RT Okinawa Aff Evidence DDI 2010
1
DDI 2010 – RT 2010 – Okinawa Affirmative Core
DDI 2010 – RT 2010 – Okinawa Affirmative Core 1
Notes 4
***Inherency*** 5
Inherency 6
Inherency – Relocation 7
***Solvency*** 8
Plan causes full base removal 9
Okinawa Presence = Unsustainable 10
Military Bases Bad – Laundry List 11
***Environment Advantage*** 12
US Disregards Okinawa Environment 13
One reason why the Pentagon is considering moving out of rich democracies like Germany and South Korea and looks covetously at military dictatorships and poverty-stricken dependencies is to take advantage of what the Pentagon calls their "more permissive environmental regulations." The Pentagon always imposes on countries in which it deploys our forces so-called Status of Forces Agreements, which usually exempt the United States from cleaning up or paying for the environmental damage it causes. This is a standing grievance in Okinawa, where the American environmental record has been nothing short of abominable. Part of this attitude is simply the desire of the Pentagon to put itself beyond any of the restraints that govern civilian life, an attitude increasingly at play in the "homeland" as well. For example, the 2004 defense authorization bill of $401.3 billion that President Bush signed into law in November 2003 exempts the military from abiding by the Endangered Species Act and the Marine Mammal Protection Act. Solvency – US Key 13
Solvency – US Key 14
Warming Modeling Card 15
Warming Module (1/2) 16
Warming Module (2/2) 17
Warming Bad – Laundry List 18
Warming Bad – Terrorism 19
AT: Warming Not Real 20
AT: Warming Not Real 21
***Japanese Politics*** 22
1AC Japanese Politics (1/5) 23
1AC Japanese Politics (2/5) 24
1AC Japanese Politics (3/5) 25
1AC Japanese Politics (4/5) 26
1AC Japanese Politics (5/5) 27
No Support Now 28
No Majority Now 29
AT: Hatoyama 30
Fiscal Reform key to Econ 31
Impact – Climate 32
Impact – Climate 33
Impact – Climate 34
Impact – Climate 35
AT: Alt Causes 36
***China Balancing Advantage*** 37
Ext: China Aggressive Now 38
Ext: China fears Alliance/Presence 39
US-China Conflict Bad: Asian Stability 40
Authoritarian China Bad: NW 41
AT: China is Revisionist 42
AT: Cooperation now 44
Sino-Japan Relations low 45
Sino-Japan Rels Low; Energy 46
Peaceful or Not? 47
Balancing causes lashout 48
Chinese Aggression Causes Japan Prolif 49
Alliance Counterbalances China 50
Japan No Want alliance 51
No Impact to Alliance 52
Alliance Good: Japan-Chinese War 53
Alliance prevents Japan prolif 54
China Not balanced now 55
***Topicality*** 56
AT: Substantial 57
AT: Okinawa isn’t in Japan 58
***AT: Rearm*** 59
Japan no rearm 60
Japan no rearm 61
Japan no Nuclearize 62
Rearm Inevitable 63
Japan Not Aggressive 64
Japan Rearm Good – China Aggression 65
Japan Rearm Good – China Aggression 66
Alliance Causes Rearm 67
Plan Kills Alliance 68
***AT: Relations*** 69
AT: Alliance K2 Rels 70
Okinawa Bases Hurts US-Jap Relations 71
Okinawa Bases Hurts US-Jap Relations 72
Relations Good – Laundry List 73
Relations Good – Asia 74
AT: They Want Relocation 75
Tokyo Wants Relations 76
AT: Withdrawal hurts Relations 77
China Aggression Module 78
Tokyo Suspicious Now 79
China causes Japan Proliferation 80
China fears Japan Rearmament 81
US-China War probable 82
Japan Proliferation = Fast T/F 84
Proliferation Impact – Terrorism 86
***2AC Short Answers*** 87
AT: Relocation CP 88
AT: Consult NATO 89
Trilateralism 90
***Neg Args*** 91
China Won’t Balance 92
Sino-Japan Relations High 93
Withdrawal causes Nuclearization 94
Japan Proliferation Bad – NPT (1/2) 95
Japan Proliferation Bad – NPT (1/2) 96
Ext. Proliferation leads to War 97
Japan Conventional Rearm Bad – War 98
Japan Can Rearm 99
Notes
1. Pretty well organized – though cards would need to be put in order of best to worst, frontlined, etc. later on
2. We might not want to write a relations advantage but keep open the option of turning the relations disad. That way, we can decide if we’d rather link turn or impact turn it in the 2AC
3. I like that you’ve split up public relations from the generic relations ev. This will help us on politics
4. I think we need more work on relations – both in the direction of the link AND impact
5. I think you all need to spend much more time looking for our East Asian balancing scenario. We need our evidence to be about the US strategy instead of just Japan hates China, China hates Japan. As it currently stands, there isn’t a link to US troop presence – ours needs to be entirely centered on how other countries perceive US projection in East Asia
6. Where are the economy cards?
7. Consider the word “all” in the plan text
Link for relations is bidirectional; more strategic to read cards in 2AC
Work on Impact level of relations
Not much defense of Japan won’t rearm/Japan rearm good
If you find people talking about your advantage area, search their name, etc.
Assignment: US-Japan rels
Impact work:
- Look for how withdrawal would affect alliance
“burden sharing”
Sustainability
Resilience
Long-term
Troop withdrawal/presence
Way defense resources are stretched too thin is about base structure
***Inherency***
Inherency
The US will maintain bases in Okinawa
(Associated Press 5/2810 USA Today ("U.S., Japan to keep U.S. military base in Okinawa", http://www.usatoday.com/news/military/2010-05-28-us-japan-okinawa_N.htm//avi))
TOKYO (AP) — Washington and Tokyo agreed Friday to keep a contentious U.S. Marine base in the southern island of Okinawa, reaffirming the importance of their security alliance and the need to maintain American troops in Japan. In a joint statement, the two allies agreed to move the Marine Corps Air Station Futenma to Henoko, in a less crowded, northern part of the island. The decision is broadly in line with a 2006 deal forged with the previous, conservative Tokyo government, but represents a broken campaign promise on the part of Japanese Prime Minister Yukio Hatoyama. Hatoyama came to office last September promising to create a "more equal" relationship with Washington and move the Marine base off the island, which hosts more than half the 47,000 U.S. troops stationed in Japan under a 50-year-old joint security pact. But after months of searching and fruitless discussions with Washington and Okinawan officials, the prime minister acknowledged earlier this month that the base needed to stay in Okinawa. His decision, which he had pledged to deliver by the end of May, has angered tens of thousand of island residents who complain about base-related noise, pollution and crime, and want Futenma moved off the island entirely.
Despite violent protesting from Okinawans, the U.S Government still holds a large military presence in Japan.
(Doug Bandow, senior fellow at the Cato Institute, specializing in foreign policy and civil liberties, June 18th 2010, Cato Institute, Individual Liberty, Free Markets, and Peace, http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=11928)
Okinawans have been protesting against the bases for years. In 1995 the rape of a teenage girl set off vigorous demonstrations and led to various proposals to lighten the island's burden. In 2006 the Japanese government agreed to help pay for some Marines to move to Guam while relocating the Futenma facility to the less populated Okinawan community of Henoko. But residents wanted the base moved off of the island and the government delayed implementation of the agreement. During last year's parliamentary election the opposition Democratic Party of Japan (DPJ) promised to move the installation elsewhere. Prime Minister Hatoyama later said: "It must never happen that we accept the existing plan." However, the Obama administration refused to reconsider and threatened the U.S.-Japanese relationship. That unsettled a public which had voted the DPJ into power primarily for economic reasons. Prime Minister Hatoyama wanted to turn the unbalanced alliance into a more equal partnership but the Japanese people weren't ready. Said Hatoyama as he left office: "Someday, the time will come when Japan's peace will have to be ensured by the Japanese people themselves." Washington's victory appeared to be complete. The Japanese government succumbed to U.S. demands. A new, more pliant prime minister took over. The Japanese nation again acknowledged its humiliating dependency on America.
Inherency – Relocation
Plans to relocate bases in Okinawa will be delayed
(Xinhua News, "Japan's final plans to relocate base in Okinawa likely delayed", 7/20/10, http://news.xinhuanet.com/english2010/world/2010-07/20/c_13406542.htm)
TOKYO, July 20 (Xinhua) -- Japanese Defense Minister Toshimi Kitazawa indicated Tuesday that the original deadline of finalizing the details of the planned relocation of a controversial U.S. military base within Okinawa may be delayed from the August target. Kitazawa told reporters that the result of the gubernatorial election in Okinawa in November was a significant factor contributing to the delay, as a new Governor in Japan's southernmost prefecture could, theoretically, derail the original plans and provide a further headache for the central government. The central government is bound to an accord made with Washington and restated in May to move the U.S. Marine Corps Futenma Air Station within the island, much to antipathy of the island's leaders and local residents, all of whom have been assured time and again their base hosting burden will be relieved in the future. "We must place importance on the election to choose the governor who has the heaviest responsibility for Okinawa," the defense minister told reporters following a Cabinet meeting. Kitazawa added that until the election has finished it would be unlikely that any plans to move the base would be made concrete, but maintained the government does not wish to force the people of Okinawa into accepting the finalized details.
***Solvency***
Plan causes full base removal
Lawsuit over bases in Okinawa will set precedent for base removal in 2011
(Antony Adolf, author of Peace: A World History (Polity Press), and a teacher, public speaker and independent scholar and is the publisher of One World, Many Peaces: Current Events Creating the Future.,10/12/2010, Change- Human Rights, “Okinawa to Sue Japan for U.S. Military Base Removal” <http://humanrights.change.org/blog/view/okinawa_to_sue_japan_for_us_military_base_removal>. AP)
Imagine having a roommate who keeps you up all night, is trained to kill, insists on staying, pays high rent, and occasionally commits violence against your friends. What would you do? Previously I've written about 100,000 Okinawans and their supporters protesting for the removal of the U.S. military base in their backyard. A lot has happened in Japan since then.Most prominently, the Prime Minister at the time resigned, performing political hara-kiri because he did not deliver on the campaign promise to remove the base. If only more leaders worldwide would be so just. The row strained ties between Tokyo and Washington, with the former moving closer to Beijing anyways. China just bought billions of Japanese government securities, too.The resignation of the Prime Minister changed nothing, and in fact made the matter worse for Okinawans. His successor has vowed to restore strained ties with the U.S., which first and foremost means keeping the base in Okinawa (the largest in Japan) in operation indefinitely. So the mayor of Okinawa city has decided to take the matter into his constituents' hands.Challenging a 2006 agreement to relocate the base somewhere else on the island, the mayor's message is clear: get out and stay out. He plans to get his message across in an unprecedented lawsuit on behalf of the city against the national government. The grounds are that the base puts his citizens' security at risk and therefore violates the Japanese government's constitutionally mandated responsibility to protect. The legal action will certainly face an uphill battle not only in Japan but from the U.S. as well. They are taking their time to prepare a rock solid case, having announced that the lawsuit will only be filed sometime in mid 2011. Okinawa is also home to a "Perfect Peace Memorial Park," depicted in the picture above. Removing the base from the island would bring its residents one step closer to the peace that has eluded them since the end of World War II. It would also set a powerful precedent for the hundreds of other U.S. military bases around the world to be removed on simxilar legal grounds.
Okinawa Presence = Unsustainable
Public pressure and U.S. military overstretch makes maintaining military presence in Okinawa unsustainable.
(Doug Bandow, senior fellow at the Cato Institute, February 9, 1998, “No one benefits from US presence in Japan”, http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=5951, CY)
Supposedly, the United States and Japan long ago resolved the most contentious security issue dividing the two countries: American bases on Okinawa. Washington was to consolidate its forces and replace Futenma Air Station with an offshore heliport. But voters in the Okinawa town of Nago recently rejected the plan. With Prime Minister Ryutaro Hashimoto promising to respect his citizens' wishes, American deployments are again in doubt. The Nago vote is just the latest evidence that Japan's outdated security dependence on the US no longer serves the interests of either nation. It is time for a civil divorce. Washington and Tokyo updated their military cooperation agreement last fall. But, given the fine print, Japan's professed willingness to cooperate beyond the defense of its own archipelago means little. Tokyo's military will not fight or even enter a combat zone, and Japan's logistics support excludes weapons and ammunition. Moreover, the Japanese government is cutting defense outlays, as well as host-nation support for the US. The purpose of the existing security relationship has disappeared. In 1945, Washington was concerned about containing communism after the collapse of wartime Japan. Five decades later, communism has collapsed, while Japan has become an economic powerhouse. Yet, the US continues to bear a disproportionate defense burden, devoting roughly 4 percent of gross domestic product to its military, quadruple Japan's level. Equally important, Americans remain at risk in order to guard Japan's national interests with little or no assistance from Tokyo. This was illustrated by Japan's tepid support for Washington's policies toward North Korea and China. Tokyo also has unambiguously stated its opinion of potential conflicts elsewhere in the region - they are America's problems. This relationship is hardly a serious partnership, let alone a military alliance worth the $20 billion or so it costs the US. Although Japan benefits from this subsidy, it also suffers. The presence of thousands of primarily young males and the activities that inevitably accompany military bases fall heavily on local residents. Despite promises by Tokyo and Washington, little has been done to reduce the unfair burden on Okinawa. The proposed heliport offers only a minimal improvement, and no other region in Japan seems likely to accept the "adequate replacement facilities" that Washington has demanded as the price of moving its forces. Unfortunately, America's role in Okinawa has long been discreditable. After the defeat of Japan in 1945, the US asserted de facto sovereignty over the island (which was returned to Japan only in 1972) and seized land from local landowners.