
inextricable from space support, and no state relies more on space power for its economic and
security well-being than the US. Any effort to deny space capabilities would be a direct challenge to
its hegemonic power, and the United States must confront the usurper or abdicate its leadership
position. To be sure, China’s increasing space emphasis and its cultural antipathy to military
transparency suggests that a serious attempt at seizing control of space is in the works. A lingering
fear is the sudden introduction of an unknown capability (call it Technology X) that would allow a
hostile state to place multiple weapons into orbit quickly and cheaply. The advantages gained from
controlling the high ground of space would accrue to it as surely as to any other state, and the
concomitant loss of military power from the denial of space to America’s already-dependent military
forces could cause the immediate demise of the extant international system. The longer the United
States dithers on its military responsibilities, the more likely a potential opponent could seize lowearth orbit before America is able to respond.
National Association for Urban Debate Leagues • Core Files • 2011-12
2011 Novice Core Files
Space Leadership Affirmative
Page 5 of 32
SPACE LEADERSHIP – 1AC
C. PREEMINENCE HAS GAINED MUCH FOR THE U.S.
Richard Maher, PhD. candidate, Brown University, ORBIS, March 2011
[ORBIS, Winter 2011 Volume 55, Issue 1 p. 59 ]
To say that the end of unquestioned preeminence may be good for the United States is
counterintuitive. Power matters in international politics, and preeminence has produced a number of
benefits for the United States (and its allies): security, especially from attack by other states, and the
absence of power competition more generally; relative order and stability, particularly the decreasing
frequency of inter-state war; prosperity and unparalleled wealth creation, and greater freedom of
action and influence over events. Preeminence, by definition, entails few constraints to the projection
of power and influence abroad. By virtue of its position, other countries naturally look to the United
States for leadership, on everything from Middle East peace to climate change. All other things being
equal, preeminence clearly is preferable to a position of subservience, lack of agency, and weakness.
D. U.S. WITHDRAWAL INCREASES THE RISK OF REGIONAL WARS THAT
ESCALATE INTO GREAT WARS
Robert Kagan, senior associate, Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, 2007
[Policy Review No. 144, http://www.hoover.org/publications/policy-review/article/6136]
The current order, of course, is not only far from perfect but also offers no guarantee against major
conflict among the world ’s great powers. Even under the umbrella of unipolarity, regional conflicts
involving the large powers may erupt. War could erupt between China and Taiwan and draw in both
the United States and Japan. War could erupt between Russia and Georgia, forcing the United States
and its European allies to decide whether to intervene or suffer the consequences of a Russian
victory. Conflict between India and Pakistan remains possible, as does conflict between Iran and
Israel or other Middle Eastern states. These, too, could draw in other great powers, including the
United States. Such conflicts may be unavoidable no matter what policies the United States pursues.
But they are more likely to erupt if the United States weakens or withdraws from its positions of
regional dominance.
E. THE U.S. AND CHINA ARE ON A COLLISION COURSE FOR A SPACE WAR
Everett Dolman, prof., Comparative Military Studies, US Air Force, September 2010
[The Case for Weapons in Space: A Geopolitical Assessment, September 2010, p. 1]
The coming war with China will be fought for control of outer space. The stakes are high. The side
that prevails will have a clear path to domination of the international system. Although its effects will
be far-reaching, the conflict itself will not be visible to those looking up into the night sky. It will not be
televised. Most will not even be aware that it is occurring. It may already have begun. And yet, this
new kind of remotely-controlled proxy war will not be so different that it is unrecognizable. The
principles of war and the logic of competition remain as they always have. Only the context has
changed. When perceived through this mind-set, via the tenets of traditional realist and geopolitical
theories that have survived millennia in their basic forms, the unavoidable conclusion is that the
United States and the People’s Republic of China are on a collision course for war.
National Association for Urban Debate Leagues • Core Files • 2011-12
2011 Novice Core Files
Space Leadership Affirmative
Page 6 of 32
SPACE LEADERSHIP – 1AC
THE PLAN -THUS WE PRESENT THE FOLLOWING PLAN:
RESOLVED: THE UNITED STATES FEDERAL GOVERNMENT SHOULD
SUBSTANTIALLY INCREASE ITS EXPLORATION AND DEVELOPMENT OF SPACE
BEYOND EARTH’S MESOSPHERE BY DEVELOPING AND INCREASING UNITED
STATES’ LONG-RANGE SPACE EXPLORATION PROGRAMS.
National Association for Urban Debate Leagues • Core Files • 2011-12
2011 Novice Core Files
Space Leadership Affirmative
Page 7 of 32
SPACE LEADERSHIP – 1AC
OBSERVATION III: SOLVENCY
A. CAPABILITIES ARE MORE IMPORTANT FOR AMERICAN LEADERSHIP THAN
IS INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION
Christopher Stone, space policy analyst and strategist, Space Review, March 14, 2011
[The Space Review, http://www.thespacereview.com/article/1797/1]
Some seem to want to base our future national foundations in space using the important international
collaboration piece as the starting point. Traditional national leadership would start by advancing
United States’ space power capabilities and strategies first, then proceed toward shaping the
international environment through allied cooperation efforts. The United States’ goal should be
leadership through spacefaring capabilities, in all sectors. Achieving and maintaining such leadership
through capability will allow for increased space security and opportunities for all and for America to
lead the international space community by both technological and political example.
B. EXPLORATION CAPABILITY IS NECESSARY FOR AMERICAN LEADERSHIP
Christopher Stone, space policy analyst and strategist, Space Review, March 14, 2011
[The Space Review, http://www.thespacereview.com/article/1797/1]
If America wants to retain its true leadership in space, it must approach its space programs as the
advancement of its national “security, prestige and wealth” by maintaining its edge in spaceflight
capabilities and use those demonstrated talents to advance international prestige and influence in the
space community. These energies and influence can be channeled to create the international space
coalitions of the future that many desire and benefit mankind as well as America. Leadership will
require sound, long-range exploration strategies with national and international political will behind it.
American leadership in space is not a choice. It is a requirement if we are to truly lead the world into
space with programs and objectives “worthy of a great nation”.
C. INCREASED U.S. UNILATERAL POWER IN SPACE WOULD STOP THE SPACE
ARMS RACE
Everett Dolman, prof., Comparative Military Studies, US Air Force, September 2010
[The Case for Weapons in Space: A Geopolitical Assessment, September 2010, p. 31]
Seizing the initiative and securing low-Earth orbit now, while the United States is dominant in space
infrastructure, would do much to stabilize the international system and prevent an arms race in space.
The enhanced ability to deny any attempt by another nation to place military assets in space and to
readily engage and destroy terrestrial anti-satellite capacity would make the possibility of large-scale
space war or military space races less likely, not more. Why would a state expend the effort to
compete in space with a superpower that has the extraordinary advantage of holding securely the
highest ground at the top of the gravity well? So long as the controlling state demonstrates a capacity
and a will to use force to defend its position, in effect expending a small amount of violence as
needed to prevent a greater conflagration in the future, the likelihood of a future war in space is
remote.
National Association for Urban Debate Leagues • Core Files • 2011-12
2011 Novice Core Files
Space Leadership Affirmative
Page 8 of 32
INHERENCY EXT. – THE U.S. SPACE PROGRAM IS DEAD
RISING LAUNCH COSTS COULD LIMIT NASA MISSIONS
Stephen Clark, Spaceflight Now, April 4, 2011
[http://spaceflightnow.com/news/n1104/04launchcosts/]
Already faced with a potentially flat budget over the next half-decade, scientists and managers
overseeing NASA's robotic science probes worry rising and volatile rocket launch prices could further
limit the agency's ability to explore the solar system and maintain crucial climate research. Rising
launch costs could claim a larger slice of a mission's budget, increasing the price of projects geared
for planetary science, astrophysics and Earth observations, according to senior NASA officials. With
the federal government's spotlight on spending cuts, it isn't likely NASA will get a budget boost to
offset the launch costs, which experts say are triggered by inefficient rocket buying practices, an
eroding commercial market, and uncertainty about the future of the space program. That leaves
NASA with just one option: fly fewer missions.
PRESIDENT OBAMA’S BUDGET ELIMINATES THE CONSTELLATION PROJECT
John Matson, Scientific American, February 1, 2011
[http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=nasa-budget-constellation-cancel]
President Obama delivered his budget request for fiscal year 2011 to Congress on Monday,
proposing sweeping changes to NASA's spaceflight program while increasing the agency's overall
budget. As had been rumored for days, Obama's blueprint for NASA would cancel the Constellation
program, the family of rockets and hardware now in development to replace the aging space shuttle,
and would call instead on commercial vendors to fly astronauts to orbit.
THE U.S. IS GIVING UP ITS SPACE CAPABILITIES
The Economist May 19, 2011
[http://www.economist.com/node/18712369?story_id=18712369&fsrc=rss]
What the shuttles did provide, however, was a way for America to carry people into low-earth orbit.
Once the fleet is grounded, America will for a while have no means of its own to deliver men and
women to any part of space. After the usual energetic lobbying by aerospace companies and other
vested interests, Congress has ordered the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA)
to build a mighty new rocket, bigger than Apollo’s Saturn V, capable of lifting a manned vehicle into
deep space. But Mr Obama has cancelled plans to revisit the moon, no other destination has been
specified, and this “rocket to nowhere” will not be ready until 2016 at the very earliest. In the
meantime, American spacefarers bound even for low-earth orbit will have to hitch a ride on a Russian
craft or one of the as yet unproven vehicles under development by the private sector.
National Association for Urban Debate Leagues • Core Files • 2011-12
2011 Novice Core Files
Space Leadership Affirmative
Page 9 of 32
INHERENCY EXT. -- PRIVATE SECTOR SPACE PROGRAMS WILL FAIL
FREE-MARKET SPACE IS UNREALISTIC
Gregg Easterbrook, Reuters columnist, Aril 15, 2010
[http://blogs.reuters.com/gregg-easterbrook/2010/04/15/get-over-the-moon-we-need-nasa-tosave-the-earth/]
Obama’s plan to encourage free-enterprise rocketry sounds great, but is extremely unrealistic. Only
one company, Sea Launch, has ever succeeded in placing a large, privately funded rocket into orbit,
and right now Sea Launch is in Chapter 11. The capital requirement for reaching space is very high,
the customer base modest.
PRIVATE ENTITIES DON’T HAVE ENOUGH MONEY FOR AN EFFECTIVE SPACE
PROGRAM
Gregg Easterbrook, Reuters columnist, Aril 15, 2010
[http://blogs.reuters.com/gregg-easterbrook/2010/04/15/get-over-the-moon-we-need-nasa-tosave-the-earth/]
The White House would provide $6 billion over five years to encourage development of private
rockets, but this is a drop in the bucket. The new Boeing 787 and its engines cost about $13 billion to
develop, and the 787, while beautiful, is just an airplane. A new “human-rated” — multiple redundant
systems — rocket capable of carrying significant payloads to orbit could easily require $25 billion or
more for development. No private company will be able to raise such a sum without a long-term
guaranteed NASA contract, at which point you might as well just have NASA develop the next rocket.
(Private flight to orbit will happen someday, but absent a major breakthrough, perhaps not for
decades. The winged “spaceship” being developed by Richard Branson is not a spaceship; it will fly
higher than conventional aircraft, but not reach orbit.)
PRIVATE SECTOR DEVELOPMENT IS VERY UNCERTAIN AND UNPROVEN
David Freedman, science and tech journalist for 30 years, December 2010
[Scientific American December 2010, Vol 303, Issue 6]
SpaceX's successful rocket tests are encouraging, but they are really the only hard evidence so far
that private industry might succeed. The only other new player gearing up now to produce an orbital
vehicle is Orbital Sciences in Dulles, Va., although at present it has little to demonstrate. Both are
hiring some of the space industry's most highly regarded managers and engineers, but it is
impossible to know if either company will ultimately be able to come up with a good vehicle under
reduced budgets and without hordes of NASA engineers providing detailed design specs.
National Association for Urban Debate Leagues • Core Files • 2011-12
2011 Novice Core Files
Space Leadership Affirmative
Page 10 of 32
INHERENCY EXT. -- PRIVATE SECTOR SPACE PROGRAMS WILL FAIL
PRIVATE SPACE ENTERPRISES ARE UNRELIABLE LESS SUCCESSFUL THAN
NASA PROGRAMS
David Freedman, science and tech journalist for 30 years, December 2010
[Scientific American December 2010, Vol 303, Issue 6]
Hopes are high. In theory, early government support of daring entrepreneurs could jump-start a
vibrant economy centered on space travel, with competition pushing prices ever lower. Risks are, too.
Yet no one knows if start-up companies will be able to deliver safe, affordable, reliable spacecraft. If
they fail, human exploration of space could be set back by decades. TWO YEARS AGO DECEASED
STAR TREK ACTOR JAMES "SCOTTY" DOOHAN WAS GRANTED one last adventure, courtesy of
Space Exploration Technologies Corporation. SpaceX, a privately funded company based in
Hawthorne, Calif., had been formed in 2002 with the mission of going where no start-up had gone
before: Earth orbit. In August 2008 SpaceX loaded Doohan's cremated remains onto the third test
flight of its Falcon 1, a liquid oxygen- and kerosene-fueled rocket bound for orbit. Yet about two
minutes into the flight Doohan's final voyage ended prematurely when the rocket's first stage crashed
into the second stage during separation. It was SpaceX's third failure in three attempts. Well, what did
you expect? sneered old NASA hands, aerospace executives and the many others who hew to the
conventional wisdom that safely ushering payloads and especially people hundreds of kilometers
above Earth is a job for no less than armies of engineers, technicians and managers backed by
billions in funding and decades-long development cycles. Space, after all, is hard. A small, private
operation might be able to send a little stunt ship wobbling up tens of kilometers, as entrepreneurengineer Burt Rutan did in 2004 to win the X-Prize. But that was a parlor trick compared with the
kinds of operations NASA has been running over the years with the space shuttle and International
Space Station. When you're going orbital, 100 kilometers is merely the length of the driveway, at the
end of which you'd better be accelerating hard toward the seven kilometers a second needed to keep
a payload falling around Earth 300 kilometers up.
National Association for Urban Debate Leagues • Core Files • 2011-12
2011 Novice Core Files
Space Leadership Affirmative
Page 11 of 32
INHERENCY EXT. -- U.S. SPACE LEADERSHIP IS BEING THREATENED
U.S. PRIMACY IN SPACE IS BEING THREATENED
Yasuhito Fukushima, National Institute for Defense Studies, January 2011
[Space Policy, volume 27 pp. 3-6]
The current US primacy in space is, however, no longer secure and is challenged by budget
pressures and growing competition. The push for more budget cuts is especially apparent in the
national security space sector. In June 2010 Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates announced his
intention to save over $100 billion of the defense budget over a five-year period starting from fiscal
year 2012 and this is where the space-related budget is expected to suffer.6 In addition, the
proliferation of space activities has intensified heated competition in space. For example, the US
Global Positioning System (GPS) has been widely used as the “gold standard” for space-based
positioning, navigation and timing (PNT) and generated huge positive economic effects.7
Nevertheless, other countries have recently been preparing their own global navigation satellite
systems (GNSS). Russia is rebuilding its Glonass constellation, which aims to be fully operational by
the end of 2010.8 European countries are funding the Galileo system, which is scheduled to be
partially operational in 2014.9 China is also constructing the Beidou/Compass system, which is
intended to achieve global coverage by around 2020.10 These systems are designed to be dual-use
and are sure to have great impact on related markets.
U.S. MAY GET LEFT OUT IN THE GLOBALIZATION OF SPACE
Clara Moskowitz, Space.Com Senior Writer, December 2010
[http://www.space.com/10431-china-lofty-goals-space-station-moon-mars-exploration.html]
All in all, China's space accomplishments are gaining worldwide notice. "To the rest of the world,
China's working very eagerly and aggressively," Johnson-Freese said. "Canada, Europe and Russia
are all banging on the door for China to work with them. I certainly have a concern that the U.S. is
going to end up the odd man out in terms of the globalization of space."
National Association for Urban Debate Leagues • Core Files • 2011-12
2011 Novice Core Files
Space Leadership Affirmative
Page 12 of 32
INHERENCY EXT. -- U.S. LEADERSHIP IS STILL STRONG
AMERICAN HEGEMONY IS VULNERABLE AND SO FAR OBAMA HAS
MAINTAINED OUR PURSUIT OF PRIMACY
Allan Watson, Department of Georgraphy, Staffordshire Univ, 2010
[Antipode, Volume 42, No. 2 pp. 242-247]
Currently, US hegemony looks extremely vulnerable, and it is less in command of a world that looks
entirely more closed and hostile to American values. This condition is in part due to a legacy of
isolation from the international community and European allies, relationships which Obama must
rebuild if he truly wishes to build a new American age. Obama has spoken openly about the task of
relationship rebuilding, but while his words may suggest a multilateral approach, his focus has been
very much on US global “leadership.”
THIS IS A CRUCIAL MOMENT FOR AMERICAN HEGEMONY
Allan Watson, Department of Geography, Staffordshire Univ., 2010
[Antipode, Volume 42, No. 2 pp. 242-247]
We appear to have reached a turning point in American hegemony. The election of a new American
president, Barack Obama, combined with global financial crisis, have left us in uncertain times. While
the 9/11 attacks were a defining moment for the USA and its relationship with the rest of the world, as
the pretext for a more aggressive and contradictory hegemony (Anderson 2003), the events of late
2008 could arguably prove to have more fundamental and far-reaching consequences.
National Association for Urban Debate Leagues • Core Files • 2011-12
2011 Novice Core Files
Space Leadership Affirmative
Page 13 of 32
HARMS EXT. -- U.S. SPACE LEADERSHIP KEY TO OVERALL DOMINANCE
SATELLITES ARE THE KEY TO AMERICAN MILITARY DOMINANCE
Megan Ansdell, Space Policy Institute, GWU, Spring 2010
[Journal of Public and International Affairs, Princeton, vol 21, p8]
Furthermore, satellite-enabled military capabilities such as GPS precision-guided munitions are
critical enablers of current U.S. military strategies and tactics. They allow the United States to not only
remain a globally dominant military power, but also wage war in accordance with its political and
ethical values by enabling faster, less costly war-fighting with minimal collateral damage (Sheldon
2005; Dolman 2006, 163-165). Given the U.S. military’s increasing reliance on satellite-enabled
capabilities in recent conflicts, in particular Operation Desert Storm and Operation Iraqi Freedom,
some have argued that losing access to space would seriously impede the ability of the United States
to be successful in future conflicts (Dolman 2006, 165).
AMERICAN POWER DEPENDS ON DOMINATING SPACE
Gabriele Garibaldi, Association for Asian Research, 2006
[The Chinese Threat to American Leadership in Space, Part II, December 5, 2006
http://asianresearch.org/articles/2979.html]
The relation between the space dimension and the imperialistic dimension (with “Manifest Destiny”
echos) of the USA, is sealed by the conclusions of a book written in 1996 by arms experts George
and Meredith Friedman: “Just as by the year 1500 it was apparent that the European experience of
power would be its domination of the global seas, it does not take much to see that the American
experience of power will rest on the domination of space. Just as Europe expanded war and its power
to the global oceans, the United States is expanding war and its power into space and to the planets.
Just as Europe shaped the world for a half a millennium [by dominating the oceans by its fleets] so
too the United States will shape the world for at least that length of time” - by dominating Space.
THE U.S. HEAVILY RELIES ON SPACE FOR MILITARY POWER
Everett Dolman, prof., Comparative Military Studies, US Air Force, September 2010
[The Case for Weapons in Space: A Geopolitical Assessment, September 2010, p. 3]
No state relies on space power and space support more than the US. Since at least the mid- 1980s,
its armed forces have undergone a radical transformation. Space intelligence and observations, high
bandwidth communications, and navigation support have created the most deadly combat force in
history. America can engage targets anywhere in the world, in all weather, day or night, with
extraordinary precision and lethality, and with a minimum of collateral damage. The progress of this
transformation has been stymied with the continuing emphasis on ground forces occupation duties in
Iraq and Afghanistan, but the American military is operating more effectively and efficiently today with
the smallest percentage of its population actively engaged in military service since the post-WWII
demobilization.
National Association for Urban Debate Leagues • Core Files • 2011-12
2011 Novice Core Files
Space Leadership Affirmative
Page 14 of 32
HARMS EXT. -- U.S. SPACE LEADERSHIP KEY TO OVERALL DOMINANCE
SPACE OFFERS NUMEROUS CRUCIAL MILITARY ADVANTAGES
Mark Stokes, Executive Director, Project 2049 Institute, May 11, 2011
[Testimony before the U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission,
http://www.uscc.gov/hearings/2011hearings/written_testimonies/hr11_05_11.php]
Increasingly sophisticated space-based systems expand PLA battlespace awareness and support
extended range convent ional precision strike systems. Space assets enable the monitoring of naval
activities in surrounding waters and the tracking of air force deployments into the region. The PLA is
investing in a diverse set of increasingly sophisticated electro-optical (EO), synthetic aperture radar
(SAR), and electronic reconnaissance assets. Space-based remote sensing systems also provide the
imagery necessary for mission planning functions, including automated target recognition technology
that correlates pre-loaded optical, radar, or infrared images on a missile system’s computer with real
time images acquired in flight. A constellation of small electronic reconnaissance satellites, operating
in tandem with SAR satellites, could provide commanders with precise and timely geolocation data on
mobile targets. Satellite communications also offer a survivable means of linking sensors to strike
systems, and will become particularly relevant as PLA interests expand further from PRC borders.
Authors publishing in authoritative journals have advocated accelerating and expanding China’s
space-based surveillance system to cover targets operating out to a range of 3000 kilometers from
the shoreline.
CONTROL OF SPACE PROVIDES THE U.S. CRUCIAL MILITARY ADVANTAGES
Bruce MacDonald, United States Institute of Peace, May 11, 2011
[Testimony for the US-China Economic and Security Review Committee,
http://www.uscc.gov/hearings/2011hearings/written_testimonies/hr11_05_11.php]
PLA officers have noted the great U.S. dependence upon space assets and capabilities and the way
they multiply U.S. force effectiveness. Just recently, they saw how U.S. special forces, and the
military and civilian leadership that commanded them, heavily depended upon satellite photographs,
space-derived weather and electronic intelligence, GPS, other space-enabled information, and
satellite communications in executing the strike against Osama bin Laden’s compound in Pakistan.
This brilliantly successful operation was built on a firm foundation of information in which space
played a vital role in creating.. Is it any wonder that the PLA would want the capability to interrupt
these rivers of information and services that our space assets provide? This information allows our
military decision-making, our weapons, and especially our warfighters to be far more effective than in
the past, vital advantages across the spectrum of potential conflict. These “space-enabled information
ser vices” lie at the heart of U.S. military superiority. The PLA certainly wants to be able to greatly
weaken U.S. military power in wartime, and I believe t he PLA could do so within a decade using its
kinetic kill and other ASAT weapons if it chose t o deploy them in large numbers, and thus pose a
serious threat to U.S. space assets. China is also pursuing ot her programs that have important ASAT
implications, and other nations are interested in ASAT as well, such as India and Russia.
National Association for Urban Debate Leagues • Core Files • 2011-12
2011 Novice Core Files
Space Leadership Affirmative
Page 15 of 32
HARMS EXT. -- CHINA’S SPACE PROGRAM IS SUCCESSFUL
CHINA IS MOVING FORWARD WITH A MANNED SPACE STATION AND TRAVEL
TO THE MOON
Christopher Mims, Journalist, Washington DC, Fast Company, April 27, 2011
[http://www.fastcompany.com/1750093/what-chinas-new-space-station-means-for-chinaand-the-world]
Human space exploration requires mastery of a succession of tasks: getting a human home from
space safely. Spacewalks. Docking in orbit. Living in space for extended periods. The Chinese space
program has accomplished all of these goals except the last; the space station completes the
country's maturation as the world's current leading space power. The step beyond this program
program would be the most public and visible demonstration imaginable of the country's ascendancy:
it would mean reproducing the United States' most singular moment of scientific and military triumph,
a boot-print on lunar soil.
CHINA’S SPACE STATION HAS OVERCOME OBSTACLES AND IS ON TRACK
David Cyranoski, Nature News, Nature Magazine, May 4, 2011 p. 14-15
[http://www.nature.com/news/2011/110504/full/473014a.html]
The International Space Station (ISS) is just one space-shuttle flight away from completion, but the
construction boom in low-Earth orbit looks set to continue for at least another decade. Last week,
China offered the most revealing glimpse yet of its plans to deploy its own station by 2020. The
project seems to be overcoming delays and internal resistance and is emerging as a key part of the
nation's fledgling human space-flight programme. At a press briefing in Beijing, officials with the China
Manned Space Engineering Office even announced a contest to name the station, a public-relations
gesture more characteristic of space programmes in the United States, Europe and Japan.
National Association for Urban Debate Leagues • Core Files • 2011-12
2011 Novice Core Files
Space Leadership Affirmative
Page 16 of 32
HARMS EXT. -- CHINESE MOON BASE THREAT
CHINA COULD USE A MOON BASE TO DOMINATE THE U.S. UNLESS WE
MATCH THEM
Mark Whittington, Houston-based writer and author, October 28, 2010
[http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/5946740/chinas_militarization_of_space_a_long
_pg2.html?cat=15]
Further in time, George Friedman, who runs the national security website Stratfor, suggests a chilling
scenario in a recent book, "The Next Hundred Years." A war breaks out in the middle of this century.
An enemy launches space weapons from a base on the far side of the Moon, disguised as space junk
and/or meteors. The weapons proceed to targets in low Earth orbit by eccentric orbits, timed to take
out those targets, which would include American reconnaissance, communications, and navigation
satellites, and also whatever commercial space facilities might exist a few decades from now,
effectively blinding and immobilizing American military assets on Earth. A Pearl Harbor strike from the
Moon around the year 2050 could spell the end of America as a super power and the rise of China in
her place. That history-changing disaster could happen unless America as well as China occupies the
celestial high ground of the Moon. That means reversing Barack Obama's decision to abandon the
Moon and make Earth's nearest neighbor once again the focus of America's initial return to space
exploration.
National Association for Urban Debate Leagues • Core Files • 2011-12
2011 Novice Core Files
Space Leadership Affirmative
Page 17 of 32
HARMS EXT. -- CHINA’S SPACE PROGRAM IS A THREAT TO THE U.S.
CHINA’S AMBITIOUS SPACE PROGRAM MAY SURPASS THE U.S.
Clara Moskowitz, Space.Com Senior Writer, December 2010
[http://www.space.com/10431-china-lofty-goals-space-station-moon-mars-exploration.html]
China is shifting its space program into high gear, with recently announced goals to build a manned
space station by 2020 and send a spacecraft to Mars by 2013 ? all on the heels of its second robotic
moon mission this year. Yet some space analysts worry that China's ascendancy in space means the
waning of American superiority in spaceflight. The United States is retiring its storied space shuttle
fleet in 2011 and plans to rely on commercial spaceships for orbital flights, once they're available,
while planning future deep-space missions. "Certainly [the Chinese] see it as an opportunity to
garner prestige at a time when the U.S. space program is in what some people call turmoil, and what
others call regrouping," said Joan Johnson-Freese, chairwoman of the department of national security
studies at the Naval War College in Newport, R.I., and an expert on China's space program. Among
Americans, she said, "there is the perception that China is somehow getting ahead, that the U.S. is
sliding behind."
National Association for Urban Debate Leagues • Core Files • 2011-12
2011 Novice Core Files
Space Leadership Affirmative
Page 18 of 32
2AC ANSWERS TO: CHINA’S SPACE PROGRAM IS ONLY AN ECONOMIC THREAT
1. CHINA’S MAIN GOAL FOR SPACE PROGRAM IS NOT ECONOMIC
Alanna Krolikowski, Visiting Scholar, Space Policy Institute, GW Univ., May 11, 2011
[Testimony before the U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission,
http://www.uscc.gov/hearings/2011hearings/written_testimonies/hr11_05_11.php]
Proponents of the space program since many decades emphasize its potential contribution to
economic development. Taking a systemic view of the economy, they argue that space-sector
development can “pull” along other sectors. Political elites see the economic, security, and prestige
benefits of space activities as inter-related and mutually reinforcing. However, even though the space
program has had these economic goals and impacts, concrete development benefits, as we usually
think of them, have not provided the main rationale for the program itself or for decisions within it.
2. THE GOAL OF CHINA’S SPACE PROGRAM IS PRESTIGE, NOT ECONOMIC
DEVELOPMENT
Alanna Krolikowski, Visiting Scholar, Space Policy Institute, GW Univ., May 11, 2011
[Testimony before the U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission,
http://www.uscc.gov/hearings/2011hearings/written_testimonies/hr11_05_11.php]
The government’s allocation of resources in civil space has not been consistent with developmental
priorities since 1992, when the human spaceflight program formally began. The areas of space
technology known to generate the most direct and reliable contributions to economic development are
those with concrete applications, such as telecommunications satellites and remote-sensing satellites
for resource management and weather monitoring. The Japanese and Indian space programs,
especially in earlier periods, were designed to serve these developmental priorities. In China, over
the past two decades, resources devoted to civil space have been concentrated not in these relatively
productive areas, but in a costly human spaceflight engineering program of no evident direct benefit
to the national economy. The symbolism of human spaceflight has been an important driver of this
effort.
3. CHINA’S SPACE PROGRAM NOT TIED TO CONDITION OF ITS ECONOMY
Alanna Krolikowski, Visiting Scholar, Space Policy Institute, GW Univ., May 11, 2011
[Testimony before the U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission,
http://www.uscc.gov/hearings/2011hearings/written_testimonies/hr11_05_11.php]
Because of the space sector’s special status, macroeconomic and other aggregate national-level
indicators are weak predictors of China’s space performance. Prospects for the space sector cannot
be directly inferred from the growth of China’s gross domestic product or gross national income. Nor
can they be read off demographic data, such as characterizations of the workforce’s age structure or
estimates of the numbers of new scientific and technical university degree holders. Each of these
factors will matter, but the relationships between these factors and space-sector outcomes are likely
to be non-linear.
National Association for Urban Debate Leagues • Core Files • 2011-12
2011 Novice Core Files
Space Leadership Affirmative
Page 19 of 32
2AC ANSWERS TO: CHINA’S SPACE PROGRAM IS EXAGGERATED
1. DO NOT BELIEVE THE RUMORS -- CHINA IS ENGAGED IN A SPACE RACE
The Telegraph (UK) April 27, 2011
[http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/china/8475779/China-to-build-its-own-spacestation.html]
More than half-a-century after the space race between the United States and the former Soviet
Union, China has poured billions into its own space programme in competition with India. If
everything goes according to plan, China will send a man to the moon by 2025 according to Ye Peijin,
the commander in chief of the Chang'e (lunar landing) programme. Plans are also afoot to send
probes to both Mars and Venus. The plan for a 60-ton, three-module space station is the third and
final phase of Project 921, a project that began in 1992 and which has already seen China become
the third country to launch a man into space. In 2008, China carried out its first space walk, which
was broadcast live to a huge audience on national television.
2. THE U.S. UNDERESTIMATES CHINA’S SPACE GOALS IN THE STATUS QUO
Clara Moskowitz, Space.Com Senior Writer, December 2010
[http://www.space.com/10431-china-lofty-goals-space-station-moon-mars-exploration.html]
Although the country has not officially announced plans to send people to the moon, many experts
say that's where they're heading, and that the space station project, lunar surveyors and robotic
landers are merely the setup for that goal. "They're very conservative about laying out their goals,"
Johnson-Freese told SPACE.com. "They have not announced an official manned lunar program.
They want to have all the building blocks in place for success before that's announced." In addition to
its moon programs, China has also drawn up a technical plan for a spacecraft to orbit Mars, Xinhua
reported. That mission would build upon the technology developed for the two moon missions. The
earliest possible launch date for the Mars orbiter is 2013. Meanwhile, the country has launched a
record total of 14 rockets in 2010 so far, beating the record for most Chinese space missions in a
single year. A number of these payloads were Chinese Beidou navigation satellites and Yaogan
military spacecraft.
National Association for Urban Debate Leagues • Core Files • 2011-12
2011 Novice Core Files
Space Leadership Affirmative
Page 20 of 32
2AC ANSWERS TO: CHINA’S SPACE PROGRAM IS NOT A MILITARY THREAT
1. CHINA IS STRONGLY COMMITTED TO MILITARY ADVANTAGES IN SPACE
Baohui Zhang, Director of the Center for Asia Pacific Studies, Lingnan Univ, Feb. 2011
[Asian Survey, vol. 51, number 2, p.311]
Indeed, in the wake of China’s January 2007 anti-satellite (ASAT) test, many U.S. experts have
attempted to identify China’s motives. One driver of China’s military space program is its perception
of a forthcoming revolutionin military affairs. The People’s Liberation Army (PLA) sees space as a
new and critical dimension of future warfare. The comment by the commander of the Chinese Air
Force captures this perception of the PLA. In addition, China’s military space program is seen as part
of a broad asymmetric strategy designed to offset conventional U.S. military advantages. For
example, as observed by Ashley J. Tellis in 2007, “China’s pursuit of counterspace capabilities is not
driven fundamentally by a desire to protest American space policies, and those of the George W.
Bush administration in particular, but is part of a considered strategy designed to counter the overall
military capabilities of the United States.
2. MILITARY AMBITION IS AT THE CENTER OF CHINA’S SPACE PROGRAM
Mark Stokes, Executive Director, Project 2049 Institute, May 11, 2011
[Testimony before the U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission,
http://www.uscc.gov/hearings/2011hearings/written_testimonies/hr11_05_11.php]
While political and economic considerations contribute to China’s ambit ions in space, the People’s
Liberation Army (PLA) plays a prominent if not central role. Aerospace power – the strategic and
operational application of military force via or aided by platforms operating in or passing through air
and space -- is emerging as a key instrument of Chinese statecraft. The PRC understands the
potential role that aerospace power can play in pursuing military goals. Control over the skies over a
particular region is a critical enabler for dominance on the surface. Effective application of
space-based systems, and denying a potential adversary’s effective use of space assets, offers the
PLA greater flexibility in conducting operations around the country’speriphery and greater confidence
in it s nuclear deterrent. An ability to hold at risk adversarial space systems also may deter attacks on
Chinese space systems, or complicate the ability of regional powers to operate in the Asia-Pacific
region should deterrence fail.
National Association for Urban Debate Leagues • Core Files • 2011-12
2011 Novice Core Files
Space Leadership Affirmative
Page 21 of 32
2AC ANSWERS TO: CHINA’S SPACE PROGRAM IS NOT A MILITARY THREAT
3. CHINA’S REAL AIMS IN SPACE ARE HOSTILE, DESPITE THEIR DIPLOMATIC
EFFORTS
Gabriele Garibaldi, Association for Asian Research, 2006
[The Chinese Threat to American Leadership in Space, Part II, December 5, 2006
http://asianresearch.org/articles/2979.html]
As the situation currently stands, it is clear that the expression “to assure our continued access to
space and deny the space to others if necessary” - recurrent, with little variations, in the US military
plans - is specifically directed towards China. The Pentagon believes that China has the same
intention towards the ousting the United States from Space, and considers its polemic declarations
about the “rumoured” US plans of space weaponization - expressed in front of the UN Committee on
the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space - as the weapon to diplomatically damage and slow down the
action of the USA, while actively working in secret towards the same objective. According to Larry
Wortzel, director of the Asian Studies Center at the Heritage Foundation, the introduction by the
Chinese of a draft treaty devised to act against the US's intent to develop space weapons is
misleading (“…because they’re developing their own space-based weapons...”), having no other
purpose than to diplomatically damage the USA and thus delay their Theater Missile Defense plan,
while China continues with its own plans. According to Richard Fisher of The Jamestown Foundation,
the People's Liberation Army is aware that the “control of space” concept - as theorized by the US
military - is an objective that China must achieve: “China needs to be able to deny to the United
States access and use of space, as they themselves exploit space to support their own forces”.
National Association for Urban Debate Leagues • Core Files • 2011-12
2011 Novice Core Files
Space Leadership Affirmative
Page 22 of 32
2AC ANSWERS TO: CHINA’S SPACE PROGRAM IS NOT A MILITARY THREAT
4. CHINA AND THE U.S. WILL MAKE PEACE IN EVERY AREA BUT ONE: SPACE
Everett Dolman, prof., Comparative Military Studies, US Air Force, September 2010
[The Case for Weapons in Space: A Geopolitical Assessment, September 2010, p. 2-3]
Less venerable theories of conflict and cooperation are more favorable toward long-term peace.
Economically, the US and PRC are tightly bound. Chinese markets are opening and the productivity
of PRC manufacturing has allowed the US to move into a post-industrial economy. Trade is
increasing substantially, and much of America’s foreign debt is held by China, to the point that it is not
to either state’s fiscal advantage to engage in a conflict that will sever or (even just weaken) these
ties. Culturally and historically, the Chinese and American people are inclined toward mutual
admiration and respect. Despite the political differences between Chinese Communism and Western
Liberal Democratic Capitalism, human connections and government rapprochement are valued by
both sides. An appreciation of American technological innovation and Chinese work and spiritual
ethics imbues the still-developing relationship. Both sides seem willing to work together and sustain a
world system in which each nation-state has its place and its independence. In every sphere but one,
it seems, the two great powers are building toward peace. In every sphere of competition, with one
exception, there is room for negotiation and mutually beneficial outcomes. That one incompatible,
uncompromising realm is outer space.
5. SPACE IS A KEY SECURITY ISSUE BETWEEN CHINA AND THE U.S.
Baohui Zhang, Director of the Center for Asia Pacific Studies, Lingnan Univ, Feb. 2011
[Asian Survey, vol. 51, number 2, p.311]
China’s military space program and its strategies for space warfare have caused rising concerns in
the United States. In fact, China’s military intentions in outer space have emerged as one of the
central security issues between the two countries. In November 2009, after the commander of the
Chinese Air Force called the militarization of space “a historical inevitability,” General Kevin Chilton,
head of the U.S. Strategic Command, urged China to explain the objectives of its rapidly advancing
military space program.
National Association for Urban Debate Leagues • Core Files • 2011-12
2011 Novice Core Files
Space Leadership Affirmative
Page 23 of 32
2AC ANSWERS TO: CHINA’S SPACE PROGRAM IS NOT A MILITARY THREAT
6. THE U.S. MUST TAKE CHINA’S SPACE THREAT SERIOUSLY
Gabriele Garibaldi, Association for Asian Research, 2006
[The Chinese Threat to American Leadership in Space, Part II, December 5, 2006
http://asianresearch.org/articles/2979.html]
According to Robert Walker, former president of the Commission on the future of the American
aerospace industry, China is engaged in an aggressive space program focused on a Moon landing,
followed by establishing a permanent base within a decade (according to Japanese experts, China
will be able to reach the Moon within three to four years) and eventually aiming for Mars. It will be
sufficient for it to spend 1% of its GDP over the next few years in order to provide the financing for a
significantly competitive space program. The USA, on the other hand, at least according to Walker, is
no longer able to repeat the Moon mission of thirty-five years ago. This inability to compete in a new
Moon race is more than an issue of national pride: it also raises serious strategical questions over
China's rising potential as a lunar power. China, if it succeeded in its goal, would acquire enormous
international prestige. However, most significantly, by establishing permanent bases on the Moon,
China would gain the ability to exploit lunar resources and therefore gain important technological
advantages over other nations (including nuclear fusion, using the helium 3 isotope), with concrete
consequences on Earth's activities. Walker's conclusion is that the Chinese space program has yet to
be taken seriously by American politicians. Nevertheless, it represents a serious challenge to the US
leadership in Space. The US must answer such a challenge by developing new technologies (for
instance, the nuclear plasma propulsion system) in order to reach the Moon and Mars faster than
currently possible, and to travel more frequently and thriftily into Earth's low orbit.
National Association for Urban Debate Leagues • Core Files • 2011-12
2011 Novice Core Files
Space Leadership Affirmative
Page 24 of 32
2AC ANSWERS TO: THE CHINESE LEADERSHIP TURN
1. SPACE ACHIEVEMENTS STRENGTHEN THE CURRENT CHINESE
LEADERSHIP
Alanna Krolikowski, Visiting Scholar, Space Policy Institute, GW Univ., May 11, 2001
[Testimony before the U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission,
http://www.uscc.gov/hearings/2011hearings/written_testimonies/hr11_05_11.php]
Chinese leaders and policymakers stress that domestic political stability is a precondition for
sustainable economic development. Both proponents and critics of the space program say that it
serves an increasingly important domestic political function by bolstering the legitimacy of the regime
which created it and by serving as a national achievement in which Chinese, often divided on other
issues, can share pride.
2. CHINA’S SUCCESSFUL SPACE PROGRAM LEGITIMIZES THEIR SOCIETY
Everett Dolman, prof., Comparative Military Studies, US Air Force, September 2010
[The Case for Weapons in Space: A Geopolitical Assessment, September 2010, p. 4]
China’s current space program is readily imagined as a New Age Great Wall. Competing with the
West in the highest technological endeavors, and doing so despite significant capital disparities,
enhances the legitimacy of the communist party. China’s domestic population rationalizes lower per
capita income as the state completes its rise among nations to superpower status. International
audiences are awed by the accomplishments, conveying further legitimacy to the state. They
acknowledge China’s domestic right to self-determination, but more importantly give credence to the
capacity of Chinese manufacturing to produce quality high technology goods. This perception helps to
increase the sale of advanced Chinese-made products abroad.
3. SPACE IS A BIG SOURCE OF NATIONAL PRIDE IN CHINA
Washington Post January 23, 2011
[www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2011/01/22/AR2011012203747.html]
There is also the matter of prestige. As with other grandiose projects - high-speed rail, the world's
biggest airport in Beijing, staging the 2008 Olympics - China's Communist leaders view the space
program as a way to show citizens that they can produce successes, thus fostering patriotism and
support for the party's continued rule. "National pride will increase," Xu said. "It's a selling point used
by leading scientists."
National Association for Urban Debate Leagues • Core Files • 2011-12
2011 Novice Core Files
Space Leadership Affirmative
Page 25 of 32
2AC ANSWERS TO: THE CHINESE LEADERSHIP TURN
4. CHINA’S SPACE PROGRAM INCREASES PRESTIGE AND BOOSTS
LEGITIMACY OF THE CHINESE COMMUNIST PARTY
Mark Stokes, Executive Director, Project 2049 Institute, May 11, 2011
[Testimony before the U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission,
http://www.uscc.gov/hearings/2011hearings/written_testimonies/hr11_05_11.php]
The PRC has embarked upon an ambitious dual-use, civil-military space program that is
predominantly driven by the desire to stand among equals in the international community. However,
as in most space programs, there is a military stake. China’s motivations for investing significant
resources into space programs may differ little from other space-faring nations. From a political
perspective, Beijing seeks to elevate its status and prestige internationally. National pride resulting
from successes in space may enhance the domestic legitimacy of the Chinese Communist Party.
From an economic perspective, China benefits from space technology spin-offs, commercial
applications of space systems, and revenue generated by international satellite launch services.
National Association for Urban Debate Leagues • Core Files • 2011-12
2011 Novice Core Files
Space Leadership Affirmative
Page 26 of 32
2AC SOLVENCY ANSWERS: CHINESE INSECURITY
1. THE PLAN IS USING SPACE FOR PROJECTING POWER NOW
Mark Stokes, Executive Director, Project 2049 Institute, May 11, 2011
[Testimony before the U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission,
http://www.uscc.gov/hearings/2011hearings/written_testimonies/hr11_05_11.php]
The PLA is expanding it s ability to project military power vertically into space and horizontally beyond
its immediate periphery in order to defend against perceived threats to national sovereignty and
territorial integrity. Over time, the PRC’s defense establishment may gain a limited ability to conduct
“new historic missions” to enforce a broader set of security interests beyond China’s immediate
periphery. PLA observers view air and space as merging into a single operational medium of the
future, with the English term aerospace best describing the linkage between the two domains.
2. SPACE PROGRAM ASSETS ARE LINKED INTO CHINESE TARGETING
SYSTEMS NOW
Mark Stokes, Executive Director, Project 2049 Institute, May 11, 2011
[Testimony before the U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission,
http://www.uscc.gov/hearings/2011hearings/written_testimonies/hr11_05_11.php]
As its persistent sensor, data fusion, and command and control architecture increases in
sophistication and range, the PLA’s ability to hold at risk an expanding number of targets throughout
the western Pacific Ocean, South China Sea, and elsewhere around its periphery is expected to
grow. In line wit h the PLA’s “informationization” goals, precision guidance enjoys a high R&D priority.
For high altitude target acquisition of moving targets at sea, China’s defense R&D community
appears to be investing significant resources into developing a missile- born SAR capability that
would be integrated with satellite positioning and inertial navigation systems. Existing and future data
relay satellites and other beyond line of sight communications systems could transmit targeting data
to and from theater command elements. Developments underway suggest that the PLA is improving it
s ability to quickly download, process, and disseminate information obtained from space systems.
Space-based assets have been integrated into “Blue Force” ballistic and ground launched cruise
missile operational training exercises.
3. THE PLAN PLAYS A KEY ROLE IN CHINA’S SPACE PROGRAM NOW
Alanna Krolikowski, Visiting Scholar, Space Policy Institute, GW Univ., May 11, 2001
[Testimony before the U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission,
http://www.uscc.gov/hearings/2011hearings/written_testimonies/hr11_05_11.php]
Critical space infrastructure, including existing launch facilities, and the day-to-day management of
civil space operations, especially in the human spaceflight program, are the responsibility of PLA
organs. Within the PLA, the General Armaments Department (GAD) plays the most important role in
space activities. In civil space, the GAD acts mainly in and through the Manned Space Engineering
Office, the entity responsible for the human spaceflight program. The PLA Air Force plays a role in
astronaut training and medicine.
National Association for Urban Debate Leagues • Core Files • 2011-12
2011 Novice Core Files
Space Leadership Affirmative
Page 27 of 32
2AC SOLVENCY ANSWERS: CHINESE INSECURITY
4. THE PLAN HAS ENORMOUS INFLUENCE OVER CHINA’S SPACE PROGRAM
Mark Stokes, Executive Director, Project 2049 Institute, May 11, 2011
[Testimony before the U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission,
http://www.uscc.gov/hearings/2011hearings/written_testimonies/hr11_05_11.php]
Within a broad and fragmented part y and government policy framework, the PLA plays a central role
in coordinating, defining, and managing national space requirements. Functional offices within the
General Staff Department (GSD) shape operational requirements for militarily relevant space-based
sensors, aerospace surveillance systems, and communications satellites. The GSD, as well as the
Chinese Air Force, Navy, and Second Artillery Force, also are primary customers of space-based
systems. For example, the GSD Operations Department appears to manage reference stations and
at least one laser ranging system supporting the country’s expanding navigation satellite network.
Other GSD departments operate sites for processing and distributing downlinked imagery and
electronic reconnaissance information.
5. CHINA IS MODERNIZING ITS WEAPONS SYSTEMS NOW
Christopher Twomey, Asst Prof National Security, Naval Postgraduate School, 2011
[Asia Policy, Number 11, January 2011 p. 59]
Additionally, it is important to highlight that Asian states are modernizing weapon delivery systems
across the board. Some modernizations will likely stabilize power dyads, but most will not (as
discussed in the next section). China has begun to develop a secure second-strike force. The
People’s Liberation Army (PLA) already has fielded long-range solid fueled missiles that can be
launched in minutes rather than hours. These DF-31A systems are also deployed on mobile
launchers, further enhancing their immunity from a potential first strike to disarm them by Russia, the
United States, or, potentially, India. The PLA Navy is also in the process of deploying new ballistic
missile–launching submarines (China’s “boomers” are the Type-94 Jin-class boats). At some point,
these will be equipped with a modern missile, the JL-2, which has long been in development.
National Association for Urban Debate Leagues • Core Files • 2011-12
2011 Novice Core Files
Space Leadership Affirmative
Page 28 of 32
2AC/1AR SOLVENCY EXT.
1. HISTORY SHOWS THAT TECHNICAL CAPABILITY IS A NECESSARY FIRST
STEP BEFORE THE U.S. CAN GAIN INTERNATIONAL LEADERSHIP
Christopher Stone, space policy analyst and strategist, Space Review, March 14, 2011
[The Space Review, http://www.thespacereview.com/article/1797/1]
The world has recognized America as the leaders in space because it demonstrated technological
advancement by the Apollo lunar landings, our deep space exploration probes to the outer planets,
and deploying national security space missions. We did not become the recognized leaders in
astronautics and space technology because we decided to fund billions into research programs with
no firm budgetary commitment or attainable goals. We did it because we made a national level
decision to do each of them, stuck with it, and achieved exceptional things in manned and unmanned
spaceflight. We have allowed ourselves to drift from this traditional strategic definition of leadership in
space exploration, rapidly becoming participants in spaceflight rather than the leader of the global
space community.
2. IF THE U.S. GETS TO SPACE FIRST, IT WILL DISCOURAGE OTHERS FROM
TRYING
Everett Dolman, prof., Comparative Military Studies, US Air Force, September 2010
[The Case for Weapons in Space: A Geopolitical Assessment, September 2010, p. 31]
Moreover, if the United States were willing to deploy and use a military space force that maintained
effective control of space, and did so in a way that was perceived as tough, non arbitrary, and
efficient, such an action would serve to discourage competing states from fielding opposing systems.
It could also set the stage for a new space regime, one that encourages space commerce and
development. Should the United States use its advantage to police the heavens and allow unhindered
peaceful use of space by any and all nations for economic and scientific development, over time its
control of LEO could be viewed as a global public good. In much the same way the British maintained
control of the high seas in the nineteenth century, enforcing international norms of innocent passage
and property rights, and against slavery, the US could prepare outer space for a long-overdue burst
of economic expansion.
3. DEPLOYMENT OF SPACE WEAPONS WOULD GREATLY ENHANCE U.S.
MILITARY POWER
Everett Dolman, prof., Comparative Military Studies, US Air Force, September 2010
[The Case for Weapons in Space: A Geopolitical Assessment, September 2010, p. 32]
There is little reason to believe the United States will forego the capacity to influence decisions and
events beyond its borders, with military force if necessary. Whether that capacity comes from space
as well as the other military domains is undetermined. But, the operational deployment of space
weapons would increase that capacity by providing for nearly instantaneous force projection
worldwide. This force would be precise, unstoppable, and deadly.
National Association for Urban Debate Leagues • Core Files • 2011-12
2011 Novice Core Files
Space Leadership Affirmative
Page 29 of 32
2AC/1AR SOLVENCY EXT.
4. SPACE WEAPONIZATION WOULD COST SO MUCH IT WOULD CONSTRAIN
OUR GROUND FORCES, MAKING THE U.S. LESS OF AN IMPERIAL THREAT –
REDUCING FEAR OF US
Everett Dolman, prof., Comparative Military Studies, US Air Force, September 2010
[The Case for Weapons in Space: A Geopolitical Assessment, September 2010, p. 32]
At the same time, the United States would forgo some of its ability to intervene directly in other states
because the necessary budget tradeoffs would diminish its capacity to do so. A space-heavy
American military would structurally limit potential American imperial ambitions while simultaneously
extending its global leadership role. The need to limit collateral damage, the requirement for precision
to allay the low volume of fire, and the tremendous cost of space weapons will ensure they are used
for high-value, time-sensitive targets. An opposing state’s calculation of survival no longer would
depend on interpreting whether or not the United States desires to be a good neighbor; whether it will
invade and occupy its territory. Without sovereignty at risk, fear of a space-dominant American
military will subside. The United States will maintain its position of hegemony as well as its security,
and the world will not be threatened by the specter of a future American empire.
National Association for Urban Debate Leagues • Core Files • 2011-12
2011 Novice Core Files
Space Leadership Affirmative
Page 30 of 32
U.S. LEADERSHIP SOLVES W AR – EXT.
AMERICAN PRIMACY REDUCES THE RISK OF WAR
Bradley Thayer, assoc prof, Missouri State Univ, The National Interest 2006
[In Defense of Primacy, National Interest, Nov/Dec 2006 Issue 86]
In addition to ensuring the security of the United States and its allies, American primacy within the
international system causes many positive outcomes for Washington and the world. The first has
been a more peaceful world. During the Cold War, U.S. leadership reduced friction among many
states that were historical antagonists, most notably France and West Germany. Today, American
primacy helps keep a number of complicated relationships aligned--between Greece and Turkey,
Israel and Egypt, South Korea and Japan, India and Pakistan, Indonesia and Australia. This is not to
say it fulfills Woodrow Wilson's vision of ending all war. Wars still occur where Washington's interests
are not seriously threatened, such as in Darfur, but a Pax Americana does reduce war's likelihood,
particularly war's worst form: great power wars.
AMERICAN WITHDRAWAL MAKES WAR WITH NUCLEAR WEAPONS MORE
LIKELY
Robert Kagan, senior associate, Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, 2007
[Policy Review No. 144, http://www.hoover.org/publications/policy-review/article/6136]
The jostling for status and influence among these ambitious nations and would-be nations is a second
defining feature of the new post-Cold War international system. Nationalism in all its forms is back, if
it ever went away, and so is international competition for power, influence, honor, and status.
American predominance prevents these rivalries from intensifying — its regional as well as its global
predominance. Were the United States to diminish its influence in the regions where it is currently the
strongest power, the other nations would settle disputes as great and lesser powers have done in the
past: sometimes through diplomacy and accommodation but often through confrontation and wars of
varying scope, intensity, and destructiveness. One novel aspect of such a multipolar world is that
most of these powers would possess nuclear weapons. That could make wars between them less
likely, or it could simply make them more catastrophic.
National Association for Urban Debate Leagues • Core Files • 2011-12
2011 Novice Core Files
Space Leadership Affirmative
Page 31 of 32
U.S. LEADERSHIP SOLVES W AR – EXT.
HEGEMONY CREATES THE CONDITIONS FOR ECONOMIC AND POLITICAL
FREEDOM
Bradley Thayer, assoc prof, Missouri State Univ, The National Interest 2006
[In Defense of Primacy, National Interest, Nov/Dec 2006 Issue 86]
Everything we think of when we consider the current international order--free trade, a robust
monetary regime, increasing respect for human rights, growing democratization--is directly linked to
U.S. power. Retrenchment proponents seem to think that the current system can be maintained
without the current amount of U.S. power behind it. In that they are dead wrong and need to be
reminded of one of history's most significant lessons: Appalling things happen when international
orders collapse. The Dark Ages followed Rome's collapse. Hitler succeeded the order established at
Versailles. Without U.S. power, the liberal order created by the United States will end just as
assuredly. As country and western great Ral Donner sang: "You don't know what you've got (until you
lose it)."
AMERICAN POWER SPREADS LIBERALISM
Bradley Thayer, assoc prof, Missouri State Univ, The National Interest 2006
[In Defense of Primacy, National Interest, Nov/Dec 2006 Issue 86]
American power gives the United States the ability to spread democracy and other elements of its
ideology of liberalism: Doing so is a source of much good for the countries concerned as well as the
United States because, as John Owen noted on these pages in the Spring 2006 issue, liberal
democracies are more likely to align with the United States and be sympathetic to the American
worldview. So, spreading democracy helps maintain U.S. primacy. In addition, once states are
governed democratically, the likelihood of any type of conflict is significantly reduced. This is not
because democracies do not have clashing interests. Indeed they do. Rather, it is because they are
more open, more transparent and more likely to want to resolve things amicably in concurrence with
U.S. leadership. And so, in general, democratic states are good for their citizens as well as for
advancing the interests of the United States.
National Association for Urban Debate Leagues • Core Files • 2011-12
2011 Novice Core Files
Space Leadership Affirmative
Page 32 of 32
2AC ANSWERS TO U.S. LEADERSHIP IS BAD
1. AMERICAN PRIMACY HAS ITS FLAWS, BUT THOSE ARE VASTLY
OUTWEIGHED BY ITS BENEFITS
Robert Kagan, senior associate, Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, 2007
[Policy Reviw No. 144, http://www.hoover.org/publications/policy-review/article/6136]
This is a good thing, and it should continue to be a primary goal of American foreign policy to
perpetuate this relatively benign international configuration of power. The unipolar order with the
United States as the predominant power is unavoidably riddled with flaws and contradictions. It
inspires fears and jealousies. The United States is not immune to error, like all other nations, and
because of its size and importance in the international system those errors are magnified and take on
greater significance than the errors of less powerful nations. Compared to the ideal Kantian
international order, in which all the world ’s powers would be peace-loving equals, conducting
themselves wisely, prudently, and in strict obeisance to international law, the unipolar system is both
dangerous and unjust. Compared to any plausible alternative in the real world, however, it is relatively
stable and less likely to produce a major war between great powers. It is also comparatively
benevolent, from a liberal perspective, for it is more conducive to the principles of economic and
political liberalism that Americans and many others value.
2. U.S. POWER IS STILL AN INDISPENSABLE FORCE FOR GOOD
Thomas Henricksen, senior fellow, Stanford’s Hoover Institution, November 3, 2009
[http://www.forbes.com/2009/10/30/berlin-wall-09-anniversary-cold-war-nato-opinionscontributors-thomas-h-henriksen.html]
Instead of a diminished U.S. role, the post-Wall stretch has witnessed the expanded indispensability
of American power and diplomacy. Without the prodigious U.S. economic capacity and military might,
regional troublemakers and local conflicts would have gotten out of hand. An American-led coalition
turned back Iraq's conquest of Kuwait. Washington's intervention stopped the turmoil in Haiti and the
horrific atrocities in Bosnia and Kosovo during the 1990s, while Western Europe dithered. When Bill
Clinton failed to lift a finger to staunch Rwanda's genocide, hundreds of thousands died in the Central
African country, testifying to the need for U.S. engagement.
National Association for Urban Debate Leagues • Core Files • 2011-12