SDI 2007 5 Week

1 Landmines Neg

Index
Strategy Sheet.............................................................................................................................................................................. 2 T PHA........................................................................................................................................................................................... 5 AT: WOT Adv ............................................................................................................................................................................... 6 US-Ethiopian/Eritrean Relations Alt Causes ................................................................................................................................ 7 Relations Bad ............................................................................................................................................................................... 9 AT: Readiness/Hegemony.......................................................................................................................................................... 10 Demining Now ............................................................................................................................................................................ 11 Overstretch Turn......................................................................................................................................................................... 14 Readiness low alt cause.......................................................................................................................................................... 16 Heg High Now ............................................................................................................................................................................ 17 AT: Environment Adv.................................................................................................................................................................. 18 AT: Death and destruction/landmines Adv ................................................................................................................................. 19 AT: Malaria Adv.......................................................................................................................................................................... 20 Solvency Frontline ...................................................................................................................................................................... 22 China CP 1NC Shell ................................................................................................................................................................... 24 AT: US cooperates internationally .............................................................................................................................................. 26 AT: US tech key.......................................................................................................................................................................... 27 AT: US has moral obligation....................................................................................................................................................... 28 AT: Training locals key ............................................................................................................................................................... 29 AT: US=most experienced ......................................................................................................................................................... 30 Canada CP 1NC......................................................................................................................................................................... 31 AT: US=international signal........................................................................................................................................................ 33 AT: US experience/signal key .................................................................................................................................................... 34 Canada SoPo NB ....................................................................................................................................................................... 35 2NC Small Arms Outweigh......................................................................................................................................................... 36 Ottawa CP 1NC.......................................................................................................................................................................... 37 US key to Ottawa Ext ................................................................................................................................................................. 39 Ottawa key to long term Solvency.............................................................................................................................................. 40 US SoPo NB............................................................................................................................................................................... 41 SoPo Key to Heg ........................................................................................................................................................................ 43 2NC AT: North Korea DA ........................................................................................................................................................... 44 Ottawa = Unpopular/Flip Flop..................................................................................................................................................... 46 Ottawa = bipartisan .................................................................................................................................................................... 47 Ottawa = popular w/ public ......................................................................................................................................................... 48 Spending 1NC ............................................................................................................................................................................ 49 Spending Link Ext....................................................................................................................................................................... 51 Politics Links Bipart ................................................................................................................................................................. 52 Politics Links Public ................................................................................................................................................................. 53 China DA Links........................................................................................................................................................................... 54 Dept of State DA......................................................................................................................................................................... 55 Dept of State DA Ext .................................................................................................................................................................. 58 1AC Reconstruction U Mich ....................................................................................................................................................... 59 1AC Reconstruction GDI ............................................................................................................................................................ 71

SDI 2007 5 Week

2 Landmines Neg

Strategy Sheet
1AC Summaries:
Most plans basically offer straight US tech and then training for locals. There are some reasonably creative advantages stemming from interactions in the countries where wed do the de-mining, WOT and relations type stuff, and then some obvious ones like landmines screwing up the environment and peoples lives. Then there are pretty decent solvency cards about how sweet US tech is.

Advantage Areas:

The landmines affs put out thus far contain one or more of the following advantages if you read any of these notes on advantages and think the internals might be terribly sketchy, thats because youre right and they are: Death and destruction/landmines: -Pretty much what it sounds like landmines kill people who walk through them -A lot of people die or are maimed each day -Some affs read a Cuomo-like criticism of not focusing on structural violence (i.e. landmines) War on Terror: -Goes with the Ethiopia, Eritrea specific aff -Relations with Ethiopoa/Eritrea are supposed to help the US gain a foothold there to win WOT - Ethiopia is probably not key to global WOT, but thats what they say -The impact card is from someone who writes for Right Wing News might want to point that out Readiness/Hegemony: -Apparently de-mining is critical for readiness -This is clearly a lie -The idea is that soldiers get experience Agriculture: -Landmines jack agriculture because farmers cant plant when there are bombs in the ground -People starve because there isnt enough food Environment: -Landmines kill species and disrupt the foodchain -Loss of bioD -Thats extinction Malaria: -Landmines create craters -Craters collect puddles -Mosquitoes breed in the puddles -Mosquitoes have malaria, and malaria kills people

Plan Texts: U Mich: The United States Federal Government should substantially increase its landmine clearance, training, and risk education efforts in Ethiopia and Eritrea. Well clarify. GDI: The United States Federal Government should

SDI 2007 5 Week

3 Landmines Neg

Strategy 1:

-T PHA -China CP -Politics -Spending OR Dept. of State DA -Case The T argument is pretty solid. Most of the aff cards saying that landmines are PHA are warranted with landmines cause injuries and deaths. This argument is pre-empted in the 1NC shell with the limits standard allowing affs to be topical based on solving injury and death would probably explode the topic any aff with an advantage might meet that interpretation. Also, the violation card in the shell here is pretty good about why the approaches to humanitarian de-mining and PHA are fundamentally different. I think the China CP is the best counterplan in this file theres specific evidence to answer all of their US key warrants. Expect 1) tech, 2) good at training locals, and 3) moral obligation because the US is a huge exporter of mines. But the cards that Chinese tech is good are pretty good; Chinas successfully trained locals before, theres evidence on that too, and the good news (ironically enough) is that China is also a huge exporter or landmines, so theyd have a reciprocal obligation. Theres also evidence of empirical success in Africa more empirical success evidence than theyll have, since the US really doesnt do that much de-mining in Africa. Obviously it doesnt solve the readiness/heg advantages, but those internals are pretty sketchy. Pulling mines out of the ground is probably not key to readiness. Politics Bush bad is probably the right side of the link debate. The plan would obviously be a flip flop, but seriously, no one doesnt like saving helpless people from mines. Even the GOP likes it, shockingly enough, as do the public and Democrats, so Im not even sure who the flip flop would hurt him with. Youll have to make a choice between spending and the DOS DA obviously the spending links are pretty good; demining is incredibly expensive, then its just your standard spending debate. It surprised me a little how good the DOS cards were; that being said, theyre still not the most fantastic cards ever. Spending is certainly safe, but if you want to surprise them a little with something, DOS is definitely viable. You should obviously load up on the advantages that the counterplan doesnt solve you can probably win the internal link debate on heg. There arent that many cards, but you really dont need that many. Seriously, teaching soldiers to pull mines out of the ground isnt going to make them any more badass in combat. Then theres the WOT advantages, relations being the internal link. Theres some good relations defense its true that US/Eritrean relations might be a good thing, but de-mining isnt going to cut it. Thats probably a pretty winnable debate. Other than that, the case defense is pretty self explanatory. The Dyck solvency turns are fairly solid, I think, and the no timeframe card is probably also worth throwing in there. **Also the Ottawa CP solvency cards can be read as solvency takeouts on case if Ottawa is key to real success demining, its a reason the plan doesnt solve

SDI 2007 5 Week

4 Landmines Neg

Strategy 2:

-T PHA -Canada CP -Canada SoPo NB -Politics -Spending OR Dept. of State DA -Case Most of this stuff is explained above. The only real difference is the Canada CP and its SoPo NB. I think China probably solves the case better most of the solvency in this file just speaks to Canadas experience de-mining in SSA. If theres any kind of morality argument in the case, China/US undoubtedly fulfill it better, because Canada just doesnt export that many mines. That solvency deficit is hardly damning, but its something to be aware of also, theres no specific evidence that Canada can train locals. Not all affs train locals; the ones that do dont seem to have amazing evidence that thats key. Also, in the 1NC shell is a card Canada does have a couple of distinct advantages over China they started Ottawa, so they have a pretty good international signal, and they probably have more experience than almost any other actor, and the evidence in this file speaks to that. Also, theres the Canada soft power net benefit. The cards arent absolutely fantastic, but theyre alright, and its worth reading if you read this CP. The impact is light arms, so you can get on their level of impact calculus with structural violence and other probability warrants. **When running either Canada, or China, or any intl agent for that matter, be sure to use the relations alt causes as reasons China/Canada/whatever would solve better because the US and Eritrea cant play nice

Strategy 3:
-T PHA -Ottawa CP -Politics -Spending -Case The Ottawa CP Ottawa has to be the biggest de-mining effort to date. Well over one hundred countries are signatories. The cards as to why the US is key to give Ottawa teeth are pretty good. Youd have bigger I/Ls to their impacts, for the Ethiopia specific aff and even for the SSA aff, because the CP would be done on a much larger scale. Most of the aff answers Ive seen so far say something to the effect of the Ottawa treaty isnt enforceable/no one listens. The solvency cards in this file assume those arguments Ottawa sucks it up because the US isnt behind it. The net benefit is spending costs wouldnt be incurred immediately, as they would be with the plan, and theyd also be defrayed by other actors. Also, some cards were included about Ottawa being key to soft power, and soft power being key to hard power. That I/L is probably bigger and better than the one on case CP might solve heg better. I went ahead and chose terrorism as the soft power impact to put in this file, but obviously that could be mixed up. Its not like theres a shortage of soft power impacts. Also, the politics debate politics can probably be a net benefit. There are politics cards both ways in this file for the CP. The plan is pretty definitely popular. Heres the story on the CP: Bush and his cronies hate the Ottawa treaty because it would force them to remove mines from the Koreas, where we have definite security interests. Its pretty unpopular on that front. But there are actually some cards in here about how its pretty popular in a Democratic Congress and with the public, which makes some sense, but on the truth side of the debate, Ottawa is probably unpopular ***Note with this counterplan, dont read any of the mines good/key to readiness arguments. They definitely link more to the CP.

SDI 2007 5 Week

5 Landmines Neg

T PHA
A. Interpretation: Public health assistance is the provision of general health services designed to protect the health of the general public Code of Federal Regulations 2007 B. Violation: de-mining is not PHA doesnt use public health techniques Daniel Wolf and Steven Barmazel, President and Publications Director of Terra Segura International, 2001 (The
Necessity of Implementing a Public Health Approach to Humanitarian De-mining, http://maic.jmu.edu/JOURNAL/5.2/ notes/danielwolf.htm, hl) Landmines are an epidemic, yet unlike other programs fighting epidemics, humanitarian demining does not conscientiously apply public-health techniques. National mine-clearing projects conform to inflexible military models that maximize central control while stifling local initiative. Intensive mine-at-a-time clearing efforts, though urgent in heavily trafficked areas, are applied across the board, dissipating demining resources. This makes reducing risks across large areas and populations impossible, resulting in continuing and unnecessary deaths from unaddressed mine fields. Clearing every mine field is beyond the worlds demonstrated willingness to expend capital. Speeding reclamation and reducing casualties within existing resources requires more emphasis on overall risk reduction, more efficient methods and technologies and increased incentives for private action. Public-health programs do this by balancing what is best for individuals with what is best for all. Expensive acute care, such as caring for the sick during cholera epidemics, is the smaller part of the solution; the larger part is generalized threat reduction (e.g., providing reliable, potable water systems). The goal is to achieve the highest societywide health benefit for the available funds, which are always insufficient.

C. Standards 1. Ground: they take the core of the topic aid and PHA bad away, which is key for all neg strategy K links, international CPs, disad links 2. Limits: the aff justifies solving for any issue that injures people or results in death means affs that negotiate with North Korea not to develop the bomb or counseling to prevent suicide would be topical 3. Predictability: no way the neg can be forced to prepare for non public health issues D. Voters topicality is a voter for fairness and education

SDI 2007 5 Week

6 Landmines Neg

AT: WOT Adv

Relations with Ethiopia dont solve terrorism Berte Habte-Giorgis, professor at Rowan College, 11-18-2005 ( Why the War on Terrorism in the Horn of Africa Can
Never Succeed, http://www.dehai.org/demarcation-watch/articles/Berhe_HabteGiorgis_why_the_war _on_terrorism_in_the_horn_of_ Africa_cannot_succeed.html, hl) "Islamic extremism" can be fought militarily from outside. There are two types of terrorism: state sponsored and committed in other countries (external); "home grown" (internal). War against external terrorism, both against the sponsor countries and the terrorists can be effectively fought by governments from outside. However, internal terrorism, especially religious extremism, which relies on sentiments that reside in the minds and beliefs of people can be tackled internally by political, religious, and social action, by people and governments in those countries. A regional or global consortium of religious leaders and governments may be useful to develop a common approach and appeal to fight extremism in respective countries. Sheer military action from outside is bound to fail. If at all, it may produce the opposite result. As for Ethiopia, the country will be lucky if it succeeds in curbing the infiltration of "Islamic extremism" in its own country.

Turn: Relations building with Ethiopia incites Somali backlash and more terrorism Berte Habte-Giorgis, professor at Rowan College, 11-18-2005 ( Why the War on Terrorism in the Horn of Africa Can
Never Succeed, http://www.dehai.org/demarcation-watch/articles/Berhe_HabteGiorgis_why_the_war _on_terrorism_in_the_horn_of_ Africa_cannot_succeed.html, hl) Use a neighboring country that is viewed as the eternal enemy of the Somali people in the fight against terrorism. Ethiopians and Somalis have age-old enmity. Putting the war on terrorism in the same bundle changes the perception of the people. The war is viewed as an extension of the fighting Somalia and Ethiopia waged over the Ogaden, and the essence of Greater Somalia. U.S. involvement in this situation creates the impression that the U.S. is assisting Ethiopia in destroying Somalia, the same way the U.S.S.R. and the Soviet block countries fought Somalia on the Ethiopian side in 1977. The issue unites "Islamic extremists" and nationalistic Somalis against the U.S. and Ethiopia. Embracing the Ethiopian Prime Minister, Meles Zenawi, was a kiss of death for U.S. anti-terrorism strategy in the region.

Relations wont solve terrorism Ethiopian interests are contrary to the U.S.s Berte Habte-Giorgis, professor at Rowan College, 11-18-2005 (Why the War on Terrorism in the Horn of Africa Can
Never Succeed, http://www.dehai.org/demarcation-watch/articles/Berhe_HabteGiorgis_why_the_war _on_terrorism_in_the_horn_of_ Africa_cannot_succeed.html, hl) The expectation that Ethiopia can serve a useful purpose as an ally in the war on terrorism in Somalia. As a country in the hinterland, Ethiopia cannot have a role in preventing infiltration of terrorists into Somalia from outside or to curb their activities inside the country. Preventing incursions by Al Qaeda from outside requires control of the coastline. Ethiopia does not have this capability. The attack on a cruise ship recently demonstrates that terrorists have freedom of movement on the sea and should be a warning of a possible catastrophic attack on civilian targets in the future. All Ethiopia can do is mount occasional raids into Somalia from across the border, thereby stiffening the resistance by the Somali people and increasing support for extremists. Going too deep inside Somalia will entail the raiders being cut off and destroyed. Complete occupation of Somalia is unthinkable, even militarily. Such attempt will be the death-knell for Ethiopia as a country. The Somalis are exceptionally good fighters, and Somalia is a member of the Arab League. A prudent policy by the U.S. would find ways of bringing the Somali people to its side. It has to use its allies in the region, such as Yemen, Kenya, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Djibouti, and Eritrea for advice and assistance. First order of priority should be to create a viable government. Then assist the new government to take care of the extremists. The Ethiopian regime's policy runs contrary to the interest of the U.S. Ethiopia's strategy is to prevent the creation of an independent and strong government. Instead, it wants to create a puppet government in Somalia and keep the country unstable, with the hope of weakening the guerilla war in the Ogaden, which has been going on for almost half a century. To use the regime in Ethiopia as an ally is alienating Washington from the Ethiopian people, who were, until now, some of the most die-hard supporters of the U.S. Historically, there will be a price to be paid for this mistake. As Dr. Weinstein mentions in his article, and as events during the last ten days testify, the regime in Ethiopia is very unpopular in its own country. As far as the fight on terrorism in Somalia goes, to trust such a regime is tantamount to putting all eggs in one basket, and give them to a blind man, to carry them across a river.

SDI 2007 5 Week

7 Landmines Neg

US-Ethiopian/Eritrean Relations Alt Causes

Alt causes for bad US/Eritrean and Ethiopian relations, plan cant overcome A) U.S. objection to peace agreements BBC 5-11-2007 (Eritrean President on Ties with US, Ethiopia, Somalia, Domestic Issues, p. Lexis, hl)
Asked about Eritrea's relations with the United States, Afewerki says the main reason for the "lukewarm" relations between Eritrea and the United States is the latter's "objection" to the implementation of the EritreanEthiopian border agreement reached in 2002. Asked why the United States would object to the implementation of the agreement reached with Ethiopia, he says the United States has its own strategy in Africa. Responding to another question, he denies that the United States has asked for military bases in Eritrea.

B) Eritrean crackdown on civil liberties US Fed News 4-1-2007 (State Department Issues Background Note on Eritrea, p. Lexis, hl)
Eritrea is a member of the Common Market of Eastern and Southern Africa (COMESA) and the African Union (AU) but does participate actively in the AU. Eritrea maintains diplomatic relations with the United States, Italy, and several other European nations, including the United Kingdom, Germany, Norway, and the Netherlands. Relations with these countries became strained as a result of the 2001 government crackdown against political dissidents and others, the closure of the independent press, and limits on civil liberties.

C) History of mistrust US Fed News 4-1-2007 (State Department Issues Background Note on Eritrea, p. Lexis, hl)
The U.S. consulate in Asmara was first established in 1942. In 1953, the United States signed a mutual defense treaty with Ethiopia. The treaty granted the United States control and expansion of the important British military communications base at Kagnew near Asmara. In the 1960s, as many as 4,000 U.S. military personnel were stationed at Kagnew. In the 1970s, technological advances in the satellite and communications fields were making the communications station at Kagnew increasingly obsolete. In 1974, Kagnew Station drastically reduced its personnel complement. In early 1977, the United States informed the Ethiopian Government that it intended to close Kagnew Station permanently by September 30, 1977. In the meantime, U.S. relations with the Mengistu regime were worsening. In April 1977, Mengistu abrogated the 1953 mutual defense treaty and ordered a reduction of U.S. personnel in Ethiopia, including the closure of Kagnew Communications Center and the consulate in Asmara. In August 1992, the United States reopened its consulate in Asmara, staffed with one officer. On April 27, 1993, the United States recognized Eritrea as an independent state, and on June 11, diplomatic relations were established, with a charg d'affaires. The first U.S. Ambassador arrived later that year. In the past, the United States has provided substantial assistance to Eritrea, including food and development. In FY 2004, the United States provided over $65 million in humanitarian aid to Eritrea, including $58.1 million in food assistance and $3.47 million in refugee support. In 2005, the Government of Eritrea told USAID to cease operations. At the Eritrean Government's request, the United States no longer provides bilateral development assistance to Eritrea.

D) Anti-US statements and funding terrorist organizations States News Service 1-30-2007 (Press Conference at AU Summit in Ethiopia, p. Lexis, hl)
We have an ambassador in Eritrea. Eritrea has an ambassador in the United States, so we continue to have our diplomatic relations. As I said, the lines of communications aren't that great right now. But, we are not as concerned about the statements coming out of Eritrea against the U.S. Government. We think those statements have more to do with the Eritrea-Ethiopia border issue than anything else. I think that President Issaias felt that the United States government could somehow solve the Eritrea-Ethiopia Border Commission. It has been fairly aggressive in terms of their government statements towards us since then. But we don't mind. We can manage and for us, where there is a real threat is the fact that the CIC was being highjacked by extremists and terrorists. And that was a threat against our interests and the neighbors' interests, and it was unfortunate that Eritrea's government was funding, assisting and training those extremists and those terrorists.

SDI 2007 5 Week

8 Landmines Neg

E) Tensions over Somalia and weapons trading Salad Duhul, writer for the Associated Press, 10-29-2006 (Islamic Group Says Peace Talks Off Unless Ethiopian Troops
Withdraw, p. Lexis, hl) The top U.S. diplomat to Africa, Jendayi Frazer, on Oct. 19 accused Eritrea of using Somalia to open a second front against Ethiopia. Relations between the two sides are at a low with Frazer claiming Eritrea is shipping in weapons to the Islamic group, whom the U.S. believe are harboring al-Qaida terrorists.

F) USs perceived agenda Salad Duhul, writer for the Associated Press, 10-29-2006 (Islamic Group Says Peace Talks Off Unless Ethiopian Troops
Withdraw, p. Lexis, hl) Eritrea, meanwhile, claimed the U.S. is using its arch rival Ethiopia to carry out a war in the country. A statement posted on the Eritrean Information Ministry's Web site late Saturday said the U.N. troop claim was an attempt "to cover up the U.S. governments plans and the war it is carrying out in Somalia and the Horn of Africa in general" through the Ethiopian government.

SDI 2007 5 Week

9 Landmines Neg

Relations Bad
Turn Relations based on counter-terrorism focus are bad they allow glaring human rights abuses Lynn Fredriksson, Advocacy Director for Africa Amnesty International USA, 5-10-2007 (Human Rights in Africa, p. Lexis,
hl) U.S. foreign policy's focus on counter-terrorism has also played a significant role. It has contributed to the glaring absence of public statements and policy decisions in response to diminishing political space and the abusive treatment of prisoners of conscience and other political prisoners in Ethiopia. Given the close and longstanding relationship U.S. government policymakers have enjoyed with the Government of Ethiopia, are we left to assume that they have chosen to ignore universally recognized human rights norms in exchange for military bases, political intelligence and the facade of national stability? U.S. policy toward Ethiopia should make the protection of all human rights, including the fundamental rights of physical integrity, expression, assembly and fair trial central to U.S. relations with the Government of Ethiopia and Ethiopian civil society. And it should recognize even if the government in Addis Ababa currently does not that in order to achieve Ethiopia's goal of domestic and border security, both the Government of Ethiopia and the international community must listen to and respect the rights of minority groups and opposition parties and in particular leading human rights defenders whose perspectives on national priorities and the nature of their own rights have been too long ignored.

SDI 2007 5 Week

10 Landmines Neg

AT: Readiness/Hegemony
Landmines have diverse uses and are a key part of military strategy Michael Sholz, senior in engineering at U of Wisconsin, 1996 (Landmines: A Global Crisis to Challenge this University,
http://tc.engr.wisc.edu/Steuber/papers/1996/landmines.html, hl) A landmine is an explosive device left on the ground, or buried just beneath the surface. The two major categories of landmines are anti-personnel and anti-tank. Anti-personnel mines are triggered by a force as little as 5-10 pounds, while anti-tank mines are made to detonate under a vehicle [1]. Millions have been spent to advance their capabilities. Landmines are becoming easier to employ, harder to detect and nearly impossible to disarm. For example, landmines can now be delivered by remote means. A packet of mines can be launched over enemy lines and scattered by an artillery shell. Once there, the mines can interfere with enemy supply routes and impede the arrival of reinforcements. These tactics have allowed landmines, previously considered defensive weapons, to be used offensively. As a result, the number of active mines in place around the world has increased at a startling rate. Last year alone, another two million of these lethal weapons were planted

Landmines are a key part of military strategy multiple warrants Michael Sholz, senior in engineering at U of Wisconsin, 1996 (Landmines: A Global Crisis to Challenge this University,
http://tc.engr.wisc.edu/Steuber/papers/1996/landmines.html, hl) Many countries -- including the United States--are reluctant to support restrictions on the use of landmines due to the significant role that they play in military strategy. Mines are used to slow or restrict enemy movement, to protect friendly forces or even to funnel enemy troops into areas where they can be easily attacked. Mines often maim instead of actually killing, which can be seen as favorable from a military standpoint. One officer states, &quotNot only are [the victim's] fellow soldiers forced to witness the distress of one of their own, but transporting a single victim behind the lines for medical care can force the redeployment of several combatants away from the battle zone" [1]. In addition, mines are inexpensive and require almost no upkeep to perform their function.

US military leaders maintain landmines key to readiness Melvin Goodman, writer for Washington Monthly, December 2000 (Shotgun Diplomacy, http://findarticles.com/p/
articles/mi m1316/is_12_32/ai_68148602, hl) The debate over the ICC isn't the only place where the interests of the uniformed military have pushed the United States to oppose its allies and support dubious policies. Take the campaign to ban land mines. The Pentagon opposes the international effort because of its deployment of mines near the border between North and South Korea. Antipersonnel mines, unable to tell the difference between a combatant and a child, have created havoc in such disparate places as Cambodia, Angola, Afghanistan, El Salvador, Bosnia, and Mozambique. But the cincs have made land mines a readiness issue and will not budge. Not even the inauguration of a tentative peace between the two Koreas and the beginning of summit diplomacy between the United States and North Korea has led to new thinking at the Pentagon.

SDI 2007 5 Week

11 Landmines Neg

Demining Now
Status quo solves were demining now in A) Bosnia US Fed News 4-11-2007 (US Funding Support for Humanitarian Demining in Bosnia, Herzegovina, p. Lexis, hl)
In order to maximize the cost-effectiveness and productivity of demining efforts funded by the United States in Bosnia and Herzegovina, the U.S. Department of State has decided to channel its funding in the future to those demining organizations that are capable of efficiently and effectively executing larger projects, or a greater number of smaller projects combined, than has been the case in the past.

B) Kosovo US Fed News 2-23-2007 (US Clearance of Unexploded Cluster Munitions, p. Lexis, hl)
KOSOVO: NATO used cluster munitions as well as conventional unitary bombs against Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (FRY) military targets in Kosovo. After the withdrawal of FRY forces, the United States and other donors launched a clean-up of all ERW and landmines. In addition to providing air strike data within 6 months of the end of hostilities to facilitate ERW clearance, the United States provided $15.5 million in clearance aid. By the end of the 2001 demining season, the United Nations declared that Kosovo was free from the humanitarian impact of all ERW and landmines. The United States continues supporting indigenous Kosovar clearance capabilities as new suspect areas are discovered.

C) Serbia US Fed News 2-23-2007 (US Clearance of Unexploded Cluster Munitions, p. Lexis, hl)
SERBIA: Limited cluster munitions strikes occurred within Serbia as part of NATO operations to force the withdrawal of FRY forces from Kosovo. The United States has provided more than $2 million for ERW clearance in Serbia (and Montenegro) through the Slovenian International Trust Fund for Demining and Mine Victims Assistance. Clearance of all known contaminated areas in Serbia is expected to be complete later in 2007. Additional United States resources will be provided to further survey unverified ERW contamination in suspect areas.

D) Montenegro US Fed News 2-23-2007 (US Clearance of Unexploded Cluster Munitions, p. Lexis, hl)
MONTENEGRO: Some NATO air strikes that employed cluster munitions occurred within Montenegro, then part of the rump Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (FRY), during the campaign to force a withdrawal of (FRY) forces from Kosovo. A portion of the more than $2 million that the United States allocated for ERW clearance in Serbia via the Slovenian International Trust Fund for Demining and Mine Victims Assistance (see above) was used to clean up unexploded cluster munitions and other ERW in Montenegro as well.

E) Afghanistan US Fed News 2-23-2007 (US Clearance of Unexploded Cluster Munitions, p. Lexis, hl)
AFGHANISTAN: In late 1988, the United States and other concerned donors began to clear landmines and ERW in Afghanistan, including unexploded cluster munitions used by the former Soviet Union. In 2002, the United States provided strike data for air- delivered ordnance, including cluster munitions, to the United Nations within three months of the cessation of hostilities against the Taliban. Concurrently, the U.S. Department of State expanded existing demining efforts to address the danger of unexploded cluster munitions with a $3 million project that was successfully concluded in July 2002. That $3 million is a small part of the more than $152 million in ERW and landmine clearance that the United States has funded in Afghanistan since 1993. United States assistance continues.

SDI 2007 5 Week

12 Landmines Neg

F) Albania US Fed News 2-23-2007 (US Clearance of Unexploded Cluster Munitions, p. Lexis, hl)
ALBANIA: Most of the unexploded cluster munitions present in Albania resulted from FRY forces firing artillerydelivered cluster munitions during the Kosovo crisis in 1999. A total of 15 square kilometers of Albanian territory were ultimately affected by ERW and landmines stemming from that conflict, with about 50 per cent of that area considered to have been affected to some degree by unexploded cluster munitions. By the end of 2006, thanks in part to more than $7 million of United States assistance, approximately 13 square kilometers of that total affected area was cleared. United States ERW clearance and demining assistance continues.

G) Cambodia US Fed News 2-23-2007 (US Clearance of Unexploded Cluster Munitions, p. Lexis, hl)
CAMBODIA: Cambodia suffers from extensive contamination from persistent landmines as well as ERW of all types, including unexploded cluster munitions delivered by United States forces. In addition to air strike target data, the United States has provided with over $32 million in U.S. funding since 1993 to clear both landmines and ERW of all types, including unexploded cluster munitions. United States ERW clearance and demining assistance continues.

H) Iraq US Fed News 2-23-2007 (US Clearance of Unexploded Cluster Munitions, p. Lexis, hl)
IRAQ: Immediately after the Second Gulf War in early 2003, clearance of ERW, including cluster munitions and landmines, was extended to all of Iraq. This effort was significantly facilitated by United States provision of strike data to the United Nations, often in as little as 72 hours after a particular attack while hostilities were ongoing. The U.S. Department of State's Quick Reaction Demining Force was deployed to Baghdad and other population centers in central Iraq in September 2003 to assist with the initial clearance of unexploded cluster munitions and other ERW at military targets situated among the civilian infrastructure. From fiscal year 2003 through fiscal year 2006, the U.S. Department of State invested over $111 million to clean up all war detritus generated by all combatants. Its clearance assistance continues.

I) Laos US Fed News 2-23-2007 (US Clearance of Unexploded Cluster Munitions, p. Lexis, hl)
LAOS: This is the one country in the world where the predominant long-standing ERW threat comes primarily from unexploded cluster munitions as opposed to other ERW or landmines or . Laos has benefited from the sharing by the United States of strike target data and of over $21 million in U.S. assistance since 1993, the majority of which has gone to address the problem of unexploded cluster munitions. United States ERW clearance assistance continues.

J) Lebanon US Fed News 2-23-2007 (US Clearance of Unexploded Cluster Munitions, p. Lexis, hl)
LEBANON: Immediately following the most recent conflict in Lebanon , the United States dedicated more than $9 million for quickly and safely clearing ERW, including cluster munitions, over and above the $17 million that the United States provided for ERW and landmine clearance there since 1993. See the Department of State press release, "Update on United States Aid to Lebanon to Clear Explosive Remnants of War," at www.state.gov/r/pa/prs/ps/2006/73579.htm for more details. United States ERW clearance and demining assistance continues.

SDI 2007 5 Week

13 Landmines Neg

K) Vietnam US Fed News 2-23-2007 (US Clearance of Unexploded Cluster Munitions, p. Lexis, hl)
VIETNAM: Similar to its efforts in Cambodia and Laos, Vietnam has received United States air strike data that has enabled its authorities, and the Veterans for America (formerly the Vietnam Veterans of America Foundation), which is conducting a U.S. Department of State-funded survey of the humanitarian impact of landmines and ERW in Vietnam's central provinces, to better focus ERW survey and clearance efforts. Since 1993, the United States has provided over $14 million to help clear all forms of ERW, including unexploded cluster munitions and landmines in Vietnam, regardless of their origin. United States ERW clearance and demining assistance continues.

SDI 2007 5 Week

14 Landmines Neg

Overstretch Turn
A. US Special Forces are key to victory in Iraq unfortunately they are dangerously stretched to the breaking point any draw down causes collapse Martin Sieff, UPIs managing editor of international affairs, 1-8-2007 (This Year Rumsfelds Dream Died, p. Lexis, hl)
One taboo phrase is not yet being heard anywhere: that is "Imperial Overstretch" -- the phenomenon that faces an over-extended global hyperpower when its strategic commitments around the world exceed its military and resource ability to support them. The British Empire faced this dilemma of "Imperial Overstretch" in the 1930s, as documented by British
historian Corelli Barnett in his classic book, "The Collapse of British Power." Significantly, the problem was exacerbated by a continuing Sunni Muslim Arab insurgency in the Middle East in a small country that eventually engaged up to 25 percent of the effective ground combat forces of the British Army. That insurgency in Mandate Palestine, the territory now occupied by the State of Israel and the Palestinian Authority territories, was eventually totally crushed by the British. The ground commander responsible for defeating it was Bernard Law Montgomery, who later won world renown as the greatest British combat general of World War II. During the three years from 1936 to 1939 that the Arab Revolt raged in Palestine, Britain's potential enemies such as Nazi Germany and Fascist Italy grew increasingly bold. The longer the Iraq insurgency lasts and the more U.S.

troops are tied up in combating it or trying to separate rival factions there, the greater is the likelihood that the United States will face increasingly serious challenges to its commitments and interests in other parts of the world. The growing sentiment in Congress to approve a boost in the size of the U.S. Army reflects these concerns that are increasingly felt within the Washington Beltway, even when they are not so explicitly articulated. Rumsfeld's successor, former director of Central Intelligence Robert Gates, has lost no time in signaling that he wants to step up recruitment for U.S. ground forces and the initial response in the
White House and on Capitol Hill has been highly favorable. Obviously, increasing the size of U.S. ground forces does not mean abandoning the enormous Pentagon investment in advanced weapons systems and force multipliers. But the Rumsfeld vision was a very explicit one: Rumsfeld was determined to shrink the size of the conventional army, boost the size of and budget of Special Forces, and pour unprecedented sums into high-tech weapons and IT systems that the Army and Marines could use in real time. Now, U.S. policymakers are coming up against the

bedrock reality that they cannot afford to shrink ground forces any more and that regular conventional forces as well as the Special Forces Rumsfeld favored will have to grow. The failure to prevent or quickly defeat the Iraq insurgency has
brought home forcibly the old truth, repeatedly emphasized by such old Army men as retired Lt. Gen. William Odom, that there is no substitute for having enough boots on the ground, and well-trained soldiers to put in them. Rumsfeld never admitted that to the day he left the Pentagon. His successor has already acknowledged it. That is the lasting strategic change that bitter experience in Iraq in 2006 has taught the policymakers of the United States.

B. Plan uses Special Forces to do de-mining Major Michael F. Lizelman, Civil affairs operations officer, special operations command, Ph.D. in Public Policy, August 2002 (Benefit/Cost Analysis of U.S. Demining in Ethiopia and Eritrea, http://maic.jmu.edu/Journal/6.2/focus/michaellitzelman/
michaellistzelman.htm) This study has found that this may be true for peacekeeping operations, but not for the humanitarian demining operations, which consist of Special Operation Forces. Initially, U.S. Special Operation soldiers28 gained access and experience, but this was generally during the period of building its demining infrastructure, while training the Ethiopian soldiers how to train their own personnel. Since then, only a few liaison officers have gained that experience. Special Forces soldiers have continued to train in-country, but on other soldier tasks (i.e., infantry skills) as well. A demining program could only consist of a few months' deployment for these elite personnel, who would train the host nationals. (6) Generally increasing morale among U.S. troops while enabling them to engage in activities with measurable benefits that are greatly appreciated by the host population. Morale among U.S. troops has not been surveyed.

C. Iraq is key to fight global terrorism defeat there is global defeat Los Angeles Times 8-29-2006 (Bush Shields US, Cheney Says, p. Lexis, hl)
In his address, Cheney said that Iraq was a key part of the administration's anti-terrorism effort and that pulling out would be a mistake. "A precipitous withdrawal from Iraq would be a victory for the terrorists, an invitation to further violence against free nations, and a ruinous blow to the future security of the United States," he said. "We have only two options in Iraq -- victory or defeat."

SDI 2007 5 Week

15 Landmines Neg

D. Future terrorist attacks will cause extinction Yonah Alexander, Director of Inter-University for Terrorism Studies, 8-28-2003 (Washington Times, p. Lexis)
Last week's brutal suicide bombings in Baghdad and Jerusalem have once again illustrated dramatically that the international community failed, thus far at least, to understand the magnitude and implications of the terrorist threats to the very survival of civilization itself. Even the United States and Israel have for decades tended to regard terrorism as a

mere tactical nuisance or irritant rather than a critical strategic challenge to their national security concerns. It is not surprising, therefore, that on September 11, 2001, Americans were stunned by the unprecedented tragedy of 19 al Qaeda terrorists striking a devastating blow at the center of the nation's commercial and military powers. Likewise, Israel and its citizens, despite the collapse of the Oslo Agreements of 1993 and numerous acts of terrorism triggered by the second intifada that began almost three years ago, are still "shocked" by each suicide attack at a time of intensive diplomatic efforts to revive the moribund peace process through the now revoked cease-fire arrangements [hudna]. Why are the United States and Israel, as well as scores of other countries affected by the universal nightmare of modern terrorism surprised by new terrorist "surprises"? There are many reasons, including misunderstanding of the manifold specific factors that contribute to terrorism's expansion, such as lack of a universal definition of terrorism, the religionization of politics, double standards of morality, weak punishment of terrorists, and the exploitation of the media by terrorist propaganda and psychological warfare. Unlike their historical counterparts, contemporary terrorists have introduced a new scale of

strategy can be developed [e.g., strengthening international cooperation]. The first illusion is that terrorism can be greatly reduced, if not eliminated completely, provided the root causes of conflicts - political, social and economic - are addressed. The conventional illusion is that terrorism must be justified by oppressed people seeking to achieve their goals and consequently the argument advanced "freedom fighters" anywhere, "give me liberty and I will give you death," should be tolerated if not glorified. This traditional rationalization of "sacred" violence often conceals that the real purpose of terrorist groups is to gain political power through the barrel of the gun, in violation of fundamental human rights of the noncombatant segment of societies. For instance, Palestinians religious movements [e.g., Hamas, Islamic Jihad] and secular entities [such as Fatah's Tanzim and Aqsa Martyr Brigades]] wish not only to resolve national grievances [such as Jewish settlements, right of return, Jerusalem] but primarily to destroy the Jewish state. Similarly, Osama bin Laden's international network not only opposes the presence of American military in the Arabian Peninsula and Iraq, but its stated objective is to "unite all Muslims and establish a government that follows the rule of the Caliphs." The second myth is that strong action against terrorist infrastructure [leaders, recruitment, funding, propaganda, training, weapons, operational command and control] will only increase terrorism. The argument here is that law-enforcement efforts and military retaliation inevitably will fuel more brutal acts of violent revenge. Clearly, if this perception continues to prevail, particularly in democratic societies, there is the danger it will paralyze governments and thereby encourage further terrorist attacks. In sum, past experience provides useful lessons for a realistic future strategy. The prudent application of force has been demonstrated to be an effective tool for short- and long-term deterrence of terrorism. For example, Israel's targeted killing of Mohammed Sider, the Hebron commander of the Islamic Jihad, defused a "ticking bomb." The assassination of Ismail Abu Shanab - a top Hamas leader in the Gaza Strip who was directly responsible for several suicide bombings including the latest bus attack in Jerusalem - disrupted potential terrorist operations. Similarly, the U.S. military operation in Iraq eliminated Saddam Hussein's regime as a state sponsor of terror. Thus , it behooves those countries victimized by terrorism to understand a cardinal message communicated by Winston Churchill to the House of Commons on May 13, 1940: "Victory at all costs, victory in spite of

violence in terms of conventional and unconventional threats and impact. The internationalization and brutalization of current and future terrorism make it clear we have entered an Age of Super Terrorism [e.g. biological, chemical, radiological, nuclear and cyber] with its serious implications concerning national, regional and global security concerns. Two myths in particular must be debunked immediately if an effective counterterrorism "best practices"

terror, victory however long and hard the road may be: For without victory, there is no survival. "

SDI 2007 5 Week

16 Landmines Neg

Readiness low alt cause

Readiness is inevitably jacked alt causes plan cant hope to solve: A) Iraq and the War on Terror US Fed News 9-13-2006 (United States Army Military Readiness, p. Lexis, hl)
As we have come to expect, the U.S. Army is imbued with a "whatever-it-takes" spirit of commitment and hard work; it has been given a mission and it will complete that mission. Yet, it is becoming increasingly apparent that that level of commitment has not been met by the civilian officials charged with overseeing and assuring the well-being of our military. The mere fact that roughly one-half of the entire U.S. Army is reported to be at the lowest level of military readiness speaks volumes in this regard. Perhaps most troubling to many of the Army's senior uniformed leaders is the lack of national attention to the Army's plight. To suggest that the Global War on Terror will last for years, yet fail to even acknowledge - let alone take steps to address - the Army's readiness, equipment, and personnel shortfalls, is viewed as short-sighted at best. At worst, the future security and deterrent power of the United States is dangerously at risk.

B) Incompetence in the Pentagon, equipment shortages US Fed News 9-13-2006 (United States Army Military Readiness, p. Lexis, hl)
The U.S. Army's preparedness for war has eroded to levels not witnessed by our country in decades. As deployments to Iraq and Afghanistan continue unabated, there is a very real prospect that Army readiness will continue to erode, undermining its ability to meet the theater commanders' needs and foreclosing any option for the U.S. to respond to conflicts elsewhere around the globe. The degradation of Army readiness is primarily a function of unanticipated high troop deployment levels to Iraq, chronic equipment and personnel shortages, funding constraints, and Pentagon civilian mismanagement.

C) Drug and discipline problems US Fed News 9-13-2006 (United States Army Military Readiness, p. Lexis, hl)
* The lowest readiness levels for the vast majority of non-deployed active-duty combat units. The situation for the Army Guard and Reserves is worse. * Thousands of key Army weapons platforms - such as tanks, Humvees, Bradley Fighting Vehicles - sitting in disuse at Army maintenance depots for lack of funding. * Indications of growing drug and discipline problems among the newest Army recruits.

D) Lack of training time due to equipment failures US Fed News 9-13-2006 (United States Army Military Readiness, p. Lexis, hl)
* Many Army units here at home have been forced to spend much of their time and energy on managing equipment and personnel shortfalls, instead of training or spending time with their families. * Commanders at all levels reporting that Army families are becoming increasingly anxious, even angry, about current and future deployments.

E) Afghanistan is on the brink

US Fed News 5-4-2007 (Iraq, Afghan Wars Cause Concern in US Military About Readiness, p. Lexis, hl) The United States has had troops in combat in Afghanistan since 2001 and in Iraq since 2003. Aside from the thousands of dead and wounded, and hundreds of billions of dollars spent, there is growing concern that the strain on the force could have implications for the future of U.S. military readiness. The top U.S. military officer, General Peter Pace, says it is something he watches closely. "I think we must pay attention to that every single day, because it's not a precise point on a curve where we can say when you get to this point, something good or bad is going to happen," he said.

SDI 2007 5 Week

17 Landmines Neg

Heg High Now

American hegemony remains unchallengedset backs are recoverable and resources prove that the US has the most hard power The Economist, July 04, 2007, Demons Jangle Americans Nerves, but US is still No. 1 Superpower, THE SEATTLE
POST-INTELLIGENCER, lexis) Yet America is being underestimated. Friends and enemies have mistaken the short-term failure of the Bush administration for deeper weakness. Neither American hard nor soft power is fading. Rather, they are not being used as well as they could be. The opportunity is greater than the threat. It is hard to deny that America looks weaker than it did in 2000. But is that really due to a tectonic shift or to the errors of a single administration? Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld reversed the wise Rooseveltian doctrine, "Speak softly and carry a big stick." After Sept. 11, 2001, the White House talked up American power to an extraordinary degree. In that brief period of "shock and awe" when Americans were from Mars, their Venutian allies were lucky to get invited to the show (indeed, in Afghanistan some "old" Europeans were initially turned away). Meanwhile, Bush declared a "war on terror," rather than just on al-Qaida, broadening the front to unmanageable dimensions (and paving the way for Guantanamo). While the talk was loud, the stick was spindly. Defying his generals, Rumsfeld sent too few troops to Iraq to pacify the country. Disbanding the Iraqi army compounded the error. Regardless of whether Iraq was ever winnable, it is hard to imagine any future American administrations making such schoolboy howlers when it comes to regime change. Yet in one way, Bush is unfairly maligned. Contrary to the Democratic version of history, America did not enjoy untrammeled influence abroad before he arrived. The country that won the Cold War also endured several grievous reverses, notably Vietnam (where 58,000 Americans were killed - sixteen times the figure for Iraq). Iran has been defying America since Jimmy Carter's presidency, and North Korea for a generation before that. As for soft power, France has been complaining about Coca-Cola and Hollywood for nearly a century. From this perspective of relative rather than absolute supremacy, a superpower's strength lies as much in what it can prevent from happening as in what it can achieve. Even today, America's "negative power" is considerable. Very little of any note can happen without at least its acquiescence. Iran and North Korea can defy the Great Satan, but only America can offer the recognition the proliferating regimes crave. In all sorts of areas - be it the fight against global warming or the quest for an Arab-Israeli peace - America is quite simply indispensable. That is because America still has the most hard power. Its volunteer army is indeed stretched: It could not fight another small war of choice. But it can still muster 1.5 million people under arms and a defense budget almost as big as the whole of the rest of the world's. And it could call on so much more: In relation to the country's size, its defense budget and Army are quite small by historical standards.

US hegemony is still high despite the Iraq war: lack of global rival, strong economy and population growth, and scientific innovations Leon Hadar, Washington Correspondent, July 6, 2007, Iraq-scarred US may settle for Primus inter pares, The Business
Times Singapore, lexis) 'MIRROR, Mirror on the Wall; Who is the Biggest Superpower of all?' That is the question being asked by foreign policy pundits in Washington these days, as they ponder the impact of the military quagmire in the Middle East on America's preeminent global position. Indeed, policy wonks who have been searching for the Next Big Thing in the geo-strategic arena seemed to have found it: Which power is rising and which one is falling? Is the world's Only Remaining Superpower losing its power as a result of the mess in Iraq? And if so, who will replace America as the leading hegemon? The Economist, the British magazine that has always been bullish on America - it considers the United States successor to the British Empire - puts it simply on a recent cover. 'Still No 1', it declares, next to a cartoon of Uncle Sam standing in the boxing arena and ready to punch again despite his injuries. It calls America a 'hobbled' hegemon, and concludes that while the problems in Iraq may have weakened the US, it is still likely to remain the 'dominant superpower'. Much of the support for the Still-No1 thesis, which not surprisingly is also very popular among members of the foreign policy establishment in Washington (after all, who really wants to be a member of an elite in charge of a declining power?) is based on numbers: The US has the largest and most-advanced economy and the largest of most-powerful military. Even those who cheer for China agree that China will not become the world's largest economy before 2050 (and even that proposition is very 'iffy'). And no one expects any of America's potential global rivals (the European Union; Russia; China; India) to outspend the US on defence and overtake it in the military sphere anytime soon. It just ain't gone to happen. Period. One can also make an argument that when it comes to the European Union and Russia, America is a nation that continues to grow in population as a result of immigration and relatively high birth-rates. And that notwithstanding the advances that the Chinese, Indians and the Europeans are making in science and technology, America's open and dynamic free-market economy as well as its impressive elite universities and research institutions help the Americans to maintain their status as the world's centre of scientific and technological creativity.

SDI 2007 5 Week

18 Landmines Neg

AT: Environment Adv

Status quo solves: A) Mine Ban Treaty Claudio Torres-Nachon, Center for Environmental Law and Economic Inegration, 2000 (Environmental Aspects of the
International Crisis, http://www.icbl.org/lm/2000/appendices/environment.html, hl) Third, multilateral, environmental and humanitarian demining organizations should work together with countries Party to the 1997 Mine Ban Treaty towards the development and ultimate establishment of a Minimum Environmental Standard (MES) for the destruction of antipersonnel landmines. A first step should be the detailed sharing of specific environmental measuring and mitigation techniques used during destruction of stockpile and planted landmines between technologically advanced and developing or less developed countries.

B) Even in countries without Mine Ban, environmental initiatives spill over Claudio Torres-Nachon, Center for Environmental Law and Economic Inegration, 2000 (Environmental Aspects of the
International Crisis, http://www.icbl.org/lm/2000/appendices/environment.html, hl) Fourth, in countries where the 1997 Mine Ban Treaty has not been signed or ratified, it may probe effective to follow a strategy consisting on distributing this and other publications on environmental impacts of landmines to national environmental organizations in order to get them on board for advocacy goals for signature, ratification and/or effective implementation of the 1997 Mine Ban Treaty. By doing so, environmental organizations may become part of national campaigns and use their influence to advance in the goal of universal ban of landmines.

SDI 2007 5 Week

19 Landmines Neg

AT: Death and destruction/landmines Adv

Landmine use is inevitable multiple countries A) Burma Burmanet News 11-23-2005 (Landmine Use in Burma Increases, http://www.burmanet.org/news/2005/11/23/irrawaddylandmine-use-in-burma-increases/, hl) Several armed ethnic opposition groups in Burma possess the capability of building a variety of mines, including blast, fragmentation, Claymore-style and anti-handling fuse devices. Landmine use is inevitable because of our small troop numbers and lack of weapons in comparison to the strength of the SPDC, said Manh Sha, general secretary of the Karen National Union. He added that the KNU will stop using landmines when Burmas military regime collapses.

B) United States Melvin Goodman, writer for Washington Monthly, December 2000 (Shotgun Diplomacy, http://findarticles.com/p/
articles/mi m1316/is_12_32/ai_68148602, hl) But the cincs have made land mines a readiness issue and will not budge. Not even the inauguration of a tentative peace between the two Koreas and the beginning of summit diplomacy between the United States and North Korea has led to new thinking at the Pentagon.

C) Korea BBC 8-13-1997 (South Cites Norths War Threat in Opposing Ban on Mines, p. Lexis, hl)
In discussions between US Secretary of State Madeleine Albright and her South Korean counterpart, Yu Chongha, concerning the deployment of anti-personnel landmines, they agreed that use of the landmines on the Korean Peninsula was inevitable given the special security situation on the peninsula.

SDI 2007 5 Week

20 Landmines Neg

AT: Malaria Adv

Alt causes: A) Refugees Jose Montalvo, Review of Economics and Statistics, February 2007 (Fighting Against Malaria: Prevent Wars While
Waiting for the Miraculous Vaccine, p. Lexis, hl) The World Health Organization estimates that 300 million clinical cases of malaria occur annually and observed that during the 80s and part of the 90s its incidence increased. In this paper, we explore the influence of refugees from civil wars on the incidence of malaria in the refugee-receiving countries. Using civil wars as an instrumental variable, we show that for each 1,000 refugees there are between 2,000 and 2,700 cases of malaria in the refugeereceiving country. On average 13% of the cases of malaria reported by the WHO are caused by forced migration as a consequence of civil wars.

B) Climate Jose Montalvo, Review of Economics and Statistics, February 2007 (Fighting Against Malaria: Prevent Wars While
Waiting for the Miraculous Vaccine, p. Lexis, hl) There are two predominant views with respect to the incidence of malaria. The first one, represented by J. Sachs, and also expressed in some reports from the World Health Organization, is that malaria is basically determined by the ecological conditions of the tropics.

C) Cut aid programs US Fed News 10-12-2006 (Africa Warns the General Assembly It Will Stay Trapped in Life and Death Struggle if Donors
Fail to Deliver on Promised Aid Pledges to Lift Lagging Development, p. Lexis, hl) Also before the Assembly is a note of the Secretary-General transmitting the World Health Organization's (WHO) report on the 2001-2010: Decade to Roll Back Malaria in Developing Countries, Particularly in Africa (document A/61/218 and corr.1), which highlights the progress made in meeting the 2010 malaria goals since last year. Funding shortages, lack of technical expertise, weak health systems and inadequate planning have slowed progress, according to the report.

D) Civil conflict US Fed News 10-12-2006 (Africa Warns the General Assembly It Will Stay Trapped in Life and Death Struggle if Donors
Fail to Deliver on Promised Aid Pledges to Lift Lagging Development, p. Lexis, hl) International bilateral and multilateral funding partners should not develop parallel policies that compete with technical policies and strategies developed by the WHO, the report says. It also calls on international funding institutions to increase research and development funds, stating that malaria's impact on the world's population in terms of resources is roughly 10 times the current amount slated worldwide for malaria research and development. Also before the Assembly is the progress report of the Secretary-General on implementation of the recommendations contained in his report on the causes of conflict and promotion of durable peace and sustainable development in Africa (document A/61/213), which draws attention to recent efforts towards conflict prevention, peacemaking, peacekeeping and peacebuilding activities. The report also provides policy recommendations to support the transition from war to peace and conflict prevention. The reports says that, while prospects for peace in a number of African countries have improved during the year, root causes like extreme poverty, gross inequalities and weak State capacity continue to cause conflict. These root causes are exacerbated by other factors such as external support for repressive regimes, exclusionary Government policies and small arms proliferation. Religion, ethnicity and economic conditions also mobilize people to engage in violent action while forsaking civil responsibility.

SDI 2007 5 Week

21 Landmines Neg

Status quo solves: A) International partnerships US Fed News 10-12-2006 (Africa Warns the General Assembly It Will Stay Trapped in Life and Death Struggle if Donors
Fail to Deliver on Promised Aid Pledges to Lift Lagging Development, p. Lexis, hl) Launched in 1998 by the WHO, the Decade Partnership includes the World Bank, the United Nations Children's Fund (UNICEF), the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), malaria-endemic countries, and a host of other private and public organizations. The Partnership seeks to reduce malaria mortality by 50 per cent by 2010, and by 75 per cent by 2015.

B) Vaccines US Fed News 12-6-2006 (African Health Officials Prepare for New Malaria Vaccine, p. Lexis, hl)
Officials are meeting in Ghana to discuss ways to get an early start on administering malaria vaccines in Africa. The vaccine is currently on trial in six African countries. Malaria is a major cause of death for children in sub-Sahara Africa. Efam Dovi has more on the story for VOA, from the Ghanaian capital, Accra.

C) DDT Tren and Coticelli, 2005. [ Richard, Director, Coticelli, Researcher, both of the health advocacy group Africa Fighting
Malaria, Nov 9 http://www.fightingmalaria.org/news.aspx?id=136] One of the best ways of controlling malaria is to use the insecticide that most environmentalists love to hate -- DDT. If mosquitoes and parasites were not enough to contend with, the politics surrounding the use of DDT and vested interests that oppose it make it nearly impossible for countries to use DDT for malaria control in spite of its incredible success. DDT was first used during World War II to halt the spread of lice-borne typhus. Typhus epidemics raged in many war-torn areas. DDT powder was dusted over civilians, soldiers and concentration-camp survivors and put in their clothes and bedding, and before long the spread of the disease was halted. Malaria-control experts soon noted the success of DDT in typhus control and began to apply the insecticide against mosquitoes. When used in malaria control, DDT is sprayed in tiny quantities on the inside walls of houses. This application repels mosquitoes so that they don't enter houses to feed on humans, and kills them if they do enter. Indoor residual spraying (IRS) with DDT eradicated malaria in the US and Europe and led to spectacular declines in the disease in Africa, Asia and Latin America. Wherever DDT was used in public health, death and disease fell and the conditions for development and wealth creation improved.

SDI 2007 5 Week

22 Landmines Neg

Solvency Frontline
De-mining fails without safety reform laundry list Richard LAbbe, Aris Makris, and Derrick Young, President, Vice President, and Business Development Officer of Med-Eng Systems Inc. Summer 1999 (Body Protection Systems for Use in Humanitarian De-mining, http://maic.jmu.edu/
journal/3.2/profiles/labbe/protection.htm, hl) Several participants, including Dan Layton, executive director of the Marshall Legacy Institute in Virginia, argued that the lack of effective coordination of demining activities and failure by demining stakeholders to move more urgently to improve coordination and collaboration are two pressing issues which must be resolved in order to improve safety standards and make international demining activities more efficient. The focus group participants also agreed that the following issues hamper efforts to improve personal protection for deminers: * Inadequate documentation available on the relative safety of various SOPs. * Little or no information is provided by industry or donors on the protective capability and limitations of personal protective systems against the various threats or categories of mines (blast versus fragmentation). This leads to a lack of confidence in the field regarding the effectiveness of protection systems in general. * There are no standards to differentiate between good and poor products. * The equipment that has been historically available is not necessarily appropriate for the humanitarian demining function, nor has it been adequately tested against the various mine threats. The results of such tests have not been properly documented. * Local authorities requesting the equipment are not fully informed about the appropriate equipment required and/or available to them. * Decision-makers in donor communities do not always have the technical information available to allow them to make an optimal choice customized to the needs or threats of the given theaters. * Politics also cause problems when countries direct monies towards the donation of specific equipment that cannot be supported by the local infrastructure or equipment that is not compatible with the local needs and culture.

De-mining tech is faulty and wont work in African terrain Jane Porter, President of the Porter Education Group, 2002 (Landmines: Eliminating the Threat, http://
school.newsweek.com/pdf/Land_Mines_Study_Guide.pdf?PHPSESSID=62f7919cdeaf06304b1921c251d59c2a, hl) Disadvantages: Mechanical technologies are expensive and difficult to maintain and transport. They can work only in certain terrains and environments and can disturb and destroy areas where they are used. Humans and/or dogs must follow machinery to ensure that the area is mine-free.

Tech fails doesnt detect all mines Jane Porter, President of the Porter Education Group, 2002 (Landmines: Eliminating the Threat, http://
school.newsweek.com/pdf/Land_Mines_Study_Guide.pdf?PHPSESSID=62f7919cdeaf06304b1921c251d59c2a, hl) Disadvantages: Manual demining is slow, hazardous and expensive. Metal detectors may not be able to detect nonmetallic or plastic-encased mines and cannot be used on steel bridges or near railroad tracks. Metal detectors cannot distinguish between mines and other metallic objects. to agricultural land or urban areas. They can detect mines in nonmetallic or plastic casings as well as mines near metal bridges or railroad tracks, where metal detectors are useless.

SDI 2007 5 Week

23 Landmines Neg

Turn: training locals is counter productive Colonel L. Dyck, Mine Tech Team Operations Advisor and Director, Summer 1999 (Claim and Reality: Medically Assisted
Demining, http://maic.jmu.edu/journal/3.2/focus/dyck_claim/dyck.htm, hl) A great number of donor agencies have forgotten or wish to overlook the requirement of the Four Principles and insist on the employment of local, unskilled, deminers. These people, frankly, are counter-productive in any operation, and if donor agencies just allowed NGOs and commercial mine clearing companies to employ their own professional people, the tasks would be done twice as fast, with greater efficiency and cost-effectiveness, and with minimum accidents. In most operations in the world, an analysis of the accidents would indicate that they were brought about by unskilled deminers whom the contractor was forced to employ because of the wish of the donor. Although these people are trained, they lack the discipline and experience of the professional deminers and rapidly become a hindrance and slow down the operations. Donors should decide whether they want to spend five years in a country employing the locals to clear mines, or one year in the country employing professionals to clear the mines, and then spend the additional four years using the money saved to help develop the country.

Turn: technical methods fail but give a false sense of security Colonel L. Dyck, Mine Tech Team Operations Advisor and Director, Summer 1999 (Claim and Reality: Medically Assisted
Demining, http://maic.jmu.edu/journal/3.2/focus/dyck_claim/dyck.htm, hl) In discussing the claims and reality of demining the main theme has been that of the mechanical aspect. This is because more inaccurate claims are made by mechanical operators, manufacturers, and sponsors/ donors, than in any other form of mine clearing. This is possibly because the mechanical school all believes that they have discovered a silver bullet. This is not so, and the greatest danger to the industry is that this myth persists. Should any donor organisation allow mechanical appliances to operate in isolation in a mine-clearing role, at this time they are guilty of murdering the subsequent victims of the "cleared area." It should be clearly understood that until a machine has a record of no dangerous devices being left behind, the area prepared is still a minefield. Manual clearing and/or dogs must be used to verify that the area is safely cleared of all minefields. Notice that the term "dangerous devices" is used. This is specifically directed at some operations where the mines left behind are no longer mines because an external fuse has been knocked off and the device is no longer a mine. It does however contain explosive and a detonator and has been roughly handled by the machine. It could be much more dangerous than a mine.

No timeframe for solvency clearing all mines would take more than 1000 years Africa Policy Information Center April 1997 (Landmines: Africas Stake, Global Initiatives, http://www.ciaonet.
org/wps/lmi01/, hl) A decade earlier, in 1983, an internationally negotiated landmines treaty imposed restrictions on the legal use of landmines in an effort to reduce harm to civilians. That convention has been totally ineffective. Since then, landmines have become cheaper, harder to detect, easier to disseminate, and more effective in killing and maiming. Military planners in late Cold War and post-Cold War conflicts have often explicitly targeted civilians and the civilian economy. They have found landmines to be effective weapons in damaging these targets. The result is not only increased civilian casualties, but also rapidly escalating costs for supplying humanitarian relief and reconstructing wartorn areas once peace is restored. According to some estimates, ridding the world of all existing mine fields would cost at least $33 billion and take more than 1,000 years.

SDI 2007 5 Week

24 Landmines Neg

China CP 1NC Shell

Observation One: Text The Peoples Republic of China should substantially increase its landmine clearance, training, and risk education efforts in Ethiopia and Eritrea. Well clarify. OR The Peoples Republic of China should Observation Two: Competition The counterplan competes via net benefits solves the case and avoids our disads based on US action Observation Three: Solvency 1. China is the best de-miner versatile technology and extensive experience Statement to the Convention on the Prohibition of APLs, 9-13-2000 (Chinas Experience in Mine
Clearance, Geneva, http://www.china-un.ch/eng/cjjk/cjjblc/jhhwx/t85332.htm, hl) The international community has now recognized that intensifying international mine clearance efforts is imperative to reduce and eliminate the threat of APLs to the safety of innocent civilians. We share the same view on this point. The Chinese Delegation hereby would like to take this opportunity to exchange information and experience with other delegations on mine clearance and China's participation in international demining cooperation. The Chinese Government attaches great importance to mine clearance. From early 1992 to August 1999, the Chinese Government launched two large-scale demining operations on the Chinese territory along the ChineseVietnamese border, clearing an area of over 300 square kilometers, including clearing 1.88 million landmines and 320,000 explosives, and destroying over 700 tons of old ammunitions. As a result, over 290 border posts and trade passes have been opened up, and more than 60,000 hectares of fields and forests have been recovered. Since the end of the mine sweeping operations, there has been no single accident of personnel or animal causality caused by mines. As a result of the efforts made by the Chinese Government, the landmines on the Chinese territory along the Chinese-Vietnamese border have in general been cleared. From the two demining operations in nearly 10 years, we have gained rich experience in mine clearance, developed technique-intensive demining equipment and established a contingent of demining experts who are good at scientific and efficient demining methods and rich in demining experience. Chinese demining experts and scientific institutions have jointly developed a series of demining equipment. They include: single-person demining protective equipment, which can protect deminers from the explosion of almost all types of APLs in the world; GBP 123 rocket blasting kit, which can be used in burning operations; GTL 115 mine detector, and demining flail, both of which are highly efficient demining equipment. Meanwhile, a series of demining methods, such as burning, blasting, mechanical operation, and manual detection and clearance, have also been developed. They can be comprehensively used according to different terrain and geographical conditions of minefields. All of the four methods mentioned above can be applied to minefields in inter-mountain basin, sandy soil and roads. In general, the application of new types of demining equipment and scientific demining methods have greatly enhanced the efficiency of demining and increased the safety of deminers.

SDI 2007 5 Week

25 Landmines Neg

2. China has experience training locals in Eritrea and has been de-mining in Ethiopia for years BBC 12-21-2006 (China Trains 230 Foreign Mine Clearance Personnel Since 1999, p. Lexis, hl)
China also donated mine clearance equipment valued at several million US dollars to 11 foreign countries, sources added. China has taken an active part in international de-mining assistance programmes in recent years. In 2005, 10 de-mining specialists helped train Thai personnel. In 2002 and 2003, China sent two groups of de-mining experts to Eritrea for on-site training and donated mine-clearance equipment. In 2001, China donated detection and clearance equipment worth 1.26m US dollars to countries such as Angola, Cambodia, Ethiopia and Mozambique.

SDI 2007 5 Week

26 Landmines Neg

AT: US cooperates internationally

China empirically cooperates with the international community on de-mining efforts Statement to the Convention on the Prohibition of APLs, 9-13-2000 (Chinas Experience in Mine
Clearance, Geneva, http://www.china-un.ch/eng/cjjk/cjjblc/jhhwx/t85332.htm, hl) Mine clearance in underdeveloped countries needs both the efforts of mine-affected countries themselves and the generous assistance from the international community. China's demining technology and equipment are very applicable to developing countries. To eliminate the global threat of mines left over from conflicts to innocent civilians, the Chinese Government has actively participated in international demining cooperation and has consistently provided assistance to some mine-affected countries within its capabilities, which has made due contributions to the post-war rehabilitation efforts of those countries. In 1998, despite the severest flooding in a century in many areas of China, the Chinese Government donated 100,000 US dollars to the UN Voluntary Trust Fund for Mine Clearance Assistance. In October 1999, in collaboration with the UN, China sponsored and hosted the first international demining training course for people from countries seriously affected by mines, such as Bosnia-Herzegovina, Cambodia and Namibia. In May this year, China hosted, with the cooperation of UN, another international demining training course for people from mine-affected counties like Ethiopia, Angola, Rwanda and Mozambique. Before 2001, the Chinese Government will donate some mine detection and clearance equipment to the UN Voluntary Trust Fund for Mine Clearance Assistance.

SDI 2007 5 Week

27 Landmines Neg

AT: US tech key

China has tech and experience in Africa to do effective de-mining operations Xinhua News Service 6-8-2007 (China Destroys Half a Million Landmines, p. Lexis, hl)
China has destroyed more than half a million old or obsolete landmines since it signed a UN de-mining protocol nine years ago, a military official said on Friday. China signed the Amended Protocol on Landmines in 1998. Since then it has destroyed more than 500,000 old or obsolete landmines in the country's eight disposal stations, according to an official with the Headquarters of the General Staff of People's Liberation Army. China has also taken other measures -- such as clearing landmines within its border and offering de-mining assistance to other countries -to fulfill its duties under the protocol, the official said. Since 1998, China has taken part in de-mining operations in more than 10 countries in Asia and Africa, providing them with various forms of assistance including financial support, de-mining equipment and technical training.

SDI 2007 5 Week

28 Landmines Neg

AT: US has moral obligation

China has a reciprocal moral obligation it is one of the largest exporters of landmines Thalif Deen, UN Bureau Chief, 9-1-1993 (Disarmament: EC Wants UN to Restrict Use of Landmines, Interpress News
Service, p. Lexis, hl) Titled, "Hidden Killers: The Global Problem with Uncleared Landmines," the report pointed out that mines have become the weapon of choice in many developing countries because they are inexpensive and easy to lay. "In a time of high-tech, target-specific weaponry, landmines are perhaps the weapons most consistently dangerous to noncombatants," the report says. The large exporters of landmines include China, the former Soviet republics, Italy, Pakistan, Egypt and Singapore.

SDI 2007 5 Week

29 Landmines Neg

AT: Training locals key

China has de-mined and trained locals in Eritrea proven success Xinhua General News 12-9-2002 (Chinas Defense White Paper, p. Lexis, hl)
China continues to promote domestic and international mine clearance efforts. China is now basically safe from landmine hazards on its own territory. In 2001, China donated large quantities of demining equipment to Cambodia, Ethiopia, Eritrea, Mozambique, Rwanda, Namibia and Angola. In 2002, it contributed more than 3 million US dollars for international mine clearance cooperation, mainly in aid to the demining operations in Eritrea and Lebanon. Apart from providing the two countries with demining equipment, China has sent a group of mine clearance experts to Eritrea to give on-the-spot guidance.

SDI 2007 5 Week

30 Landmines Neg

AT: US=most experienced

China has experience in Ethiopia, Eritrea, and other sub Saharan countries Wang Lei, Chinese Delegate to the UN, 12-17-2002 (UN Resolutions Also Call for Special Assistance to States, Coherent
Responses to Global Challenges, Millennium Declaration Review, p. Lexis, hl) China supported global efforts to address that problem, and for that reason, had ratified the amended landmine Protocol to the Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons and strictly abided by it. Indeed, the indiscriminate use of landmines and the ineffectiveness of post-war demining efforts were the main causes of humanitarian concerns. He said that those concerns could be addressed from two aspects: to prevent the indiscriminate use of landmines and ensure the universal and effective implementation of the amended landmine Protocol; and to actively demine deployed landmines not in conformity with the provisions of that Protocol. China had been actively engaged in global demining assistance to seven mine-affected countries in the past two years, namely Angola, Cambodia, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Mozambique, Namibia and Rwanda. It also had plans to donate demining equipment to Lebanon and had sent a demining expert team to Eritrea for on-site demining training. In November, China sent another such team to Afghanistan.

SDI 2007 5 Week

31 Landmines Neg

Canada CP 1NC
Observation One: Text Canada should substantially increase its landmine clearance, training, and risk education efforts in Ethiopia and Eritrea. Well clarify. OR Canada should Observation Two: Competition The counterplan competes via net benefits solves the case and avoids our disads based on US action Observation Three: Solvency 1. Canada has most extensive de-mining experience in Sub Saharan Africa SafeLane 2003 (Support in Africa, http://www.international.gc.ca/foreign_policy/mines/IV/mine_action_africa-en.asp, hl)
Africa is the most mine-affected continent in the world with over half of the countries in the region co-existing with these silent, indiscriminate killers. Africa has been at the forefront of the campaign to ban anti-personnel mines, from the first calls to action from the field in the mid-1990s to the 1997 Kempton Park conference and the 2001 Bamako Seminar. To date, 41 of the 47 countries in Sub-Saharan Africa have ratified or acceded to the Convention and a further four have signed it. Africa is a top priority for the Canadian Landmine Fund, established by Prime Minister Jean Chrtien in 1997 to support global mine action. Canada's contributions are helping Africans implement their Ottawa Convention obligations, meet the needs of mine-affected communities and mobilize global resources for mine action. Victim Assistance Victim assistance programs encompass the immediate and long term needs of landmine victims, from initial emergency treatment to social and economic rehabilitation. Canada's contributions to these programs help landmine survivors rebuild their lives and communities. In Sierra Leone, Canada contributed to a Vietnam Veterans of America Foundation (VVAF) project by providing a prosthetic expert to work with local prosthetic centres. This contribution assisted the local health care system, depleted by recent civil war, to cope with the huge influx of landmine and war victims. In Mozambique, Canada and the Canadian Auto Workers union are working with Handicap International and local NGOs to renovate an orthopaedic centre in Nampula province. This project also provides job training, increasing the ability of landmine survivors to reintegrate into their communities. Also in Mozambique, in Gaza, Inhambane, Manica, Zambezia and Tete provinces, Canada is supporting the Red Cross, as an auxiliary to the Ministry of Health, in transporting landmine victims to provincial orthopaedic centres and supporting their efforts to reintegrate into society. In Uganda, Canada has funded the Canadian Network for International Surgery in the development, with local partners, of an injury surveillance system intended to improve the skills of health workers in emergency care hospitals. More recently, Canada funded a new Canadian Physicians for Aid and Relief project in Uganda. Mine Clearance Clearing mined land and returning it to safe and productive use is fundamental to addressing the humanitarian needs of people living in the wake of minefields. Community oriented, impact based models of mine clearance are supported by Canada in efforts to build the capacity of local partners to clear priority land. In Mozambique, Canada is providing the National Demining Institute (IND) with tools such as the Information Management System for Mine Action (IMSMA) and a variety of mapping programs to help gather more accurate data on minefields and ensure efficient demining. Canada is also funding a Level One Socio-economic Impact Survey under the direction of the Canadian International Demining Corps. In Chad, Canada is contributing to the United Nations Development Program (UNDP) Chad Mine Action Centre. The Centre aims to rehabilitate mine affected Chadian Territory, eliminate loss of life and injury, facilitate the return of refugees and displaced persons to their communities and promote the economic and social development of the region.

SDI 2007 5 Week

32 Landmines Neg

2. Specifically, Canada has extensive experience de-mining in Ethiopia and Eritrea it can overcome relational difficulties with them by helping with the border dispute, which the US does not SafeLane 2003 (Support in Africa, http://www.international.gc.ca/foreign_policy/mines/IV/mine_action_africa-en.asp, hl)
In Ethiopia and Eritrea, Canada is supporting the United Nations Mine Action Service (UNMAS) in the establishment of a regional mine action coordination centre. The Centre is working hand in hand with peacekeeping missions along the Ethiopian and Eritrean border. Canadian funds were allocated for emergency mine clearance and survey activities. Canada is also supporting demining of the Temporary Security Zone and capacity building initiatives for demining in Eritrea. Canada is working with the Ethiopia Mine Action Organization, as well as contributing technical assistance for demining activities under the Emergency Recovery program of Ethiopia. In Eritrea, Canadian military units taking part in the United Nations peacekeeping mission there donated explosives to The Halo Trust, in support to that organisation's mine clearance operations.

SDI 2007 5 Week

33 Landmines Neg

AT: US=international signal

Canada is best at de-mining experience and commitment Landmine Monitor 1999 (Canadas Commitment to Mine Action, http://www.icbl.org/lm/1999/appendices/gov_
canada.html, hl) Canada believes that the Ottawa Convention provides an effective and legally binding framework for integrated mine action efforts to address the humanitarian impact of anti-personnel mines. Whereas in the past mine action was often viewed as being little more than mine clearance, there is a growing consensus that to be truly effective, mine action should be understood as an integrated continuum of a number of key activities including: - advocacy in support of the ratification and universalization of the Ottawa Convention as well as efforts to monitor its implementation; - mine awareness programs to reduce the number of new mine casualties; - mine clearance and the return of cleared land to communities; - providing assistance to landmine survivors; - survey work and related efforts to collect information on the nature of the landmine problem and measures progress in mine action; - the destruction of stockpiled mines; - research and development of improved mine action technologies; and, - communications and outreach to ensure the political and financial sustainability of mine action efforts over the long term. With this mind, Canada has committed $100 million[1] over 5 years to a "Canadian Landmine Fund" to support the full implementation of the Ottawa Convention through programs in the above activity areas. This Fund is jointly managed by four Canadian Government Departments: the Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade; the Canadian International Development Agency (CIDA); the Department of National Defence (DND); and, the Department of Industry. For the fiscal year ending March 31, 1999, Canada will have spend approximately $16 million of the $100 million Landmine Fund.

Canada has experience and credibility in anti landmine policies Ottawa proves Lewis Machipisa, writer for Inter Press Service, 4-11-1997 (South Africa Disarmament: Seeking Freedom From
Landmines, p.Lexis, hl) The regional campaign to ban landmines was born out of the Maputo conference and its objective is to have a mine-free Southern Africa and have all 12 countries sign a Landmine Treaty in Ottawa, Canada in December this year. Almost 70 countries have joined an initiative spearheaded by Canada that is expected to culminate in the signing of a treaty for a total ban on the production, stockpiling, trade and use of anti-personnel landmines.

SDI 2007 5 Week

34 Landmines Neg

AT: US experience/signal key

Canada has extensive experience de-mining in Africa Canada Newswire 9-5-2002 (Canada Helps Rid Mozambique and Nambia of Landmines, p. Lexis, hl)
International Cooperation, today announced that Canada, through the Canadian International Development Agency (CIDA), is contributing $900,000 to help Mozambique and Namibia get rid of landmines. Minister Whelan is visiting Mozambique after participating in the World Summit for Sustainable Development in South Africa. While in Mozambique, Minister Whelan is visiting various CIDA-funded development initiatives. "Landmines continue to plague the people of Mozambique and Namibia," Minister Whelan said. "Landmines perpetuate poverty and are a major obstacle to sustainable development. Canada was the first country to ratify the Ottawa Convention banning antipersonnel mines and is committed to helping clear mines and prevent landmine injuries and death around the world." Many of the mines were laid as defensive rings around key villages and infrastructure hubs, such as roads, power lines and railways. Landmines are a costly burden on affected countries and the people trying to cope with potential death or injury every time they take a step. Landmines prevent development and drain the medical resources of the countries they infest.

SDI 2007 5 Week

35 Landmines Neg

Canada SoPo NB
A) De-mining enhances Canadian soft power Joseph Nye, Professor at the JFK School of Government at Harvard University, 3-8-1999 (The Challenge of Soft Power,
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,21163,00.html, hl) Axworthy argues that Canada is a country that adds value internationally by focusing on issues related to basic human security. Canada's recent approach to such issues as land mines, small arms and the International Court of Justice--even though it may have irritated the U.S.--is a good example. Now, after a decade's absence, Canada is back on the U.N. Security Council, and Axworthy serves as president this month. His recent speeches in New York City have focused on the need for the protection of civilians, particularly children, in armed conflict, and he has received a sympathetic hearing from the Security Council. By lining up behind the U.N. agenda for human security, he continues to focus on issues that enhance Canada's soft power.

B)

C) Small arms kill more people a year than any other weapon The Guardian 10-28-2006 (UN Vote Paves Way for Arms Treaty,http://www.guardian.co.uk/armstrade/story/0,,1933807,
00.html) A Ministry of Defence spokesman said yesterday: "Small arms kill more people around the world than any other sort of weapon so the MoD has been working closely with Oxfam, Amnesty International, International Action Network of Small Arms (Iansa) and the UK defence industry in support of an arms trade treaty for several years now."

SDI 2007 5 Week

36 Landmines Neg

2NC Small Arms Outweigh

Small Arms outweigh Nuclear Weapons -- certainty of use & systemic impacts make them a higher priority. David Wood, Newshouse News Service, 1994 (Plain Dealer, p. Lexis)
From Somalia to Sarajevo and in dozens of lesser-known conflicts, a relentless proliferation of small arms is fueling a global wave of mayhem, and is beyond the ability of authorities to control or even monitor. A flood of excess Cold War weapons, together with a recent boom in exports from new arms factories around the world, has combined to lethal effect with a virulent new form of conflict ideally suited to small arms: ethnic and religious terrorism and violence, spurred by economic and environmental deterioration and overpopulation. "A fully loaded fighter plane is obviously more deadly than a rifle, but there are a lot more rifles in the world and they are used with much less discretion," said Aaron Karp, a political scientist at Old Dominion University in Virginia and one of a handful of arms analysts who are beginning to study the problem. In the Persian Gulf war of 1991, 5,000 to 10,000 Iraqis are believed to have been killed, mostly by American bombers, guided missiles and long-range artillery. By contrast, Karp said, a dozen "minor" conflicts around the world at the same time - in Angola and Cambodia, for instance - each produced more than 10,000 deaths, most of them the result of rifles, hand grenades and mines. While the world's arsenals of missiles, long-range bombers and nuclear weapons bear watching, Karp said, "the greater danger certainly comes from the weapons used in ethnic conflict."

SDI 2007 5 Week

37 Landmines Neg

Ottawa CP 1NC
Observation One: Text The United States federal government should accede to the Convention on the Prohibition, Use, Stockpiling, Production, and Transfer of Anti-Personnel Mines and on their Destruction. Well clarify. Observation Two: Competition The counterplan competes via net benefits solves the case and avoids our spending and tradeoff links Observation Three: Solvency 1. Ottawa solves best multiple reasons International Campaign to Ban Landmines February 2007 (Global Ban on Landmines, http://www.icbl.org/
tools/faq/treaty/significant, hl) The process that led to the signing of the Mine Ban Treaty has been described as unorthodox, historic and unique. What was so different about it? * The treaty bans antipersonnel weapons outright, rather than regulating their use making it the only international treaty to do this with weapons that are in use. * It was very quick the treaty was negotiated within a year, which is unprecedented for an international agreement of this nature. Also it took only nine months for 40 states to ratify the treaty, thus facilitating its entry into force. In contrast, the Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons (CCW) for example was adopted in 1980 and came into force in 1983. * So many countries have joined the treaty 122 governments signed in Ottawa and now (February 2005) there are 144 that have joined in total. In comparison, a treaty like the CCW has a third less members. * For the first time, small and medium sized powers (from Australia to Zimbabwe) came together and decided on a course of action. They took the lead and were not held back by some of the superpowers that had not yet agreed to ban landmines (such as US, China and Russia). Amongst the signatories are most former mine producers and many users, including Belgium, Cambodia, Italy, Mozambique and South Africa. * The treaty was the product of an unusually cohesive and strategic partnership between NGOs and governments: the ICBL and international organizations like the ICRC and UN organizations worked closely with governments. The ICBL participated in and continues to participate in conferences about the treaty. In contrast, many other treaties either exclude NGOs altogether or grant them only observer status. Also the ICBL saw its role at these conferences as a dual one: inside it participated in discussions and negotiations and outside it worked with the media, installed exhibitions, ran public awareness events, networked with other NGOs and lobbied government representatives. * The Ottawa process took place outside the UN system and the treaty negotiation conference relied on voting, rather than consensus procedures. Governments were also required to opt in meaning that governments attending the treaty negotiation conference in Oslo, for example, had to agree on the text beforehand. This, together with strong leadership at the negotiating conferences, ensured that the treaty remained focused and strong and prevented a few governments from watering down the treaty or slowing down the negotiations. * The Mine Ban Treaty has a flexible administrative structure to support implementation. Thus, its institutions have adapted as new needs arose and the Standing Committee system, Coordination Committee and the Implementation Support Unit have been established since the treaty's entry into force.

SDI 2007 5 Week

38 Landmines Neg

2. The US getting on board makes Ottawa effective

Associated Press 10-19-1999 (Britain Destroys Landmines, p. Lexis, hl) Britain has destroyed the last of its anti-personnel land mines, three years ahead of the deadline set by an international treaty, the government said Tuesday. The last HB876 mine, designed to be dropped on airfields, was dismantled by contractors earlier in the day, said Armed Forces Minister John Spellar. The mines were part of a system that uses cratering bombs to tear up runways and mines to discourage repairs. ''I hope that the completion of our accelerated destruction program will send a clear message to those countries who have not yet signed the Ottawa Convention. I can only emphasize that a global, united effort is vital to make the Ottawa Convention truly effective,'' Spellar said. The United States is one of the most important holdouts from the treaty, which has been signed by about 100 nations.

3. Even if they win the CP isnt competitive because of a perm, any risk of a disad will outweigh case because all of the reasons Ottawa is key to solve demining are independent solvency takeouts to the aff

SDI 2007 5 Week

39 Landmines Neg

US key to Ottawa Ext

US key to Ottawa effectiveness Los Angeles Times 1-3-2007 (Tiptoeing Around Landmines, p. Lexis, hl)
A U.S. decision in the new year to formally join the global ban on landmines would provide a needed second wind to the international effort to make this convention truly universal in scope.

The US is key to move the treaty forward Marco Santana, reporter for Chicago Daily Herald, 7-10-2007 (Clearing the Philanthropists Device Tackles Landmine
Safety, p. Lexis, hl) In the United States, the U.S. Campaign to Ban Landmines focuses on the political side of things. The group's main goal is to get the United States to sign the Ottawa Convention, a treaty designed to ban and remove all antipersonnel land mines in the world. Today, 155 countries have signed the pact. Scott Stedjan has been coordinator of the Washington-based U.S. Campaign for the past three years. "It's a frustrating initiative where you know we will not make progress right now," he said. "Once the U.S. (signs), we'll be able to get (other holdout countries) to do it more easily." The United States does contribute $70 million a year to de- mining activities around the world and is the world's No. 1 donor, Stedjan said. But it needs to do more, including sign the treaty, he said.

US refusal to sign is Ottawas main weakness complying is key to the treaty BBC 11-11-2006 (Belgian Minister Helps Promote International Campaign Against Cluster Bombs, p. Lexis, hl)
But Belgium, which helped to lay the foundations for the treaty against landmines in the nineties, does not wish to go it alone or act as the conscience of the world. If it ever comes to a treaty on cluster bombs, it should not be something lacking in substance, but big players such as the United States, China, and Russia should take part. This is still the great weakness of the 1977 Ottawa treaty on landmines: nearly 10 years later, the big powers are still keeping away.

We assume the indicts of Ottawa US is key to make the treaty effective Patrick Leahy, Senator of Vermont, 12-5-1997 (The Growing Consensus on Landmines, The Washington Post, p.
Lexis, hl) The advantages of the second choice are obvious. By throwing its weight behind the treaty, the United States would reaffirm its commitment to a ban. Linking our signature to solving the "mixed" mines problem ensures the Pentagon of an effective anti-tank mine capability or some suitable replacement technology. Setting a target date would allay fears of treaty supporters that the development of alternatives might go on indefinitely. Both the Pentagon and those of us who believe that the United States and its unmatched international prestige and abilities are crucial to an effective Ottawa treaty should acknowledge that the "mixed" mines problem needs to be solved. That would give us the common ground we need to move forward after Ottawa.

SDI 2007 5 Week

40 Landmines Neg

Ottawa key to long term Solvency

Counterplan solves the case and then some not only is there comprehensive mine clearance but Ottawa bans all future production International Campaign to Ban Landmines February 2007 (Global Ban on Landmines, http://www.icbl.org/
tools/faq/treaty/cover, hl) The treaty commits member states to put an end to the suffering and casualties caused by antipersonnel landmines. Treaty obligations fall under two broad headings: * those that prevent future landmine problems e.g. a ban on mine use, production and trade, as well as the destruction of stockpiled mines; and * those that aim to solve the existing landmine problem e.g. clearance of mined areas, mine risk education and assistance for landmine survivors.

Ottawa is most effective implementation methods and a ten year timeframe for total de-mining International Campaign to Ban Landmines February 2007 (Global Ban on Landmines, http://www.icbl.org/
tools/faq/treaty/cover, hl) Obligations State Parties agree to: * never use antipersonnel mines, nor to develop, produce, otherwise acquire, stockpile, retain or transfer them; * destroy mines in their stockpiles within four years of the treaty becoming binding; * clear mines in their territory, or support efforts to clear mines in mined countries, within 10 years; * in mine-affected countries, conduct mine awareness and ensure that mine victims are cared for, rehabilitated and reintegrated into their communities; * offer assistance to other States Parties, for example in providing for survivors or in clearance programmes; * adopt national implementation measures (such as national legislation) in order to ensure that the terms of the treaty are upheld in their territory.

SDI 2007 5 Week

41 Landmines Neg

US SoPo NB
A. Acceding to Ottawa key to US soft power Japan Times 5-13-2002 (Unilateralism Is Not the Way, p. Lexis, hl)
While the CTBT and NPT, along with the chemical and biological weapons convention, the Ottawa Treaty and other international instruments, raise the threshold of proliferation and use, they simultaneously lower the bar to collective international responses for ensuring regime compliance. They thus lower the threat, reduce the need for counterproliferation preparation and strategies, and promote norms of acceptable international behavior. In

accept individual costs in order to collectively punish transgressors of key social norms. The same applies, I believe, to countries, for we all have a strongly developed sense of right and wrong. Of course, no arms control regime can provide foolproof assurance against cheating. But the key issue, as in all aspects of life is risk management. We don't stop driving or flying because of the risks of accidents. Rather, we take reasonable precautions, institute safety procedures, ensure minimum skills through approved testing procedures and set in place mechanisms and people for catching and punishing the violators of the collective norms of driving and flying. There is no country on Earth in which people do not violate traffic laws and seek to evade detection. Some even succeed. It would be as irresponsible as it would be irrational to conclude that driving license requirements and traffic codes should therefore be thrown out in favor of a free-for-all on the nation's roads. So, yes, some states and groups will surely try to cheat on their international obligations. But the verification and monitoring mechanisms built into arms control regimes gives us a higher chance of catching them in efforts to cheat. The risk of detection acts as a deterrent against cheating, and the risk of being branded a cheat adds an element of compliance. The

easier to form coalitions of the willing from those angered by noncompliance with international treaties and global norms - which is a good working definition of a rogue state. Some fascinating recent research suggests that people will

signing international arms control treaties, states accept binding obligations. If North Korea should seek to acquire nuclear weapons, NPT obligations give us significant leverage first to hold it to a legal contract, and second, if that is ignored, to fashion a collective response to noncompliance. It is far

U.S. can leverage its hard- and soft-power assets - its military might, economic muscle, diplomatic clout, voting weight in international financial institutions, etc. - to hold signatories to their international treaty obligations. If these are violated, the U.S. can leverage the same set of assets to forge coalitions of the willing, as in the Persian Gulf, Kosovo and Afghanistan wars over the past decade. The world needs American muscle and leadership on the side of the law-abiding.

B. Soft power is key to solving counter-terrorism cooperation Joseph S. Nye, Sultan of Oman Professor of International Relations at Harvard, Summer 2004, (Soft Power and American
Foreign Policy, Political Science Quarterly, Vol. 119, Iss.2; pg. 255, proquest, accessed 07/10/07) Skeptics about soft power say not to worry. Popularity is ephemeral and should not be a guide for foreign policy in any case. The United States can act without the world's applause. We are so strong we can do as we wish. We are the world's only superpower, and that fact is bound to engender envy and resentment. Fouad Ajami has stated recently, "The United States need not worry about hearts and minds in foreign lands."IJ Columnist CaI Thomas refers to "the fiction that our enemies can be made less threatening by what America says and does."10 Moreover, the United States has been unpopular in the past, yet managed to recover. We do not need permanent allies and institutions. We can always pick up a coalition of the willing when we need to. Donald Rumsfeld is wont to say that the issues should determine the coalitions, not vice-versa. But it would be a mistake to dismiss the recent decline in our attractiveness so lightly. It is true that the United States has recovered from unpopular policies in the past, but that was against the backdrop of the Cold War, in which other countries still feared the Soviet Union as the greater evil. Moreover, while America's size and association with disruptive modernity are real and unavoidable, wise policies can soften the sharp edges of that reality and reduce the resentments that they engender. That is what the United States did after World War II. We used our soft power resources and co-opted others into a set of alliances and institutions that lasted for sixty years. We won the Cold War against the Soviet Union with a strategy of containment that used our soft power as well as our hard power. It is true that the new threat of transnational terrorism increased American vulnerability, and some of our unilateralism after September 11 was driven by fear. But the United States cannot meet the new threat identified in the national security strategy without the cooperation of other countries. They will cooperate, up to a point, out of mere self-interest, but their degree of cooperation is also affected by the attractiveness of the United States. Take Pakistan for example. President Pervez Musharraf faces a complex game of cooperating with the United States on terrorism while managing a large anti-American constituency at home. He winds up balancing concessions and retractions. If the United States were more attractive to the Pakistani populace, we would see more concessions in the mix.

SDI 2007 5 Week

42 Landmines Neg

C. Terrorist attacks will cause extinction Yonah Alexander, Director of Inter-University for Terrorism Studies, 8-28-2003 (Washington Times, p. Lexis)
Last week's brutal suicide bombings in Baghdad and Jerusalem have once again illustrated dramatically that the international community failed, thus far at least, to understand the magnitude and implications of the terrorist threats to the very survival of civilization itself. Even the United States and Israel have for decades tended to regard terrorism as a

mere tactical nuisance or irritant rather than a critical strategic challenge to their national security concerns. It is not surprising, therefore, that on September 11, 2001, Americans were stunned by the unprecedented tragedy of 19 al Qaeda terrorists striking a devastating blow at the center of the nation's commercial and military powers. Likewise, Israel and its citizens, despite the collapse of the Oslo Agreements of 1993 and numerous acts of terrorism triggered by the second intifada that began almost three years ago, are still "shocked" by each suicide attack at a time of intensive diplomatic efforts to revive the moribund peace process through the now revoked cease-fire arrangements [hudna]. Why are the United States and Israel, as well as scores of other countries affected by the universal nightmare of modern terrorism surprised by new terrorist "surprises"? There are many reasons, including misunderstanding of the manifold specific factors that contribute to terrorism's expansion, such as lack of a universal definition of terrorism, the religionization of politics, double standards of morality, weak punishment of terrorists, and the exploitation of the media by terrorist propaganda and psychological warfare. Unlike their historical counterparts, contemporary terrorists have introduced a new scale of

strategy can be developed [e.g., strengthening international cooperation]. The first illusion is that terrorism can be greatly reduced, if not eliminated completely, provided the root causes of conflicts - political, social and economic - are addressed. The conventional illusion is that terrorism must be justified by oppressed people seeking to achieve their goals and consequently the argument advanced "freedom fighters" anywhere, "give me liberty and I will give you death," should be tolerated if not glorified. This traditional rationalization of "sacred" violence often conceals that the real purpose of terrorist groups is to gain political power through the barrel of the gun, in violation of fundamental human rights of the noncombatant segment of societies. For instance, Palestinians religious movements [e.g., Hamas, Islamic Jihad] and secular entities [such as Fatah's Tanzim and Aqsa Martyr Brigades]] wish not only to resolve national grievances [such as Jewish settlements, right of return, Jerusalem] but primarily to destroy the Jewish state. Similarly, Osama bin Laden's international network not only opposes the presence of American military in the Arabian Peninsula and Iraq, but its stated objective is to "unite all Muslims and establish a government that follows the rule of the Caliphs." The second myth is that strong action against terrorist infrastructure [leaders, recruitment, funding, propaganda, training, weapons, operational command and control] will only increase terrorism. The argument here is that law-enforcement efforts and military retaliation inevitably will fuel more brutal acts of violent revenge. Clearly, if this perception continues to prevail, particularly in democratic societies, there is the danger it will paralyze governments and thereby encourage further terrorist attacks. In sum, past experience provides useful lessons for a realistic future strategy. The prudent application of force has been demonstrated to be an effective tool for short- and long-term deterrence of terrorism. For example, Israel's targeted killing of Mohammed Sider, the Hebron commander of the Islamic Jihad, defused a "ticking bomb." The assassination of Ismail Abu Shanab - a top Hamas leader in the Gaza Strip who was directly responsible for several suicide bombings including the latest bus attack in Jerusalem - disrupted potential terrorist operations. Similarly, the U.S. military operation in Iraq eliminated Saddam Hussein's regime as a state sponsor of terror. Thus , it behooves those countries victimized by terrorism to understand a cardinal message communicated by Winston Churchill to the House of Commons on May 13, 1940: "Victory at all costs, victory in spite of

violence in terms of conventional and unconventional threats and impact. The internationalization and brutalization of current and future terrorism make it clear we have entered an Age of Super Terrorism [e.g. biological, chemical, radiological, nuclear and cyber] with its serious implications concerning national, regional and global security concerns. Two myths in particular must be debunked immediately if an effective counterterrorism "best practices"

terror, victory however long and hard the road may be: For without victory, there is no survival. "

SDI 2007 5 Week

43 Landmines Neg

SoPo Key to Heg

Soft power is key to maintaining heg Eli Fried, reporter for The Jerusalem Report, 10-16-2006 (The Soft Power of Multilateralism, proquest)
If there is one big lesson to be learned from the war in Lebanon and Iraq, it is that both Israel and the United States can gain as much, if not more, from international cooperation as from the unilateral use of naked power. America's experience in Iraq has demonstrated that no amount of military power can make up for a lack of vital international support. Indeed, as a result of its aggressive and unilateralist post- September 11 policies, Washington found itself unable to play the role of regional broker early on in the Lebanon fighting. However, it went on to pursue a sustainable cease-fire through a process of multilateral engagement, and, with the passing of U.N. Security Council Resolution 1701, significantly enhanced its persuasive capacity - or "soft power" - in the region. Its pursuit of an agreed- upon policy enabled the United States to co-opt the international community without sacrificing President Bush's paradigmatic division between the forces of good and evil. In other words, it is not the U.S.'s moral partitioning that the world opposes, but rather its perceived neo-colonialist policies and unilateralist tendencies.

SDI 2007 5 Week

44 Landmines Neg

2NC AT: North Korea DA

De-mining already occurring in Koreas Agence France Press 10-17-2000 (North Korea Starts to Work on Cross-Border Railway, p. Lexis, hl)
Since President Kim performed a ground-breaking ceremony on September 18, thousands of South Korean soldiers have been removing landmines to lay track on the line which was closed just before the 1950-53 Korean war. "The demining operation has been going smoothly without any soldiers injured," Colonel Park Byung-Hee said. From Pyongyang, the railway goes up to Shinuiju on the North Korean border with China. South Korea has now cleared anti-tank and anti-personnel mines from a 2.1-kilometer (1.3 mile) path, just over half of the track to be demined. The two Koreas have also agreed to build a four-lane highway parallel to the border railway. The South has removed landmines on a 1.9 kilometre (1.2 mile) stretch of the 5.1 kilometre (3.2 mile) long road.

Extensive de-mining already in the North and South Agence France Press 8-28-2002 (Koreas Discuss Re-linking Railways; Roads at New Economic Talks, p. Lexis, hl)
Work to clear thousands of landmines inside the DMZ cannot start until a military accord is hammered out. Military authorities from the two Koreas will have to hold separate talks to guarantee the safety of the proposed demining work inside the border. There are two cross-border railways -- one to link up with China and the other with Russia -- that both Koreas have been working to relink. The South has completed work on its side to rebuild the railway route leading up to China, but work has yet to start on the route up to where Russia's trans-Siberian railway runs to Europe.

If their arguments about NoKo mines needing to stay in place are true, its a reason they wouldnt access all of their case impacts their internals arent specific to Africa Turn: Failure to remove landmines jacks US-Korea relations The Washington Times 12-17-1997 (Why US Landmines in Korea Are Necessary, p. Lexis, hl)
John J. Kim of the National Association of Korean Americans writes in a letter to the editor ("Not signing the Ottawa treaty means continued racism against the Third World," Dec. 11) that the U.S. decision to continue to deploy land mines in Korea was "a clear example of our government's racism and discrimination against people of color in the Third World." This statement reflects total ignorance of the continuing state of war on the Korean peninsula and is insulting to Americans of every color. The land mines in Korea are emplaced along the Demilitarized Zone (DMZ) that separates the two Korean states (which are still technically at war). These mines are not randomly sown to kill or disable civilians, as they are commonly used in Third World conflicts.

Political moves, not landmines, key to avert Korean conflict Patrick Leahy, Senator of Vermont, 12-5-1997 (The Growing Consensus on Landmines, The Washington Post, p.
Lexis, hl) Informed people in the Pentagon say that given the complete allied control of the air over the deep battlefield in Korea, technologies and tactics already exist to delay a North Korean advance for that long without the use of anti-personnel mines. It may take time to perfect these options, but political will, not technical skill, lies at the heart of the problem. Had the administration taken the Ottawa process seriously early on, we could have won time to solve the "mixed" mines problem before the treaty takes effect.

SDI 2007 5 Week

45 Landmines Neg

More of Bushs lies landmines not key, other technologies can be found to protect troops Edward Epstein, reporter for the San Fransisco Chronicle, 12-20-2002 (Global Pressure on US Against Landmines;
Bush May Use Them in Iraq, p. Lexis, hl) But the last time American forces used anti-personnel land mines was in the 1991 Persian Gulf War against Iraq, when about 118,000 were planted to protect U.S. troops. Since then, 146 countries, but not the United States, have signed the 1997 Mine Ban Treaty. The United States says it needs the mines to defend South Korea until an effective alternative can be found. In 1998, President Bill Clinton ordered that U.S. forces phase out their use of the mines by 2003, except in Korea. However, President Bush undertook a study of that order, which still hasn't been completed. Clinton said the United States would sign the treaty by 2006 if new defensive technologies could be found to protect American soldiers in heavily armed places such as the 150-mile-long, 2.5-mile-wide Korean demilitarized zone.

Counterplan solves the impact staying outside the treaty is the ultimate way to forfeit our leadership Patrick Leahy, Senator of Vermont, 12-5-1997 (The Growing Consensus on Landmines, The Washington Post, p.
Lexis, hl) Having missed that chance, we now have two choices: (1) Stay outside the treaty, when even Russia has signaled its intention to join eventually and as more and more countries follow suit. We would forfeit our leadership and become increasingly identified with the mine problem. (2) Declare that we will sign the treaty as soon as we have designed technologies or tactics to protect anti-tank mines in a manner consistent with the treaty, set a target date and immediately launch a crash program to do so.

There are alternatives developed to landmines for Korea and we solve the disad impact Ottawa is key to US leadership Los Angeles Times 1-3-2007 (Tiptoeing Around Landmines, p. Lexis, hl)
Two years remain in Bush's term. Thanks to the Pentagon's continued pursuit of the landmine alternative program, he has an opportunity to meet the military's force protection requirements and respond to the continuing humanitarian tragedy caused by landmines. Signing the Ottawa treaty would also send a signal to our allies and friends, virtually all of whom have signed the convention, that the United States is committed to working with other nations to solve global problems -- a theme the president and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice have stressed during Bush's second term.

There are alternatives to landmines for Korea the US just hasnt embraced the research Associated Press 12-14-1999 (AP Photo, p. Lexis, hl)
Five countries the United States, China, India, Pakistan and Finland have signed the 1996 agreement but not the Ottawa Treaty. The United States says land mines are a necessary defense for South Korea against the communist North. ICBL says Pakistan has also made use of land mines during its border war with India, while India has denied claims that it too used mines. ''The campaign is trying to put new focus and pressure on the United States,'' said Williams. ''I wouldn't say the U.S. has been backsliding, but it is certainly in neutral. Where they say they are looking for alternatives there is concern that they haven't significantly embraced that research.''

[ONLY IF THERES A MORALITY ARGUMENT] They link to their own morality arguments the idea that we should leave them in Korea but not Africa is racist

SDI 2007 5 Week

46 Landmines Neg

Ottawa = Unpopular/Flip Flop

Bush and his cronies empirically support landmines Ottawa is a flip flop Melvin Goodman, writer for Washington Monthly, December 2000 (Shotgun Diplomacy, http://findarticles.com/p/
articles/mi m1316/is_12_32/ai_68148602, hl) Take the campaign to ban land mines. The Pentagon opposes the international effort because of its deployment of mines near the border between North and South Korea. Antipersonnel mines, unable to tell the difference between a combatant and a child, have created havoc in such disparate places as Cambodia, Angola, Afghanistan, El Salvador, Bosnia, and Mozambique. But the cincs have made land mines a readiness issue and will not budge. Not even the inauguration of a tentative peace between the two Koreas and the beginning of summit diplomacy between the United States and North Korea has led to new thinking at the Pentagon.

Ottawa is a flip flop CDI 11-21-2005 (A Landmine by Any Other Name, http://www.cdi.org/program/document.cfm?DocumentID=3218&
StartRow=1&ListRows=10&appendURL=&Orderby=D.DateLastUpdated&ProgramID=22&from_page=index.cfm, hl) The administration of President Bill Clinton outlined its landmines policy in Presidential Decision Directive (PDD) 64, issued in May 1998. The PDD featured three main goals: to aggressively seek alternative technologies to replace traditional anti-personnel landmines, to end the use of all anti-personnel landmines outside of Korea by 2003, and to sign the Mine Ban treaty by 2006, provided suitable landmine alternatives had been developed. The George W. Bush administrations policy on landmines, announced on Feb. 27, 2004, represents a significant shift away from Clinton-era policy. The new policy focuses on eradicating persistent mines specifically, instead of all anti-personnel mines in general. Most notably, the policy makes no mention of ratifying the Mine Ban Treaty and, by comparison, declares U.S. readiness to, continue to develop non-persistent (selfdestructing/self-deactivating) landmines that will not pose a humanitarian threat after use in battle. The Bush policy also extends the deadline for eliminating persistent anti-personnel mines from Korea until 2010.

Even though demining is popular, Ottawa is not interests in Korea State Department Documents and Publications 7-30-2007 (Bureau of Western Hemisphere Affairs 2007, p.
Lexis, hl) The United States, while the world's leading supporter of demining initiatives, declined to sign the treaty due to unmet concerns regarding the protection of its forces and allies, particularly those serving on the Korean Peninsula, as well as the lack of exemptions for mixed munitions.

SDI 2007 5 Week

47 Landmines Neg

Ottawa = bipartisan
Ottawa has bipartisan support WAND, Womens Action for New Directives, 3-12-2002 (Letter to President Bush, http://www.wand.org/news/landmines.
html, hl) Mine Ban Treaty. However, 124 Members of the U.S. House of Representatives, both Democrats and Republicans, recently asked you not to heed these recommendations and encouraged you to eliminate antipersonnel landmines from the U.S. arsenal.

SDI 2007 5 Week

48 Landmines Neg

Ottawa = popular w/ public

Public supports the Mine Ban Treaty Julian Davis, United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, no date (The Campaign to Ban Landmines, http://www.
jha.ac/articles/a134.htm, hl) By galvanizing world public opinion, NGOs applied pressure on policymakers to support a total ban. These organizations were intent on politicizing global civil society, a public sphere that exists above the individual but below the state and cuts across national boundaries; it is where groups and individuals interact for a common purpose.[16] During anti-landmine campaign, NGOs tried to politicize the previously unpoliticized[17] by encouraging ordinary citizens to give donations, sign petitions, start letter writing campaigns and even join street protests. It became increasingly difficult for decision makers to ignore the swell of public support for this issue.

Widespread public support for Ottawa Lutheran World Relief September 2004 (Campaign to Ban Landmines, http://www.lwr.org/advocacy/
landmines.asp, hl) According to a major poll on Americans views on foreign policy released in late September 2004 by the Chicago Council on Foreign Relations, 80% of the American public believes that the U.S. government should support the international treaty banning landmines.

SDI 2007 5 Week

49 Landmines Neg

Spending 1NC
A. GOP and Bush will maintain fiscal discipline. CQ 2007 (CQ Transcriptions, June 21, p. l/n, twm)
If you look at the appropriation bills, there's another $20 billion worth of additional spending that American taxpayers are going to have to deal with. Republicans are standing united with one another and with the White House, and have made it clear that we will sustain the president's threatened veto of these spending bills. Yesterday, we delivered to the president a letter signed by 147 House Republicans promising to uphold the president's veto of these excessive spending bills. And I think it's another important step in the unity we see amongst our members here on Capitol Hill, and our commitment to real fiscal responsibility here in Washington.

B. De-mining costs are astronomical Robert Drinan, writer for National Catholic Reporter, 12-19-1997 (Robert F. Drinan "America faces moral duty on demining, http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1141/is_n8_v34/ai_20201211, hl) Every estimate of the full cost of removing the 100 million land mines is astronomical. It can cost up to $1000 to remove a single antipersonnel device whose planting cost very little.

C.

SDI 2007 5 Week

50 Landmines Neg

D.

E.

SDI 2007 5 Week

51 Landmines Neg

Spending Link Ext

De-mining is really expensive Michael Sholz, senior in engineering at U of Wisconsin, 1996 (Landmines: A Global Crisis to Challenge this University,
http://tc.engr.wisc.edu/Steuber/papers/1996/landmines.html, hl) Landmines cost as little as $3 to deploy, but up to $1,000 to remove by conventional methods.

De-mining costs are huge tech and implementation Geneva International Center for Humanitarian De-mining August 2005 (Manual Mine Clearance,
http://www.gichd.org/fileadmin/pdf/publications/Manual_Mine_Clearance_Book5.pdf, hl) Generally, indirect costs are treated as overheads and apportioned among the various programmes that are supported in some way by these costs according to some reasonable and well-defined basis. For a simple example, take an organisation with a country mine action programme comprising mine clearance and MRE operations, with US$900,000 in direct expenditures per year on clearance plus US$100,000 on MRE, and with US$100,000 in costs borne by the national programme management office. Reasonably, the overhead expenses (i.e. the national office) might be allocated to clearance and MRE operations in the same ratio as their direct costs, or 9-to-1. There are two main complications that arise in practice. First, there may be multiple layers of overheads. For example, there might be a national office with some staff working only on mine action activities (say, manual clearance, mine detection dogs (MDD), and MRE) but others working on mine action plus additional programmes (say, construction of housing for returning refugees). There would also be overhead costs incurred at the international headquarters, but there might also be regional offices covering a number of countries plus special programmes supporting the organisations MDDs on a global basis. This raises some complications,6 but these need not concern us here.

De-mining is hugely expensive, especially in developing countries Surajit Sen and Ronald Woodfin, American Physical Society, April 2002 (Humanitarian De-mining, http://units.
aps.org/units/fps/newsletters/2002/april/a2ap02.cfm, hl) According to ICBL, the total investment (including equipment purchase, maintenance, salaries, R&D, etc.) on "humanitarian mine action" in 1999 was $211 million. However, this amount is meager when one considers the overall cost of de-mining, some $1-2 million/sq. km (Trevelyan 1998). The stated amount includes the costs of operating an overall de-mining program in a typical third world environment. Hence, it would be incorrect to associate the $211 million figure with resources available for developing improved approaches to the problem of mine detection, deactivation and certification.

De-mining is one of the most expensive humanitarian actions Ruth Ayisi, UNICEF Communications Officer, no date (Landmines Inflict Heavy Costs on Africa, http://www.un.org/
ecosocdev/geninfo/afrec/vol11no3/landmine.htm, hl) Landmines, known as "the poor man's weapon," cost only $3-10 to lay, but $300-1,000 to remove. Some $33 bn is needed to deactivate the 110 mn mines laid around the world. With 6-8 mn mines laid in Angola, or one mine for every two Angolans, the government faces financial and practical obstacles.

SDI 2007 5 Week

52 Landmines Neg

Politics Links Bipart

Plan has bipartisan support Scott Stedjan and Matt Schaaf, writers for Foreign Policy in Focus, 8-28-2006 (If It Looks Like a Landmine, Smells Like a
Landmine . . . http://www.hartford-hwp.com/archives/27a/277.html , hl) For the first time in nearly a decade, the Bush administration plans to begin production of a new generation of antipersonnel mines. Seeking to avoid the images of soldiers in wheelchairs and dismembered children associated with landmines, the administration has renamed these particular landmines networked munitions systems. Wrapping landmines in a new nameremoving the stigma they deservemakes selling them to Congress and the public easier. Still, these networked munitions systems are nothing but high-tech landmines, and carry the same abhorrent side effects they always have. Fortunately Congress is not that easily fooled. On August 1, Senators Patrick Leahy (VT) and Arlen Specter (PA) introduced the bipartisan Victim-Activated Landmine Abolition Act of 2006. The bill prohibits the procurement of any victim-activated weapon, whether called a landmine or something else.

De-mining efforts have bipartisan support Lincoln Bloomfield Jr., Special Representative of the President and Secretary of State for Mine Action and Assistant Secretary of State for Political-Military Affairs, January 2004 (US Humanitarian Mine Action: Making the World Safer,
http://usinfo.state.gov/journals/itps/0104/ijpe/bloomfield.htm, hl) Humanitarian mine action is a bipartisan issue that has received broad and growing support from both Republicans and Democrats in the U.S. Congress. The Clinton administration launched the first formal Humanitarian Demining Program, and the Bush administration continues to strengthen it. Mine action embodies American core values - respect for life, caring in the face of human suffering, support for economic independence and self-sufficiency, and concern for wildlife and domestic animals.

Humanitarian de-mining is widely popular US Fed News 6-12-2006 (House Approves Lynch Amendment to Increase Funding for Landmine Removal Programs, p.
Lexis, hl) The measure also takes the United States an important step toward fully meeting our commitment to humanitarian landmine removal programs worldwide. The amendment was supported by a broad majority in the House, as well as the 500 U.S.-based organizations that make up the U.S. Campaign to Ban Landmines.

SDI 2007 5 Week

53 Landmines Neg

Politics Links Public

Widespread public support for de-mining WAND, Womens Action for New Directives, 3-12-2002 (Letter to President Bush, http://www.wand.org/news/landmines.
html, hl) Last year at this time, more than 250 Americans and additional people from more than 70 countries came together in Washington, D.C. for Ban Landmines Week where they met with more than 300 Congressional offices and asked the U.S. government to prioritize this issue. We believe that our nation is above using weapons of terror such as landmines. As humanitarian, religious, human rights, veterans, arms control, and medical organizations, we represent a wide cross-section of American values and constituencies.

SDI 2007 5 Week

54 Landmines Neg

China DA Links
China is already de-mining in Africa Richard Kidd, Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary for Political-Military Affairs, 4-27-2004 (US China Engagement on
Humanitarian Mine Action, http://www.state.gov/t/pm/rls/rm/32774.htm, hl) China has already made a strong contribution to humanitarian demining operations in Eritrea and in Yunnan and Guangxi provinces.

China already working to be preeminent actor on de-mining in Africa Africa News 11-22-2006 (Africa-China Relations Move to a Higher Pedestal, http://www.lexisnexis.com.proxy1.cl.
msu.edu:2047/us/nacademic/search/homesubmitForm.do, hl) China pledged to continue supporting the demining operations in Africa and the fight against illicit trade in small arms and light weapons through financial and material assistance and related training.

China is using this to further its influence US action crowds China Donovan Chau, PhD in Counter Terrorism and Preparedness, March 2007 (Political Warfare in Sub Saharan Africa, http://
www.strategicstudiesinstitute.army.mil/pdffiles/pub766.pdf, hl) Africa today has emerged as a continent of strategic consequence. Domestic and international terrorism aside, the two great powers of our time, the United States and the Peoples Republic of China (PRC), are vying for influence over African governments and people. Not unlike the Cold War, the primary means of exerting influence in Africa is through the use of nonviolent instruments of grand strategy.

SDI 2007 5 Week

55 Landmines Neg

Dept of State DA
A. The plan would be funded through the NADR budget FCNL, Friends Committee on National Legislation, 6-28-2007 (Humanitarian De-mining Budget Memo for FY 2008,
http://www.fcnl.org/issues/item.php?item_id=1720&issue_id=9, hl) While other U.S. government agencies do support specific mine action initiatives, funding support comes primarily form the Departments of State and Defense. The State Department manages two programs: 1) the Humanitarian Demining Program which provides assistance to mine-affected countries through corporations, nongovernmental organizations, and international organizations, and 2) the Slovenian International Trust Fund (ITF) assisting mine-affected countries in the Balkan region. Both programs are funded through the Nonproliferation, Antiterrorism, Demining, and Relation Programs (NADR) in the foreign operations appropriations bill.

B. Increases in NADR force tradeoffs within the Department of State budget. Joseph, Undersecretary of State for Arms Control and International Security, 2006 (Robert, Federal
News Service, Feb. 9, p. l/n, twm) But just as there are positive elements, we do have some problems. The president and his administration have devoted higher priority and more funding to nonproliferation and counterproliferation and weapons reduction assistance than any of our predecessors. However, the United States, even when we are joined with very active partners, cannot do everything at once. Therefore, as I've discussed with your staff and as I know you agree, we must establish priorities, especially in a constrained funding environment. But I would point out that even in this environment, the president's request for nonproliferation and conventional weapons destruction elements of the Nonproliferation, Anti-terrorism, Demining and Related Programs, or NADR account, would rise by a significant percentage compared to the estimate for FY '06. Mr. Chairman, conventional weapons destruction is a significant challenge, and it does require resource - resources that are matched to the scope of the problem. Yet it's one of a number of challenges that we face, and resources cannot come from other priorities of equal or greater value. We carefully considered our funding proposal in light of the current budget environment and other needs. Any additional requirements that are imposed outside of the normal budgetary process would limit our ability to implement the secretary's other priorities. In that regard, the department is concerned at the requirement in S. 1949 to devote specific percentage amounts from the NADR and the foreign military financing programs for WMD detection, interdiction and conventional arms reductions. While those objectives are clearly important and we share them, the designation of funds required by the legislation could lead us to devote resources to efforts which other agencies may be better suited to fund and could also prevent us from implementing what may be higher-priority programs in which the State Department funds might best be used.

C. Specifically, the plans earmarking stops the Department of State from using flexible funding to meet the highest priority needs like initiatives promoting US interests in the Middle East Biden, Senator, and Joseph, Undersecretary of State for Arms Control and International Security, 2006 (Joe and Robert, Federal News Service, Feb. 9, p. l/n, twm)
SEN. JOSEPH BIDEN (D-DE): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Welcome, Mr. Secretary. Thanks for making the time to be here. And thank you, Mr. Chairman, for holding this hearing. The spread of weapons of mass destruction and conventional weapons like shoulder-

does not get the attention it deserves within the Stat Department. I know that both the president and Secretary Rice have expressed their commitment to -- proliferation issues, but four key State Department interdiction and nonproliferation programs are either flatlined or slated for only modest increases in the president's budget. Meanwhile, a $1.2 billion increase is proposed for the Millennium Challenge Account, which will provide funding to such nations as Cape Verde, Madagascar and Vanuatu. I'm supporting the MCA and I'm not saying these countries aren't worthy of assistance, but, you know, a budget is about prioritizing strategic objectives, and in my view, the priorities don't appear appropriately aligned with the strategic threats we confront today. MR. JOSEPH: Thank you, Senator. Let me say from the outset, as I said during my confirmation hearings this past spring, we very much want to work closely together you and your staffs, as we are doing, to achieve what I know are shared goals. Your letter of invitation to me to testify today lays out the broad objectives of S. 1949, the Lugar-Obama Bill. Specifically, you stated that the United States must do more to assist others in detecting and interdicting weapons of mass destruction and in eliminating conventional weapons stockpiles that pose a security threat. As you

fired missiles, quite frankly, may be the gravest threat to our country today, especially if those weapons end up in the hands of terrorists. SEN. BARACK OBAMA (D-IL): Thank you so much, Mr. Chairman. I'm also concerned that the issue just simply

SDI 2007 5 Week

56 Landmines Neg

know, I fully share those objectives, as well as the need that you point out in the legislation to give greater focus to the threat, and to improve the coordination of both policies and programs within the State Department, within the interagency and a multinational level. We are working to achieve these same objectives, from stopping the proliferation trade to ending the humanitarian and security threats posed by surplus and abandoned conventional weapons stockpiles, including of course the key threat that we face from MANPADS in the wrong hands. There are a number of elements of S. 1949 that I believe are very helpful. At the most general level, through your sponsorship, you bring new and needed attention to these priority objectives, shining the spotlight where it is needed as you did in your speech at the U.N. on Monday. At the operational level, the legislation offers an important broader definition of conventional arms, which is in keeping with the comprehensive nature of the threat, again, even as it puts needed emphasis and priority on the danger of MANPADS. We also, of course, welcome the provision to provide permanent authority for the use of NDF funds outside the former Soviet states. But just as there are positive elements, we do have some problems. The president and his administration

purpose. On the contrary, we believe that the recent restructuring in the State Department configures us well to pursue the objectives of the legislation in both counterproliferation and conventional weapons reduction. As you know and as you supported, Senator, we have created a new Bureau of International Security and Nonproliferation, a new post of principal deputy assistant secretary for Counterproliferation and new offices responsible for counterproliferation initiatives, WMD, terrorism and strategic planning. The Office of Counterproliferation Initiatives is bringing new focus to the department's counterproliferation efforts, including the Proliferation Security Initiative and other defensive measures against proliferation. The Office of WMD Terrorism directly confronts the nexus between terrorism and WMD, and is working to help build the capabilities of our friends and allies to prevent, protect against and respond to the use or threat of use of WMD by terrorists. The Office of Strategic Planning and Outreach undertakes planning, program analysis and evaluation to encourage new and innovative thinking to meet today's and tomorrow's threats. We've also retained the relatively new Office of Weapons Removal and Abatement in the Bureau of Political Military Affairs, to provide a strategic focus on the growing conventional weapons proliferation threat. This office, which we formed in 2003, unites formerly separate nits responsible for humanitarian demining, mine action, and small arms and light weapons initiatives, allowing our organizational structure better to pursue the comprehensive approach to this problem that is required and that I believe is envisaged in S. 1949. The Department of State is taking an active leadership role in pursuing both counterproliferation and conventional weapons destruction goals reflecting the strong personal commitment of the secretary and my own. These areas are important priorities both within the State Department and more broadly within the administration. The department vigorously leads U.S. efforts to deepen the international foundation for action against proliferation; examples include the progress we've made in elevating proliferation to a core concern of G-8 leaders, the passage of the landmark U.N. Security Council Resolution 1540 and the creation and expansion of the Proliferation Security Initiative. This past fall I traveled to central Asia, East Asia and the Middle East to expand international efforts to broaden active participation in PSI by states in those regions. I emphasized to the governments in central Asia the need to cooperate more with us in improving WMD detection and interdiction, and they have responded positively. Outside of PSI specifically, the same is true with South Korea and others. Next week, we will have our first meeting of a new counterproliferation task force with the United Arab Emirates, which, as you know, is a critical transshipment point. While much of the specific operational work for detection and interdiction is carried out by other agencies, for example, the Department of Defense and the Department of Homeland Security, the State Department's Export Control and Border Security program does help to build partners' capacity to participate effectively in PSI. And the department overall takes the diplomatic lead in establishing priorities for fostering and implementing these vital efforts. We admittedly as a department and as an administration need to do even more in these areas, especially an effective prioritization of and follow-through on detection. But as you know, increasing our capacity for WMD interdiction is about much more than money and assistance. We have requested an increase in NADR funds for 2007 related to WMD interdiction for projects that would help partners improve their overall interdiction capability. At its core, however, increasing WMD interdiction is even more about increasing active cooperation through PSI and other means. Many of these collaborative efforts with our friends and allies are with partners who do not need our assistance, but who do contribute greatly through information sharing and through coordination of capabilities, both with regard to military and law enforcement action. In contrast, the roles -- the role of the department in conventional weapons elimination is both diplomatic and programmatic. Working with other agencies and other governments, we provide site surveys, assistance for physical security and stockpile management and for de-mining and destruction of excess weapons and munitions. In some cases, like Cambodia and Bosnia, our dealing with landmine problems has given us access to small arms and light weapons, particularly MANPADS. We have fully integrated programs to address land mines, ordnance, and small-arms light weapons in Iraq, Afghanistan and Sudan and we're working to do the same in several other countries. For a relatively small amount of money, the Department of State, with the assistance, of course, of the Department of Defense and others, has destroyed or

have devoted higher priority and more funding to nonproliferation and counterproliferation and weapons reduction assistance than any of our predecessors. However, the United States, even when we are joined with very active partners, cannot do everything at once. Therefore, as I've discussed with your staff and as I know you agree, we must establish priorities, especially in a constrained funding environment. But I would point out that even in this environment, the president's request for nonproliferation and conventional weapons destruction elements of the Nonproliferation, Anti-terrorism, Demining and Related Programs, or NADR account, would rise by a significant percentage compared to the estimate for FY '06. Mr. Chairman, conventional weapons destruction is a significant challenge, and it does require resource -- resources that are matched to the scope of the problem. Yet it's one of a number of challenges that we face, and resources cannot come from other priorities of equal or greater value. We carefully considered our funding proposal in light of the current budget environment and other needs. Any additional requirements that are imposed outside of the normal budgetary process would limit our ability to implement the secretary's other priorities. In that regard, the department is concerned at the requirement in S. 1949 to devote specific percentage amounts from the NADR and the foreign military financing programs for WMD detection, interdiction and conventional arms reductions. While those objectives are clearly important and we share them, the designation of funds required by the legislation could lead us to devote resources to efforts which other agencies may be better suited to fund and could also prevent us from implementing what may be higher-priority programs in which the State Department funds might best be used. Further, we do not support the organizational changes called for in S. 1949, but not because we disagree with their

SDI 2007 5 Week

57 Landmines Neg

disabled over 17,000 at-risk MANPADS, and we have commitments for the destruction of over 7,000 more. The department looks forward

to working with this committee to address how best to enhance our ability to meet the full spectrum of WMD missile and conventional threats that we face as a nation. As I mentioned, more flexible funding authority could help us take on higher-priority tasks, some unforeseen, for which other agencies or other governments are not as well equipped. We also would welcome an extension of the period covered by our conventional arms destruction funds. At the moment, most of those appropriations are good for only one year. It often takes that much time, if not more, to agree with a government on a program, let alone to start it or to complete it.

Mr. Chairman, on behalf of the department, I'd like to thank you and other members of your committee for your leadership and support as we have worked to confront the threat of weapons of mass destruction, missiles, and dangerous conventional arms. As I've described, we've been working hard to develop innovative and more effective tools. We have had considerable success, but there is still much to be done.

D. This impact outweighs on probability- Middle East instability makes proliferation likely and makes nuclear terrorism easy Noah Feldman 2006 Nuclear holocaust: A risk too big even for martyrs?, IHT, October 27,
http://www.iht.com/articles/2006/10/27/news/bombforweb.php, JP Given the increasing instability of the Middle East, nuclear proliferation there is more worrisome than almost anywhere else on earth. As nuclear technology spreads, terrorists will enjoy increasing odds of getting their hands on nuclear weapons. States - including North Korea - might sell bombs or give them to favored proxy allies, the way Iran gave Hezbollah medium-range rockets that Hezbollah used this summer during its war with Israel. Bombing through an intermediary has its advantages: deniability is, after all, the name of the game for a government trying to avoid nuclear retaliation. Proliferation could also happen in other ways. Imagine a succession crisis in which the Saudi government fragments and control over nuclear weapons, should the Saudis have acquired them, falls into the hands of Saudi elites who are sympathetic to Osama bin Laden, or at least to his ideas. Or Al Qaeda itself could purchase ready-made bombs, a feat technically much less difficult than designing nuclear weapons from scratch. So far, there are few nuclear powers from whom such bombs can be directly bought: as of today, only nine nations in the world belong to the nuclear club. But as more countries get the bomb, tracing the seller will become harder and harder, and the incentive to make a sale will increase.

SDI 2007 5 Week

58 Landmines Neg

Dept of State DA Ext

More money is being allotted to the DOS to stop prolif and WMD activity Joseph Benkert, Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary Global Security Affairs Department of Defense, 4-11-2007 (Fiscal
2008 Budget: Emerging Threats, p. Lexis, hl) In private life, Senator Nunn has remained a leading voice to maintain public awareness of the WMD threat. Senator Lugar has been a tireless advocate for non- proliferation activities within the Senate and the Department of State, and in partnership with this committee has been a key steward and mentor of the CTR Program. I want also to thank the members of the committee for their strong support of DoD programs that serve to combat the proliferation of WMD. Since DoD last testified on these subjects in March 2006, we believe much has been accomplished and we look forward to a productive year ahead for both CTR and PSI. The President has requested $348 million for FY2008 CTR activities; there is also a small request to support COCOM PSI-related exercises included in the Defense-Wide O&M section of the President's request. The Department urges your support for these requests. Appended to my prepared statement is a detailed description of the FY2008 CTR Program request.

Landmines arent the biggest threat. Biden, Senator, 2006 (Joe, Federal News Service, Feb. 9, p. l/n, twm)
And thank you, Mr. Chairman, for holding this hearing. The spread of weapons of mass destruction and conventional weapons like shoulder-fired missiles, quite frankly, may be the gravest threat to our country today, especially if those weapons end up in the hands of terrorists.

SDI 2007 5 Week

59 Landmines Neg

1AC Reconstruction U Mich

Observation 1- Inherency United States giving tens of millions of dollars in global demining assistance in the status quo, but its not nearly enough United Press International, May 30, 2007, p.
http://www.upi.com/International_Intelligence/Briefing/2007/05/30/us_invests_more_in_demining_efforts/5322 WASHINGTON, May 30 (UPI) -- The United States is investing more to get rid of landmines worldwide. The U.S. State Department announced Tuesday that it will give more than $2.2 million to a total of 23 non-governmental organizations working to eliminate landmines, teach mine risk education and assist mine survivors. The latest financial aid package brings the total amount State has invested into landmines and small-arms abatement to $65.3 million for the current fiscal year. Recipients of the grant include the Norwegian Peoples Aid, which is working to develop the South Sudan Demining Commission's capacity to survey explosive remnants, and to the Demining Agency for Afghanistan, which provides vocational training to former deminers in the country.

There has recently been a substantial increase in United States foreign aid globally Salt Lake Tribune, June 25, 2007, p. Lexis
While the House's $34 billion worldwide foreign aid bill for next year amounts to a nearly 10 percent increase over last year's foreign assistance budget, its $1.5 billion earmarked for Latin America amounts to an 8.5 percent decrease in aid to the region over the same period. Comparatively, the Bush administration-proposed bill includes a 54 percent increase in foreign aid to Africa, a nearly 7 percent increase for South Asia, a nearly 4 percent increase for the Middle East and a 25 percent drop in assistance to Eastern Europe.

Specifically, United States foreign aid to sub-Saharan Africa is also increasing States News Service, June 6, 2007, p. Lexis
The U.S. Agency for International Development's (USAID) 2006 investment alone provided more than 9 million people with improved access to safe drinking water, and nearly 1.5 million with better access to sanitation. USAID also increased aid in some of the neediest areas of the world, such as sub-Saharan Africa. "Sound water management and increased access to water and sanitation are critical to human progress," the report reads. "The challenge, given limited resources, is determining where and how to focus U.S. efforts to achieve the greatest benefits in support of U.S. foreign assistance goals."

Despite status quo demining assistance, millions of landmines remain in Eritrea and Ethiopia landmines continue to impair the productivity of Ethiopian and Eritrean economies Perry 04 (Cost Effectiveness of the Ethiopian and Eritrean Demining Programs by Michael F. Litzelman, Assistant Professor
of Military Science and Wayne D. Perry, Professor of Public Policy and Operations Research, George Mason University 4/12) Long after anti-personnel landmines (AP) were planted to gain military advantage in battle, they continue to destroy lives by killing and maiming civilians and livestock, inhibiting productivity and preventing economies from developing in poor, third world countries. Landmines contribute to political instability in regions vital to the United States. The U. S. Department of State claims that there are approximately 85 to 200 million mines in 63 countries, producing approximately 15,000 casualties per year, an average of 70 people per day, or 500 people every week, most of them innocent civilians (DOS 1994). Of these, an estimated 9,500 people are killed each year (GHE 1995). Both Ethiopia and Eritrea have approximately 500,000-1,000,000 landmines according to the Department of States "Hidden Killers." According to Mintz, "twenty percent of mine victims are children, with about half the victims of the worlds estimated 100 million landmines non-soldiers" (Mintz1996), although Bonnie Benwick claims that the estimated number of landmines may be overinflated (Benwick 1998). This paper will attempt to analyze the available data to perform a cost-effectiveness study of the U.S.-sponsored Ethiopian (ET) and Eritrean (ER) Demining Programs. This analysis may eventually be used as evaluation criteria to help determine if the United States should maintain its current level of operations or continue to expand demining into more countries.

SDI 2007 5 Week

60 Landmines Neg

Plan Text- The United States Federal Government should substantially increase its landmine clearance, training, and risk education efforts in Ethiopia and Eritrea. Well clarify. Advantage 1- Death and Destruction Africa remains the most mine-affected continent in the world Michael Oyugi, Head, International Organizations Division, Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Kenya, and, Coordinator, Nairobi Summit Host Country Secretariat, August 31, 2004, p.
http://www.reviewconference.org/fileadmin/pdf/review_conference/press_room/Oyugi_Bangkok_Workshop_31Aug04.pdf Africa remains the most mine-affected continent. In Sub-Saharan Africa, 22 countries are mine-affected. (Note that this excludes the Maghreb/North Africa, a sub-region comprising 7 countries and where there have been conflicts ranging from two World Wars to more recent and localized conflicts in which anti -personnel mines are known to have been used). Compare this to some 15 countries in Asia, 11 in Europe, and 9 in Latin America. Casualty figures for individual countries are of course not very easy to obtain. Nevertheless it is clear that Africa is faced with an enormous challenge resulting from on the mine front. Paradoxically, it would seem that the amount of resources available to mine-affected countries in the continent for mine action is inversely proportional to the huge burden placed on them by the problem of mines.

Landmines have adverse effects on public health in Africa Sarah B. Taylor, Journal of Mine Action 6.3 Victim Assistance, Upsetting Lives: The Public Health Impact of Landmines in Africa, December 2002, <http://maic.jmu.edu/journal/6.3/focus/taylor/taylor.htm>
Landmines are an immense problem throughout the continent of Africa, specifically in the way they affect public health; the International Federation of Red Cross (IFRC) and Red Crescent Societies (RCS) estimate that as many as 140 million Africans live in countries where the threat of injury or death due to landmines is high or very high. These menaces are found in villages, towns, and fields, and around roads, wells, schools, and health clinics. Both directly and indirectly, landmines have many adverse effects on the public health of the people of Africa. It is not only the physical injuries that affect the inhabitants of these nations; even the threat of landmines slows development. In Angola, studies illustrate that more individuals have died from poor water and sanitation, disease and malnutrition than direct injuries. By affecting water safety, agricultural development, public health campaigns and the socio-economic and emotional state of many inhabitants, landmines certainly hinder the well-being of entire African societies, while also killing, injuring and disabling over 12,000 African people per year.

Landmines are indiscriminate- everyone is vulnerable Jan Davis, Care and Oxfam and Save the Children, Landmines Security Training Module for NGOs, July 1998, <
http://www.redr.org/australia/resources/trainersResources/mod15.rtf> Key learning points Landmines are indiscriminate. Everyone is vulnerable. Avoid traveling in areas of known landmine risk or into an area on which you have inadequate information. Take the initiative to find out about the potential dangers: talk to local people, de-mining personnel, and other agencies working in the area.If you become involved in a landmine incident: warn others, remain calm, do not act hastily, be patient. Report all landmine incidents and publicize the danger to others. 1.0 The landmine problem Landmines are inexpensive, some available for as little as $3 each. Because they are so cheap, they have been distributed by the millions. Estimates vary, but a figure of over 100 million mines in the ground worldwide is often quoted. Mines are generally distributed randomly and the individuals who lay them do not keep records. Therefore, in many cases long after a conflict ends, mines lay undetected waiting to be detonated. It is an unfortunate fact that mines are often distributed specifically to cripple a societys infrastructure and they are placed in locations that guarantee detonation by the civilian population. They are often placed, for example, around water sources or in fertile fields used for growing crops. Civilians are faced with the choice of attempting to earn their livelihood in the face of this danger or resettle. The latter is usually not a realistic solution.

SDI 2007 5 Week

61 Landmines Neg

Landmines have killed more people than nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons combined Willerman Landmines survivors network (GOING TO FIX) 2004 (Raquel, Landmines and Human Security:
International Politics and Wars Hidden Legacy, ed. by R. Matthew, B. McDonald, K. Rutherford, p. 103) There are an estimated 300,000 landmine survivors worldwide. More than half the people involved in a landmine accident die before reaching medical care. Landmines have killed more people than nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons combined. With over eight thousand new victims reported in 2000 and thousands more whose accidents went unreported, the total number of landmine survivors continues to grow. It is estimated that at least 80 percent of survivors are civilians and 25 percent are children. Resources in nearly every mine affected country do not come close to meeting the needs of survivors. Less than 10 percent of survivors today receive appropriate medical care and rehabilitation services. The economies of most mineaffected countries rank among the least developed of the world. Available funding from the international community of the care and rehabilitation of survivors is well below even conservative estimates of the amount of money required to cover basic needs. The situation that most landmine victims live in is an affront to basic human rights.

Landmines kill one person every 20 minutes- tens of thousands die annually MannionMA, MB, BChir, FRCSand ChalonerMA, BM, BCh, DMCC2006. (Steve and Eddie, Pain Medicine,
Chapter 1 Landmines and Landmine Injuries: An Overview, Volume 7, November, pg. 1) Every 20 minutes, a person is killed or wounded by a landmine8090% of them noncombatants. Many are women and children who encounter mines while farming, collecting firewood, or searching for fresh water. Children are most at risk for death because they are smaller and therefore closer to the blast, and they are prone to roaming. All told, 26,000 28,000 people are killed or maimed annuallya statistic that has not declined in recent years, despite active landmine education programs and de-mining efforts in many nations [1]. De-mining efforts, in particular, are slow and expensive. The United Nations estimates that a US$10 landmine costs between $300 and $1,000 to remove. At the current removal rate of 100,000 per year, the last landmine now in place would not be removed until the year 3100.

Landmines are weapons of mass destruction- they dont discriminate between combatants and innocent civilians Human Rights Watch 2005 (Human Rights Watch, Page Last Modified: Thu, 10 Nov 2005 17:07 GMT, Landmine
Monitor; http://www.icbl.org/lm/2005/namibia ) The Minister of Foreign Affairs, Marco Hausiku, led the countrys delegation to the First Review Conference of the Mine Ban Treaty, held in Nairobi in November-December 2004. Minister Hausiku stated, In the African context, antipersonnel landmines are weapons of mass destruction, as they too cannot discriminate between combatants and innocent civilians. He also said, We believe that openness and transparency in the field of antipersonnel landmines are essential, as it can help minimize the risk of misunderstanding, mistrust and suspicion among neighbours on which armed conflicts feed.[4 ]

Landmines disrupt agricultural production and are the major obstacle to sustainable development Canadian Landmine Fund, 1998-1999, p. http://www.mines.gc.ca/pdf/VII_I_i_a-en.pdf
Beyond the direct costs of mine clearance and victim assistance are wider economic and social costs. Poor, rural, post-conflict societies are quickly overwhelmed by the challenges of repairing infrastructure and replacing lost agricultural production. Landmines also disrupt commerce and trade, producing shortages and inflation and preventing economic stabilization in post-conflict societies. In short, landmines perpetuate poverty and are a major obstacle to sustainable development.

US leadership on the issue of landmines essential to get other countries to act H.M. Queen Noor of Jordan, March 8, 2001, p. http://www.noor.gov.jo/main/landmines.html
I believe it is a geopolitical reality that U.S. leadership is essential to transform aspirations into action. We need your influence to stigmatize landmine-abusing nations. We need your example and energy to rally the resources for the task. As long as some of the worlds major producers and users continue to flout the global consensus, we will never fully root out this menace from our earth. It is therefore a moral imperative for the United States to lend your full authority to this issue, as soon as possible.

SDI 2007 5 Week

62 Landmines Neg

Only increased US demining in Ethiopia and Eritrea would cause other countries to increase their efforts throughout the world Litzelman 07 (Michael F. Litzelman, Assistant Professor of Military Science and Wayne D. Perry, Professor of Public Policy
and Operations Research, George Mason University; Journal of Mine Action; June 27, 2007; http://maic.jmu.edu/Journal/5.3/notes/michaellitzelman.htm ) This section analyzes data to perform a Cost-Effectiveness Analysis (CEA) of the U.S.-sponsored Ethiopian and Eritrean Demining Programs. Eventually, CEA may be used as a methodology to help determine whether the United States should continue its existing demining programs. The Ethiopian and Eritrean demining programs can serve as a model for the expansion of future demining programs in other areas that are important to American interests.Enumerated costs and their effectiveness, which are compatible with any demining effort, will be listed and quantified as

much as possible. The United Nations and NGOs have been involved in landmine programs, and some research has been completed on the personnel effects of landmine injuries in a few of the countries with landmine problems, e.g., Cambodia, Mozambique, Afghanistan and Angola. However, there has not been a study of the cost-effectiveness when the United States has solely initiated, sponsored and maintained a humanitarian demining program. The demining operations in Ethiopia and Eritrea were significantly different from the experience of previous efforts in Afghanistan (Operation Safe Passage). In Ethiopia and

objective whose attainment can be measured directly. Cost encompassed all those items valued in money terms, such as its inputs and outputs. In the case of the demining program, the prime benefit was to eliminate landmines in order to prevent injury and death to the populace. To accomplish these objectives, the United States provided funds (inputs) to help restore a national infrastructure (benefits) that had been rendered unusable by landmines. The objective was to return mined areasincluding villages, farmland and roadsto productive use. The Cost Effectiveness Analysis sought to measure: (1) costs of two or more program operations, i.e., demining, public awareness, historical research in each country; and (2) the cost effectiveness of demining in Ethiopia compared with Eritrea. In terms of comparing the cost-effectiveness of the demining programs in Ethiopia and Eritrea, the benefits or outputs of the programs were much greater in Ethiopia than Eritrea, as Table 1 clearly indicates. The Ethiopia demining efforts were more cost-effective than Eritrea. Both countries received almost the same amount of dollars, but the benefits are much greater in Ethiopia than Eritrea. Eritrea had started a costly (in terms of deminers lost) program in the early 1990s, at the time when U.S. assistance was requested. The conclusion is that benefits are going to be much less for a country that had an existing demining program such as Eritrea. The analysis suggests that equity in funding may not be cost effective. Regression Results Table 2 summarizes the total costs of each program and its effectiveness, where effectiveness means the B coefficient associated with the program components for each of the estimated regressions are significant. For the above results, although DE/HR demining/historical research costs more, it was the most effective operation. It was highly significant for both estimated regressions. When using any of these independent variables (demining (DE), public awareness, historical research (HR), (DE/HR) demining/historical research, public awareness/historical research (PA/HR)) only DE/HR has a significant impact on villages affected (cleared and surveyed). When all five independent variables were included, DE/HR had the greatest impact on the villages. For the country of Ethiopia, because of data limitations, one regression model was estimated. For Ethiopian demining, there were little or no recorded combined demining operations. There is a limited integration of Ethiopian demining operations. The coefficient for DE is 1.041 in Table 3 and is considered highly significant. For every demining operation, at least one village was cleared. For PA, the B coefficient is .523 and is not significant. HRs coefficient is 1.59 and is considered highly significant. Results from the demining programs in Eritrea indicate that combining demining and historical research produces the greatest impact on the overall mission of the program. Although the ideal dependent variable would be the population affected directly by the demining, public awareness, or historical research operations, the number of villages cleared was shown to be a good proxy of the population affected. Concluding Comments This paper has emphasized that the worldwide landmine policy and demining operations consist of two main issues: humanitarian and security. Humanitarian efforts are concerned with saving lives and preventing injuries to innocent civilians. Three goals of humanitarian demining and landmine policy include: reducing the death of innocent civilians, reducing injuries, and restoring land that was mined in order to expand the nations agriculture economy. Deploying landmines is considered by the United States as a legitimate military objective to be used in combat situations. There exist overlapping concerns that converge both humanitarian and military objectives. A non-quantifiable measure of effectiveness, for example, is the altruistic benefit of humanitarian intervention. This intervention casts the United States and other industrial nations (e.g., Canada) in the role of global good citizens. The concept of international "good citizens" is critical for the development of a secure global community (Clements, 20 April 2001). This

Eritrea, the instructors implemented a longer and more complete training program from the outset. The U.S. demining efforts in Eritrea and Ethiopia were strictly a matter between the United States and the host nations, without UN assistance. The programs were long-term, continuous processes that required a substantial transfer of equipment from the United States to the two countries. Demining training programs in these two countries provided a way for America to establish demining programs without UN assistance. This study analyzed costs and effectiveness of the U.S.-sponsored Ethiopian and Eritrean Demining Programs. The purpose was to determine its applicability as a model and to assess how the United States should decide to expand demining into other countries. Cost effectiveness was calculated for ranking program alternatives since they were relatively similar and there is a single dominant

paper suggests the United States has a role to play in demining operations. America is good for the action role, such as starting up the demining programs. Equal funding of an existing program and new programs appear not to be costeffective. The United States should begin contracting out some of the training and logistics during the demining programs sustainment phase. It could gradually integrate the program using other key players, such as the United Nations,

NGOs and private contractors. Finally, demining efforts combined with historical research are more effective than public awareness. Demining is more expensive than public awareness and historical research, but the landmines are destroyed forever. Public awareness of the locations of landmines is less expensive, but the mines are still present and could eventually harm or kill. Although

demining/historical research was the most costly, it was clearly the most effective operation for both the Ethiopia and Eritrea demining programs.

SDI 2007 5 Week

63 Landmines Neg

Advantage 2- Terrorism and Hegemony A. War on Terror Good US relations with Eritrea and Ethiopia essential to the war on terrorism American Forces Press Service, 2002 (Eritrea Could Teach U.S. Much to Combat Terror 12/10/02
http://www.defenselink.mil/news/newsarticle.aspx?id=42407) Rumsfeld said that the United States can learn much about combating terror from the people of this small African nation. Rumsfeld met with Eritrean leaders as part of a four-day visit to the Horn of Africa and Qatar in the Persian Gulf. Afwerki said his country would cooperate gladly in the global war on terrorism, because it has been the victim of terrorism. In essence, he told reporters, his neighborhood is rough. The failed state of Somalia is near Eritrea, and al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden was based in adjacent Sudan until 1996. A 1998-2000 border war with Ethiopia disrupted the area and allowed terrorists to practice their murders. Eritrea has cooperated in the war of terror and has offered facilities, intelligence, and other help such as overflight and mooring permissions to the United States and other members of the worldwide coalition, said embassy officials. Rumsfeld said during a press conference with Afwerki that the United States understands the war on terror will take time. "There are forces in the world that are urging, recommending, teaching fanaticism, extremism and terrorism, and those forces need to be overcome," he said. He said his visit to Eritrea is an example of the changes in the world since the terror attacks in New York and the Pentagon. "One of the things that has happened since the events of Sept. 11 is the development of new relationships around the world," he said. Afwerki said the secretary's visit clearly signifies that the United States is committed to the region and the global war on terror. "This is nothing new in Eritrea," the president said. "We have been fighting against terrorism for the last 13 years alone."

SDI 2007 5 Week

64 Landmines Neg

Increased US engagement of Eritrea and Ethiopia essential to the US winning the war on terrorism Bellamy 03 [William M., Principle Deputy Assistant Secretary for African Affairs, Budget Priorities for Sub-Saharan Africa,
April 2, 2003, http://www.state.gov/p/af/rls/rm/20249.htm]

At a time when the global war on terrorism and efforts to rid Iraq of weapons of mass destruction have
captured the worlds attention, we cannot afford to neglect Africa. Engagement with Africa advances significant U.S. interests, from fighting terrorism to promoting democracy to expanding our trade and investment opportunities. Africa is a continent of great potential, rich in resources and human talent. Yet it remains the world's poorest region. Chronic conflict, poverty, and disease hinder effective government and inhibit economic progress. Increasingly, Africas problems are our problems as well. The effects of refugee flows, arms and drug trafficking, the spread of disease, and environmental degradation are felt well beyond Africas borders. Because of its porous frontiers and limited law enforcement capabilities, Africa has become a potentially attractive target for international criminal and terrorist organizations. The East Africa bombings of 1998 and the attacks by Al

Qaida in Kenya last November remind us of Africas vulnerabilities to exploitation both as a hiding place for terrorists and as a venue for terrorist attacks against Americans and others. No one is more sensitive to these vulnerabilities than Africans themselves. Despite its exposure to terrorist threats, Africa as a whole was
steadfast in support of the United States following the 9/11 attacks. Almost without exception, African governments joined the global war on terrorism. Some African states offered bases and ports to U.S. and coalition forces; others shared intelligence; others apprehended terrorist suspects. Many remain eager to receive counterterrorism training and assistance from the United States. The most important message we can send to African audiences in these challenging times is that our priorities in Africa have not changed, and that our commitment to reform and progress in Africa remains as strong as before. Our five overriding goals in Africa are to:

promote economic growth through support for market reforms and the private sector; help resolve conflicts that are blocking economic and political development; foster democratic reforms, good governance, and respect for human rights; combat the HIVAIDS pandemic and other infectious diseases; and protect Africas natural environment and renewable resources. The Presidents budget for FY 2004 addresses these key goals. It requests $1.5 billion for the Department of State, USAID, and other foreign affairs agencies working to achieve our objectives in Africa. Economic growth is critical to African development and expanded U.S. commerce with the continent. Our strategy to promote growth includes an emphasis on rewarding and reinforcing successful government policies, and on opening doors and creating opportunities for private sector development. The chairman of this committee was personally instrumental in the conception and adoption of the African Growth and Opportunity Act (AGOA). AGOA will remain a flagship program in FY04. In 2002, when our overall two-way trade with Sub-Saharan Africa fell 15%, U.S. imports under the AGOA program rose 10%. In tiny Lesotho, AGOA has added ten thousand jobs to the economy. In nearby Swaziland, more than 20 new textile factories have gone up as a result of AGOA. In Namibia, AGOA has spurred $250 million in new investment. AGOA is a striking example of how to generate investment, create jobs and stimulate trade through open markets. AGOA has also met its stated purpose to serve as a stepping stone toward the first U.S. Free Trade Agreement (FTA) in Sub-Saharan Africa. Negotiations will begin this spring toward an FTA with the five-member Southern African Customs Union. This further demonstrates the readiness of these countries to undertake the rights and obligations of full membership in the global economy. The Africa Bureau will also continue its Sovereign Credit Rating Initiative in FY04. Under this initiative, sixteen countries have signed up for ratings, two ratings have been issued, and a number of rating missions are underway. Throughout Africa, we will reinforce our official assistance programs with steps to stimulate

private sector activity: Private sector growth is crucial to diversifying and sustaining the Angolan economy in this post-war period. We are working closely with USAID to provide technical assistance to a new, private

sector bank that will provide capital on reasonable credit terms to micro, small, and medium-sized enterprises. In Kenya, where a free market economy has the capacity to serve as an engine for regional growth, we will provide technical advisors to the stock exchange and management training for private sector umbrella groups.
In Ethiopia, which is in a slow transition from a state-directed economy, we will provide consultancy and training for the fledgling Chamber of Commerces capital market organization work, for the National Banks auditing and oversight mechanisms, and for the new anti-corruption commission.

SDI 2007 5 Week

65 Landmines Neg

If the US loses the war on terrorism, a future attack is inevitable John Hawkins, Right Wing News, October 1, 2006, p. http://www.rightwingnews.com/john/howandwhy.php
Summing It All Up: We face what is the perhaps the greatest threat our nation has ever known. We know that terrorist organizations have biological and chemical weapons, as well radiological bombs, and perhaps even nuclear weapons. If we don't win this war it's quite likely that we'll one day see a terrorist attack that makes September 11th look like a birthday party. Imagine if Los Angeles, D.C., or NYC were all obliterated in the same day by nuclear weapons. What if 50k people at a football game were surreptitiously sickened by an infectious biological agent and unknown to them, spread the disease to their family, friends, and co-workers with 10's of millions of resulting deaths? There are thousands of terrorists across the world working to make these nightmare scenarios and others like them a reality. Unless they are stopped, eventually they will succeed. In order to stop them we have to put them on the defensive. We have to deny them safe haven, cut off their finances, make them fear that every new recruit is a CIA plant, turn their own sponsoring nations against them, and keep them worrying about surviving until tomorrow instead of planning new terrorist attacks. The fight against global terrorism will be a long, hard, and treacherous battle. But, no matter what difficulties lie ahead, we must be willing to persevere, because the very destiny of our nation rides on our success or failure in this war.

Terrorist attack would cause World War III and extinction Mohamed Sid-Ahmed, Al-Ahram Weekly Online, August 26-September 1, 2004, p. http://weekly.ahram.org.eg/2004/705/
op5.htm A nuclear attack by terrorists will be much more critical than Hiroshima and Nagazaki, even if -- and this is far from certain -- the weapons used are less harmful than those used then, Japan, at the time, with no knowledge of nuclear technology, had no choice but to capitulate. Today, the technology is a secret for nobody. So far, except for the two bombs dropped on Japan, nuclear weapons have been used only to threaten. Now we are at a stage where they can be detonated. This completely changes the rules of the game. We have reached a point where anticipatory measures can determine the course of events. Allegations of a terrorist connection can be used to justify anticipatory measures, including the invasion of a sovereign state like Iraq. As it turned out, these allegations, as well as the allegation that Saddam was harbouring WMD, proved to be unfounded. What would be the consequences of a nuclear attack by terrorists? Even if it fails, it would further exacerbate the negative features of the new and frightening world in which we are now living. Societies would close in on themselves, police measures would be stepped up at the expense of human rights, tensions between civilisations and religions would rise and ethnic conflicts would proliferate. It would also speed up the arms race and develop the awareness that a different type of world order is imperative if humankind is to survive. But the still more critical scenario is if the attack succeeds. This could lead to a third world war, from which no one will emerge victorious. Unlike a conventional war which ends when one side triumphs over another, this war will be without winners and losers. When nuclear pollution infects the whole planet, we will all be losers.

A nuclear war is most likely to start in Africa Deutsch 02 [Dr. Jeffrey, Contributing Editor for Russian Politics, November 18, accessed 7/25/04,
http://www.rabidtigers.com/rtn/newsletterv2n9.html] The Rabid Tiger Project believes that a nuclear war is most likely to start in Africa. Civil wars in the Congo (the country formerly known as Zaire), Rwanda, Somalia and Sierra Leone, and domestic instability in Zimbabwe, Sudan and other countries, as well as occasional brushfire and other wars (thanks in part to "national" borders that cut across tribal ones) turn into a really nasty stew. We've got all too many rabid tigers and potential rabid tigers, who are willing to push the button rather than risk being seen as wishy-washy in the face of a mortal threat and overthrown. Geopolitically speaking, Africa is open range. Very few countries in Africa are beholden to any particular power. South Africa is a major exception in this respect - not to mention in that she also probably already has the Bomb. Thus, outside powers can more easily find client states there than, say, in Europe where the political lines have long since been drawn, or Asia where many of the countries (China, India, Japan) are powers unto themselves and don't need any "help," thank you. Thus, an African war can attract outside involvement very quickly. Of course, a proxy war alone may not induce the Great Powers to fight each other. But an African nuclear strike can ignite a much broader conflagration, if the other powers are interested in a fight. Certainly, such a strike would in the first place have been facilitated by outside help - financial, scientific, engineering, etc. Africa is an ocean of troubled waters, and some people love to go fishing.

SDI 2007 5 Week

66 Landmines Neg

B. US Hegemony US military readiness decreasing The Nation, June 6, 2007, p. Lexis

In fact, the move now threatens the US national security and is a contributory factor in the US failure in Iraq. The military readiness for US ground forces is at an all time low; so low that serious questions have been raised about the US ability to conduct any other ground operations beyond those to which they now are already committed. Even with US Secretary Defence Robert Gates extension of deployments to 15 months, the current deployment's timeline cannot possibly be maintained.

Increased demining in Ethiopia and Eritrea key to US military readiness and troop morale Lizelman, 02Civil affairs operations officer, special operations command, Ph.D. in Public Policy (Major Micheael F.,
August, Benefit/Cost Analysis of U.S. Demining in Ethiopia and Eritrea; http://maic.jmu.edu/Journal/6.2/focus/michaellitzelman/ michaellistzelman.htm). (5) Providing an invaluable training benefit to U.S. troops, giving them experience in relating to diverse cultures, organizing programs in sparse, foreign environments and honing foreign language skills. Readiness is supposed to be enhanced with units and personnel exercising joint and inter-service operations, and critical wartime skills are practiced. However, some of the military chiefs have questioned whether readiness has actually been enhanced as a result of the numerous deployments, which have resulted in less training for service personnel. Winslow Wheeler, a defense analyst found evidence of extremely serious Army-wide personnel and training problems. The Senate Budget Committee appeared primed to join the critics of the administration who say the Pentagon robs readiness accounts to pay for peacekeeping operations. An internal report by the panels senior defense analyst has concluded that Army readiness at its two major stateside combat training centers is inadequate and could become even worse.27 This study has found that this may be true for peacekeeping operations, but not for the humanitarian demining operations, which consist of Special Operation Forces. Initially, U.S. Special Operation soldiers28 gained access and experience, but this was generally during the period of building its demining infrastructure, while training the Ethiopian soldiers how to train their own personnel. Since then, only a few liaison officers have gained that experience. Special Forces soldiers have continued to train in-country, but on other soldier tasks (i.e., infantry skills) as well. A demining program could only consist of a few months' deployment for these elite personnel, who would train the host nationals. (6) Generally increasing morale among U.S. troops while enabling them to engage in activities with measurable benefits that are greatly appreciated by the host population. Morale among U.S. troops has not been surveyed.

US demining assistance enhances the military readiness of participating US forces U.S. Department of Defense Humanitarian Demining Training Center, March 8, 2006, p.
http://www.wood.army.mil/hdtc/ushma.html The U.S. Government provides Mine Action (MA) assistance to many countries throughout the world to relieve human suffering from the dangers of landmines, to promote regional peace and stability and to promote U.S. foreign policy and national security goals. A collateral benefit to the program is the enhancement of operational readiness skills of participating U.S. forces.

Military readiness vital to US hegemony Jack Spencer, Policy Analyst for Defense and National Security in the Kathryn and Shelby Cullom Davis Institute for International Studies at The Heritage Foundation, September 15, 2000, p. http://www.heritage.org/Research/MissileDefense/
BG1394.cfm Military readiness is vital because declines in America's military readiness signal to the rest of the world that the United States is not prepared to defend its interests. Therefore, potentially hostile nations will be more likely to lash out against American allies and interests, inevitably leading to U.S. involvement in combat. A high state of military readiness is more likely to deter potentially hostile nations from acting aggressively in regions of vital national interest, thereby preserving peace.

SDI 2007 5 Week

67 Landmines Neg

US hegemony is key to preventing proliferation and global nuclear war Khalilzad, 1995 (Zalmay, Director of the Strategy and Doctrine Program @ RAND and current US Ambassador to Iraq,
"Losing the Moment? The United States and the World After the Cold War," The Washington Quarterly, Spring, p. Lexis) Under the third option, the United States would seek to retain global leadership and to preclude the rise of a global rival or a return to multipolarity for the indefinite future. On balance, this is the best long-term guiding principle and vision. Such a vision is desirable not as an end in itself, but because a world in which the United States exercises leadership would have tremendous advantages. First, the global environment would be more open and more receptive to American values -- democracy, free markets, and the rule of law. Second, such a world would have a better chance of dealing cooperatively with the world's major problems, such as nuclear proliferation, threats of regional hegemony by renegade states, and low-level conflicts. Finally, U.S. leadership would help preclude the rise of another hostile global rival, enabling the United States and the world to avoid another global cold or hot war and all the attendant dangers, including a global nuclear exchange. U.S. leadership would therefore be more conducive to global stability than a bipolar or a multipolar balance of power system.

SDI 2007 5 Week

68 Landmines Neg

Observation 2- Solvency US action has eliminated hundreds of thousands of landmines- currently developing new technologies LitzelmanAssistant Professor of Military Scienceand PerryProfessor of Public Policy and Operations Research 2004. (Michael F. and Wayne D., Journal of Mine Action, Cost Effectiveness of the Ethiopian and Eritrean Demining
Programs, April 12) Mines can be easily made with inexpensive materials and are not difficult to acquire. They are currently being located and destroyed by the old slow "probing" method. If the ban on existing landmines remains permanent, the landmine problem could continue to exist for the next 100 years. Demining programs are an option to rid the world of many of these mines. America has been involved with demining programs that have eliminated hundreds of thousands of landmines. As technology is being developed by the United States that would serve as substitutes for landmines in combat, new technology is also being developed that will make it easier to demine areas. The United States has implemented demining operations in some of the countries suffering the most from landmines in regions that are vital to U.S. interests, i.e., the Horn of Africa (Ethiopia and Eritrea) and the Middle East.

US needs to assert global leadership in mine clearance- rest of the world looking for us to lead the way Sahlin 98 [Carl Sahlin, Colonel and Senior Military Fellow at INSS, August, 1998, p. http://www.ndu.edu/inss/strforum/SF143/
forum143.html] As long as the United States is the pre-eminent world power, it will be looked to for leadership in mine clearance. About 10 years ago the United States joined the fledgling humanitarian mine clearance effort around the world. Since that time we have generally expanded our effort by simply doing more of what was done before. While that approach got mines out of the ground, it will not suffice to meet President Clinton's goal and the world's expectation of us.

With increased US support, Ethiopia and Eritrea could develop their own indigenous capacity to conduct demining activities in the near future Bureau of Political-Military Affairs 2006. (To Walk the Earth in Safety: The U.S. Commitment to Humanitarian
Mine Action, June, http://www.state.gov/t/pm/rls/rpt/walkearth/2006/68017.htm) Having cleared more than 4 million square meters of land with U.S. assistance (1.7 million square meters in 2004, and 2,563,453 square meters in 2005), Eritrea is close to possessing its own demining capacity. In 2005, PM/WRAs assistance also enabled Eritrea to clear over 10,000 items of UXO. The United States continued to be the largest mine action donor to Eritrea in 2004 and 2005. It expanded its MRE efforts there, provided new demining equipment and vehicles, and enabled the safe return of 15,000 internally displaced persons and refugees. With host nation, U.S., and international support, Eritrea could develop its own indigenous capacity to conduct humanitarian mine action activities in the near future.

SDI 2007 5 Week

69 Landmines Neg

The USFG should increase funding of landmine clearance, assistance, and education efforts Friends Committee on National Legislation, Supporting Civilian Peace and Security Programs Through the Power of the Purse (FCNL Budget Memo), 5/2/2007, Accessed June 30, 2007, at http://www.fcnl.org/issues/item.php?item_id=
2595&issue_id=130 Unlike other humanitarian tragedies such as natural disasters and disease, the global landmine threat is human-made and can be rectified by human actions. While tremendous progress has occurred over the past decade, millions of people worldwide remain under threat. The United States leads the world in donations to efforts to clear mines, provide assistance to victims, and educate communities on the risks of landmines. Since 1993, the U.S. has donated over $1 billion, funding research and development on new demining technologies. When announcing its new policy in 2004, the Bush administration pledged to increase the funds available to support the State Departments portion of the U.S. Humanitarian Mine Action Program by an additional 50 percent over FY03 baseline levels. This raised the level to about $70 million per year. At $66.4 million, the FY08 Humanitarian Demining budget falls just short of the earlier target. When the president fails to live up to his pledge, Congress should step in and act. We urge you to fund the Humanitarian Demining account with $70 million.

US demining programs responsible for training 25 percent of the worlds deminers John Heaphy, Program manger for the Humanitarian Assistance and Demining Program. He oversees humanitarian demining
activities of USEUCOM USEUCOM - United States European Command (US DoD). He has worked for eighteen years in various OSD staff positions. John has a masters from Fordham University, 2000, p. http://www.thefreelibrary.com/HUMANITARIAN+ DEMINING.(US+Demining+2010+Initiative)-a071837327 Essentially, the DoD role is to train persons from participating mine-affected countries to become trainers of deminers and managers of demining programs. This leads to the establishment of a sustainable, indigenous demining capability in the participating country. In addition to our contribution toward achieving the overall U.S. government humanitarian demining goals, U.S. military forces involved, in particular Special Forces Groups, realize training benefits that support their own missions, such as military to military contacts, country infrastructure and cultural familiarization, language and training skills. To date, DoD humanitarian demining programs have benefited more than 30 countries, and have been responsible for the training of fully 25 percent of the world's deminers. DoD costs to date for these efforts are in excess of $115 million, and are supported under the Defense Department appropriation for Overseas Humanitarian, Disaster, and Civic Aid (OHDACA OHDACA - Overseas Humanitarian Disaster and Casualty Assistance OHDACA - Overseas Humanitarian Disaster Assistance and Civic Aid appropriation).

US military personnel best at conducting mine risk education United States Department of State, 2006 (Jun, To Walk the Earth in Safety: The U.S. Commitment to
Humanitarian Mine Action, http://www.state.gov/t/pm/rls/rpt/walkearth/2006/68013.htm#program Teaching people how to recognize and avoid landmines, and to inform demining authorities of the presence of landmines, helps to reduce casualties significantly. Mine risk education uses a variety of materials and media to convey important messages. The materials, and the manner in which the information is presented, should be sensitive to the cultural mores of the local population. Mine risk education attempts to encourage people to incorporate safety procedures into their daily lives. Mine risk education teachers discourage children from picking up and playing with mines and UXO. Educating children to the dangers is often difficult because they are fascinated with these metal and plastic objects. However, the majority of mine casualties are young men. Informing adolescents and adults about the types of mines they may encounter, the injuries they inflict, and teaching them the proper procedures to follow if a mine is found helps to save lives and limbs. U.S. military personnel also conduct mine risk education during "Train-the-Trainer" humanitarian mine action deployments. They are fluent in the language of each mine-affected country to which they deploy, and they undergo country-specific cultural training prior to engaging in this activity.

SDI 2007 5 Week

70 Landmines Neg

US world leader in the effort to rid countries of landmines- our efforts are empirically successful John Heaphy, Program manger for the Humanitarian Assistance and Demining Program. He oversees humanitarian demining
activities of USEUCOM USEUCOM - United States European Command (US DoD). He has worked for eighteen years in various OSD staff positions. John has a masters from Fordham University, 2000, p. http://www.thefreelibrary.com/HUMANITARIAN+ DEMINING.(US+Demining+2010+Initiative)-a071837327 The United States is a world leader in the effort to rid mine infected countries of the many debilitating effects of land mines left in place after armed conflicts. The Department of Defense is a major contributor to this effort. In coordination with the Department of State and other U.S. government agencies, we are active in every part of the world where landmine problems exist. Our efforts have been both significant and successful, providing numerous nations the ability to deal, themselves, with their landmine problems, while affording U.S. military personnel valuable mission related experience.

NGOs cant successfully increase public health assistance in sub-Saharan Africa- USFG leadership needed Kickbusch 01 (IIona Kickbusch, Head of the Division of Global Health at Yale University School of Medicine, in the
Department of Epidemiology and Public Health, Influence And Opportunity: Reflections On The U.S. Role In Global Public Health Health AffairsThe Policy Journal of the Health Sphere http://content.healthaffairs.org/cgi/content/full/21/6/131) Roots of the global health gap. From such a perspective, the global-health gap is about power; it is political and normative and reflects a lack of law, democracy, and justice in todays global political reality.38 A recent UN Development Program (UNDP) report on global public goods indicates the need to address the policy root cause of many of the problems: "The pervasiveness of todays crises suggests that they might all suffer from a common cause, such as a common flaw in policy making, rather than from issue specific problems. If so, issue specific responses, typical to date, would be insufficientallowing global crisis to persist and even multiply."39 To move from battling one disease after another, successful engagement in global health must be measured not only in terms of lives saved but also in terms of its contributions to a better rule of law, more democracy, and increased justice at the global levelthus laying the groundwork for better sustainable health in the future. The scope of the challenges indicate that no amount of philanthropy or NGO action can replace the responsibility of nationstates both for their own population and for the global community at large.40 Although a variety of NGOs, foundations, and charismatic individuals have stepped forward and have been active in the realm of global health, a central governmental leader is still needed.

SDI 2007 5 Week

71 Landmines Neg

1AC Reconstruction GDI

Observation One: Inherency Since WWI the use of landmines has grown substantially nowhere is this more evident than in sub-Saharan Africa where 21 countries face the deadly consequences of landmines every day while the problem has only gotten worse, donor countries have neglected the region, making the problems worse. Adeba 03 [Brian, Policy analyst and freelance writer in south Sudan, Peace and Environmental news, Action
needed on landmines in sub-Saharan Africa, September-October 2003, http://www.perc.ca/PEN/2003-0910/adeba.html] Since their introduction in World War I, the use of landmines in armed conflicts has increased dramatically. Today the UN estimates there are over 110 million mines the world over. These range from anti-personnel mines, to anti-tank mines, booby traps, cluster bombs and unexploded ordnance (UXO). For those caught up in the snare of war, life becomes a nightmarish experience as amputated limbs and imminent death become part of life. Nowhere is this spectre more painfully true than in sub-Saharan Africa with its seemingly endless wars. Exact figures on the landmine death toll are hard to come by. But if we take one of the worst case scenarios, Angola, where
915 million landmines have been planted since the '60s, then we can get a better picture. A British demining group called Halo Trust says there are 500 minefields in three of Angola's 18 provinces. Each minefield contains an average of 36 mines. Human Rights

Watch estimates 120 Angolans die every month as a result of mines. The organization believes there are 3,300 minefields in Angola. Elsewhere in Africa, the Angolan scenario is mirrored in Mozambique (2 million mines), Sudan (half a million to 2 million), and Somalia (1 million). Of Africa's 54 states, 21 have problems with mines. Ninety-eight per cent of landmine victims are civilians, often women and children. Apart from grappling with the psychological effects of losing a limb, the victim is ostracized by society, loses income and is basically reduced to begging. Most of the population of these countries derive their livelihood from farming. The rumour that landmines are present in a particular location is enough to deny the people the use of that land for farming. Saddled with the burdens of conflict, unstable economies and a strangling debt crisis, most of these countries simply do not have the means to clear these minefields. The task of mine clearance is undertaken by non-governmental
organizations, mainly from the West. One such organization is the Canadian Association for Mine Clearance and Explosive Ordnance Security (CAMEO), formed by former military engineers and active in sub-Saharan Africa since January 1998. Among the challenges facing CAMEO is the problem of getting funding for its mine clearance operations in sub-Saharan Africa. "Sub-Saharan Africa seems to be an area neglected by most donor governments," says the Executive Director, Col (ret.) James Megill. "Some (Western governments) talk big about helping, but do not 'walk the talk.' Canada appears to care, but all they appear to want to do is study the problem. They will not get serious and do something concrete like getting rid of landmines so lives and

limbs can be spared and societies can return to a semblance of normal life."

SDI 2007 5 Week

72 Landmines Neg

Observation Two: Agriculture Africa doesnt produce enough food to feed itself. Brown 02 (AG, Food For The Future, Record of Conference of ATSE Crawford Fund, http://www.crawfordfund.org/
publications/pdf/proceedings2002.pdf, Aug 8) Most of the hungry in Africa, however, are not the victims of wars or incompetent governments. Hunger is widespread in Africa. Some claim there is enough food in the world for everyone if it were evenly distributed. True, but this argument ignores reality. Africa does not produce enough food to feed itself even if it were more evenly distributed. Rather, Africa must rely on massive purchases, using precious foreign exchange, and on equally large shipments of food aid with the accompanying disincentives for local production, and still over 30% of the population remains undernourished.

Land Mines prevent effective agriculture SafeLane 06 (How Do Landmines Affect Development, http://www.dev.mines.gc.ca/I/I_F-en.asp)
On agriculture: Many hectares of productive land are unsafe and have been abandoned, especially in border areas. People may move to less productive but safer areas, and then risk malnutrition or starvation. Alternatively, people may remain on the land, but landmine casualties may lead to fewer available workers and a reluctance to use the land, resulting in lower yields and possible malnutrition or starvation. Agricultural development programs cannot proceed in mine-infested regions until demining can occur. Pastoralists, people who live off their animals rather than plant fields, are also affected, because they cannot move their herds where they might wish, and livestock may not be led to the most productive pastureland.

Low food production results in 2.9 million deaths a year Mulama 07 (Joyce, Development-Africa: Food Security Depends On Access To Western Markets, Inter Press
Service, http://ipsnews.net/interna.asp?idnews=23156) Some research agencies say the African farmer is growing poorer due to diminishing agricultural productivity, which has led to low food availability, rising poverty levels and increased number of undernourished populations. "An estimated 200 million people in Africa are malnourished, and their numbers have increased by almost 20 percent since the early 1990s," an IFPRI statistics shows. It says "undernutrition is the major risk factor underlying over 28 percent of all deaths in Africa, translating into some 2.9 million deaths annually."

SDI 2007 5 Week

73 Landmines Neg

Observation Three: Environment Landmines contribute to species loss that interrupt the equilibrium of the food chain Nachon 05 [Claudio Torres, Researcher for the International Campaign to Ban Landmines, Environmental
Aspects of Landmines, 2005, http://www.icbl.org/resources/document/lm_environment.php3] Landmines may cause a number of unregistered impacts on the environment and its components. Most of the reports on wildlife impacted by landmines tend to focus on certain charismatic species, i.e. tigers, elephants, camels. It would be a sensible gap not to give proper attention to other lesser known species that may play a fundamental role on the food chain in a given habitat. By altering these populations, the existing equilibrium of these species and their habitats may be placed under additional pressure.[44]

Mines destroy biodiversity and drive species towards extinction Berhe 06 (AA, The Contribution of Landmines to Land Degradation, Ecosystem Science Division, UCB,
http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/abstract/112748670/ABSTRACT?CRETRY=1&SRETRY=0) Loss of biodiversity. The impact of landmines on different plant and animal populations was discussed by all the participants and was considered to be a foremost environmental concern, next to access denial. As long as they receive enough mass to activate them landmines do not differentiate between human beings or other life forms (Westing, 1996; Dudley et al., 2002). Landmines can threaten biodiversity in a given region by destroying vegetation cover during explosions or de-mining, and when animals fall victim. Landmines pose an extra burden for threatened and endangered species. Landmines have been blamed for pushing various species to the brink of extinction (Troll, 2000). Although it is widely believed that landmines destroy vegetation and kill untold numbers of animals every year, this is unfortunately one of the areas where there is hardly any numerical data to determine how many individuals of a species or where and how they fall victims. The very little data that exists on animal population is also highly biased towards domesticated animal and little is known about the impacts suffered by wild populations.

SDI 2007 5 Week

74 Landmines Neg

Biodiversity Loss Causes Planetary Extinction Diner 1994 (David N. Judge Advocate Generals Corps of US Army, Military Law Review, Lexis)
No species has ever dominated its fellow species as man has. In most cases, people have assumed the God-like power of life and death -- extinction or survival -- over the plants and animals of the world. For most of history, mankind pursued this domination with a singleminded determination to master the world, tame the wilderness, and exploit nature for the maximum benefit of the human race. n67 In past mass extinction episodes, as many as ninety percent of the existing species perished, and yet the world moved forward, and new species replaced the old. So why should the world be concerned now? The prime reason is the world's survival. Like all animal life, humans live off of other species. At some point, the number of species could decline to the point at which the ecosystem fails, and then humans also would become extinct. No one knows how many [*171] species the world needs to support human life, and to find out -- by allowing certain species to become extinct -- would not be sound policy. In addition to food, species offer many direct and indirect benefits to mankind. n68 2. Ecological Value. -- Ecological value is the value that species have in maintaining the environment. Pest, n69 erosion, and flood control are prime benefits certain species provide to man. Plants and animals also provide additional ecological services -- pollution control, n70 oxygen production, sewage treatment, and biodegradation. n71 3. Scientific and Utilitarian Value. -- Scientific value is the use of species for research into the physical processes of the world. n72 Without plants and animals, a large portion of basic scientific research would be impossible. Utilitarian value is the direct utility humans draw from plants and animals. n73 Only a fraction of the [*172] earth's species have been examined, and mankind may someday desperately need the species that it is exterminating today. To accept that the snail darter, harelip sucker, or Dismal Swamp southeastern shrew n74 could save mankind may be difficult for some. Many, if not most, species are useless to man in a direct utilitarian sense. Nonetheless, they may be critical in an indirect role, because their extirpations could affect a directly useful species negatively. In a closely interconnected ecosystem, the loss of a species affects other species dependent on it. n75 Moreover, as the number of species decline, the effect of each new extinction on the remaining species increases dramatically. n76 4. Biological Diversity. -- The main premise of species preservation is that diversity is better than simplicity. n77 As the current mass extinction has progressed, the world's biological diversity generally has decreased. This trend occurs within ecosystems by reducing the number of species, and within species by reducing the number of individuals. Both trends carry serious future implications. Biologically diverse ecosystems are characterized by a large number of specialist species, filling narrow ecological niches. These ecosystems inherently are more stable than less diverse systems. "The more complex the ecosystem, the more successfully it can resist a stress. . . . [l]ike a net, in which each knot is connected to others by several strands, such a fabric can resist collapse better than a simple, unbranched circle of threads -- which if cut anywhere breaks down as a whole." n79 By causing widespread extinctions, humans have artificially simplified many ecosystems. As biologic simplicity increases, so does the risk of ecosystem failure. The spreading Sahara Desert in Africa, and the dustbowl conditions of the 1930s in the United States are relatively mild examples of what might be expected if this trend continues. Theoretically, each new animal or plant extinction, with all its dimly perceived and intertwined affects, could cause total ecosystem collapse and human extinction. Each new extinction increases the risk of disaster. Like a mechanic removing, one by one, the rivets from an aircraft's wings, [hu]mankind may be edging closer to the abyss.

Loss Of Biodiversity Results In Extinction And Outweighs All Other Impacts Wilson 1992 (Dr. Edward O.- Professor at Harvard and author of two Pulitzer Prize winning books, The
Diversity of Life, 1992) The worst thing that can happen, will happen, is not energy depletion, economic collapse, limited nuclear war, or conquest by a totalitarian government. As terrible as these catastrophes would be for us, they can be repaired within a few generations. The one process ongoing in the 1980s that will take millions of years to correct is the loss of genetic and species diversity by the destruction of natural habitats. This is the folly that our descendants are least likely to forgive us.

SDI 2007 5 Week

75 Landmines Neg

Observation Four: Malaria Mine craters serve as breeding grounds for mosquitoes Berhe 06 (AA, The Contribution of Landmines to Land Degradation, Ecosystem Science Division, UCB,
http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/abstract/112748670/ABSTRACT?CRETRY=1&SRETRY=0) When a 250 g antipersonnel landmine detonates, it can create a crater with a diameter of approximately 30 cm (United Nations General Assembly UNGA/A/38/383, 1983; Troll, 2000). The explosion was described by nine of the participants as having the ability to facilitate removal and displacement of topsoil while forming a raised circumference around the crater and compaction of soil into the side of the crater. The level of the impact can vary

depending on the physical conditions of the soil; the type and composition of the explosive and how many landmines detonate in the vicinity. The impact is greater in dry, loosely compacted and exposed desert soils but is less severe in humid soils that have vegetation or physical protection. Susceptibility to reduced infiltration, flooding and erosion is also higher in areas with steep slopes. In such cases, transported soil increases sediment load of drainage systems. When soil is compacted due to external forces, its resistance to penetration by

plant roots and emerging seedlings increases, the exchange of oxygen and carbon dioxide between the root zone of plants and the atmosphere is also retarded. Generally, as long as repeated explosions do not occur in the same location, the crater can develop into a stable element of the landscape when runoff or wind erosion washes soil to its bottom. In warm and humid regions, however, it has been reported (United Nations General Assembly UNGA/A/38/383, 1983; Troll, 2000) that the crater may hold water, turn into a marsh and serve as breeding ground for mosquitoes.

Malaria is the leading cause of death in sub-Saharan Africait is mostly transmitted through mosquitoes. CDC 04 (The Impact of Malaria, A Leading Cause of Death Worldwide, Center for Disease Control and
Prevention, http://www.cdc.gov/malaria/impact/index.htm) Malaria is one of the most severe public health problems worldwide. It is a leading cause of death and disease in many developing countries, where young children and pregnant women are the groups most affected. According to the World Health Organizations World Malaria Report 2005: At the end of 2004, some 3.2 billion people lived in areas at risk of malaria transmission in 107 countries and territories. Between 350 and 500 million clinical episodes of malaria occur every year. At least one million deaths occur every year due to malaria. About 60% of the cases of malaria worldwide and more than 80% of the malaria deaths worldwide occur in Africa south of the Sahara. Malaria occurs mostly in poor, tropical and subtropical areas of the world (Geographic Distribution). The area most affected is Africa south of the Sahara, where an estimated 90% of the deaths due to malaria occur. This is due to a combination of factors: A very efficient mosquito vector (Anopheles gambiae) assures high transmission The predominant parasite species is Plasmodium falciparum, which causes the most severe form of malaria Local weather conditions often allow transmission to occur year round Scarce resources and socio-economic instability hinder efficient malaria control activities. In other areas of the world malaria is a less prominent cause of deaths, but can cause substantial disease and incapacitation, especially in rural areas of some countries in South America and Southeast Asia.

Malaria is the leading cause of death worldwidein Africa, it claims about 742,000 deaths a year. CDC 04 (The Impact of Malaria, A Leading Cause of Death Worldwide, Center for Disease Control and
Prevention, http://www.cdc.gov/malaria/impact/index.htm) Malaria is a leading cause of death and illness worldwide. As most people who die from malaria are African children less than 5 years old, having accurate information about this group is especially important. Valid
estimates of the number of malaria deaths are useful for monitoring the impact of prevention and control activities, targeting public health interventions, and advocacy. Unfortunately, the information systems of most African countries do not produce dependable estimates. To fill this gap, a variety of estimates have been proposed using mathematical models, but most have been simplistic or lacked documentation of the methods and data. A recent model, which the World Health Organization currently uses to produce annual malaria estimates, identified populations at risk for malaria with a model that predicts where the climate is suitable for malaria transmission [1].

The malaria mortality rate, from an analysis of field studies, was applied to these malaria-risk populations to produce an estimate of about 766,000 deaths among African children less than 5 years old for the year 1995. This model was recently refined to account for variations in malaria transmission intensity, and about 742,000 malaria deaths were estimated for the year 2000 [2]. Although these two latter models were considerably superior to previous ones, they still can be refined and improved

SDI 2007 5 Week

76 Landmines Neg

Observation Five: Landmines Landmines kill one person every 15 minutes, those who live by minefields live in constant fear of dismemberment and death Bus 99 (What You Should Know about Landmine Victims Margaret S. Bus Senior Associate Information Journal
Volume 3, No.3 Fall 1999 http://maic.jmu.edu/journal/3.3/focus/how_many_victims.htm) One million people have been killed and maimed by anti-personnel mines. Twenty-six thousand people a year become victims, 70 people a day, or around one person every 15 minutes. Three hundred thousand children and counting are severely disabled because of landmines. Half the people who step on an anti-personnel mine die from their injuries before they are found or taken to hospital. An even higher percentage of children die because, being smaller, their vital organs are closer to the blast. After the end of hostilities, decades afterwards, anyone who strays into a mine field is at risk. Everyone is vulnerable. Women collecting water, children playing, men working the land or tending cattle. Most mine fields are unmarked, or have become unmarked after time, erosion, washouts and topographical changes have occurred. You may have no idea that you are in danger until it is too late. If the horrifying thought suddenly strikes you that where you are walking might be mined, there is not a lot you can do about it. You could painstakingly test each centimeter of the ground in front of you before each step. Perhaps sliding a knife into the ground at 30 degrees to see if there is anything dangerous underneath. You may not discover the mine until you put your weight on it. At least 13 pounds of weight may be necessary to activate it.

Pentland 04 (William, law clerk, World & I, April, law clerk, San Francisco writer, WORLD & I, April 2004, p.
253. (DRG/C6)) Officially, landmines claim over twenty-six thousand casualties every year. Unofficially, they claim far more. Most mine-related deaths occur in remote and underdeveloped areas of war-ravaged countries. The nearest hospitals are usually quite far, the resources required for the journey seldom available. Other than aid workers, governing elites, and their cronies, almost no one has a personal car in the rural developing world. Many cannot afford to buy food, let alone erratic "public" transportation. As a result, many landmine fatalities are simply not reported.

Mines sustain violent cultures and promote instability Litzelman 02 (Michael, Benefit/Cost Analysis of US Demining In Ethiopia and Eritrea, Journal of Mine Action
6.2, http://maic.jmu.edu/journal/6.2/focus/michaellitzelman/michaellistzelman.htm) There is an important U.S. interest to control landmines, especially those that are imbedded in the land of countries that are of national and vital interest to the United States and its allies. Reducing or eliminating these weapons may help to stabilize an important area and region inimical to U.S. interests. The existence of landmines has led to economic and political calamity and creates a greater chance of them being used by a faction or group against innocent civilians or even U.S. personnel. AP landmines may sustain a culture of conflict and violence. Therefore, it may be in the United States interest to ultimately assist in eliminating these undiscriminating weapons, which could be of direct benefit to the United States and host nations (HNs).

SDI 2007 5 Week

77 Landmines Neg

Landmines prevent humanitarian assistance and perpetuate poverty and instability Bloomfield 04 (Lincoln P. Jr, Assistant Secretary of State for Political-Military Affairs, Jan,
http://usinfo.state.gov/journals/itps/0104/ijpe/bloomfield.htm) Persistent landmines, the residue of past wars, insurgencies, and internal reigns of terror, kill or maim thousands of people each year in dozens of countries around the world. Untold numbers of persistent (or dumb) landmines, estimated in the millions, infest areas in every hemisphere. Landmines and unexploded ordnance (UXO) disrupt humanitarian aid delivery, agriculture, trade, education, and social development. These explosive remnants of war drain scarce public health resources and impede post-conflict reconstruction and economic recovery in impoverished areas most in need of relief. Landmine contamination is a humanitarian disaster that perpetuates poverty, desperation, and regional instability.

When greater focus is given to large violent events we tend to forget that violence doesnt come as a pre-packaged unit rather it erupts out of less visible structural violence instead of just worrying about the large-scale impacts of their (disad/critique/etc.) we need to examine the microlevel structural violence that end in war, violence, and genocide. King 04 [Charles, Associate Professor at the School of Foreign Service at Georgetown University, The Micropolitics of Social
Violence, World Politics 56.3, 2004, pgs 431-455] Violent events are often clustered spatially and temporally. Existing research practice has been to treat the cluster itselfsomething called "the Bosnian war" or "the Rwandan genocide"as the only serviceable dependent variable. Cases, in other words, have become coterminous with conflicts. But violence does not come in prepackaged units. Violent events are themselves constructed as part of the process of social violence; they are wrapped up in the constitutive power of collective action. Even at the lowest level of aggregation, the individual violent episode, bounding the case can still be frustratingly difficult. Previous instances of violence may be invoked as rallying
points. What outside observers see as discrete phenomena may be, in the minds of participants, multiple iterations of the same dispute. Violent events, in other words, are not natural kinds. The rhetorical battle for control over defining the event can thus be as much a part of the contestation as violence itself. Anyone who has spent time in violent settings, from societies plagued by sectarian discord to an English football match, can understand how difficult it is to distinguish successive iterations of violence from one another, both analytically and causally. Slicing into the complex narrative of first causes and iterated grievances can provide a cross-sectional image of a conflict at one point in time, but it can also be misleading. Any single episode of violence may be part of an intricate web

of meanings connected with previous events and acting as precipitants for those to come. But things can also work in the opposite way. Participants themselves may devise very clear ways of marking off one episode from another. That is why in societies where interfamilial feuding is common, there are also usually social rules for deciding how to
terminate a violent dispute whose blood and how much of it must be spilled in order for a wrong to be righted, for example.32 The alternative would be an endless spiral of revenge, precisely the condition that complex feuding norms are meant [End Page 449] to forestall. The point is that where any instance of collective violence begins and ends, whether it is a single riot or an entire civil war, can be determined only from within the cognitive landscape of those who are engaged in it. Marking off events as discrete by fiat of the researcher will not do the trick. What constitutes an analytically singular event is thus both a conceptual and an empirical question, part of what Horowitz and Kalyvas have both called, in slightly different senses, the "ontology" of violence.33 But how exactly does one go about ordering the varied and often contradictory versions of who did what to whom? One technique is simply to rely on press reports in local languages, as Beissinger does, and to make sure that those reports come from many different, mainly indigenous sources. That, at least, takes one as close as possible to the action without requiring a multisource account of every killing. Beissinger's careful event analysis protocol (included as an appendix to his book) is a model for how one might think clearly about the problem of bounding the violent event. Another is to write an ethnography of event making, to examine systematically the various meanings attached to violent episodes and to explore the ways in which one is marked off from another. That approach is less amenable to quantitative analysis and may produce only a Rashomon-like series of multiple stories. But focusing on the construction of meaning itself can provide a valuable corrective to the idea of the violent event as a naturally occurring species.34 A third is represented by what Horowitz has called

a "near-miss strategy": doing enough microlevel work to know under what conditions a case that looked to be heading toward large-scale, mass violence instead turned into something smaller, a lynching, for example.35 This is a technique much preached but rarely practiced. It is not quite enough to work at extremely high levels of aggregation, to ask why Yugoslavia's end was violent but Czechoslovakia's was not. Rather, following [End Page 450]through on this strategy would involve narrowing the research focus, both spatially and temporally, and giving greater attention to cases that really seemed, but for a few key variables, to be heading in the same awful direction. These techniques would certainly dampen scholarly ambitions, but that might not be a bad thing. They would cause researchers to take very seriously the bounding of both cases and events. They would remind us to be honest about what we are really studying: not violence tout court, but one small, bracketed space on a scale of behaviors running from murder to total war. Knowing with some certainty why a massacre did not escalate to genocide is not nearly as attractive as saying why one country is war torn and another peaceful. But it is probably closer to science.

SDI 2007 5 Week

78 Landmines Neg

Plan Text: The United States federal government should Observation Six: Solvency The State department has cut funding to demining programs U.S. Campaign to Ban Landmines 06 (Administration Cuts Funding Request for Humanitarian Demining, Feb, ,
http://www.banminesusa.org/archives/newsletters/31_Feb_2006.html#7) \ The United States leads the world in donations to efforts to clear mines, provide assistance to victims, and educate communities on the risks of landmines; its contributions represent close to half the worldwide total for such initiatives. Since 1993, the U.S. has donated over $1 billion, funding research and development on new demining technologies. When announcing its new policy in 2004, the Bush administration pledged to increase the funds available to support the State Departments portion of the U.S. Humanitarian Mine Action Program by an additional 50% over fiscal year (FY) 2003 baseline levels. This would raise the level to about $70 million per year. At $64.3 million, the State Departments portion of the FY 2007 budget falls short of the $70 million target. When the president fails to live up to his pledge, the Congress should step in and act.

Wolf and Barmazel 2000

[Daniel H. Wolf, President, and Steven Barmazel, Publications Director, Terra Segura International, The Necessity of Implementing a Public-Health Approach to Humanitarian Demining, 2004, http://maic.jmu.edu/JOURNAL/5.2/notes/danielwolf.htm] Manual demining is the gold standard for near-100 percent removal. However, the inherent risks eviscerate individual productivity. Checking for booby traps, clearing vegetation, probing carefully, digging up numerous suspicious objects and rotating crewmembers to deter stress
and boredom requires multitudes of low-skilled detection personnel. With more than 3,000 personnel, for instance, the Cambodian Mine Action Center (CMAC) cleared only 10 sq km a year out of some 3,500 affected sq km. As a consequence, labor costs are astronomical. Bureaucratic factors also increase costs. Centralization robs the tooth of clearing activities by concentrating excessive resources in the bureaucratic tail. Relying on peacekeeping forces and national armies for leadership, the organizational models for these projects, not surprisingly, are military. Though appropriate for combat, when applied to mine clearance,

this model is inefficient, not economical, stifling to local initiative and adaptation, and slow to respond to new or newlydiscovered beneficiary needs. Experimentation is directed from above, innovation must run a gauntlet of policies and doctrines, and local responses to
local conditions must pass through levels of bureaucratic filters. Furthermore, most projects suffer all the typical problems of systems with third-party funding. A handful of distant agencies disburse most demining money, so these donors (plus army headquarters when the deminers are active-duty soldiers) become the projects true clients; the people living in mine-infested areas are simply powerless beneficiaries. Priorities of donors and national officials often trump the needs of deminers and mined communities. Accountability is the reason usually given for bureaucratic structures, but small spending for actual demining is the reality, irrespective of justification for high overhead. The Bosnia Mine Action Center, despite enormous spending since 1995, has not even finished its preliminary task of mapping all minefields, much less accomplished sizable clearance. Even minefields around Sarajevo remain unmarked, a fact that was tragically proven last year when two children were killed instantly and a third died slowly within earshot of her parents while Norwegian Peoples Aid deminers tried frantically to rescue her. However, with more than 3,000 personnel, CMAC cleared only 10 sq km per year out of some 3,500 affected square kilometers. When accountability is de-emphasized to allow greater efficiency, however, abuses occur. The United Nations for years praised CMAC as a model of effectiveness and "sustainability." Recent exposure of nepotism, inefficiency and misfeasance in CMAC (specifically, the clearing of land for the commercial use of former Khmer Rouge officers) led to funding cutoffs and contraction. Some who have worked with LAO-UXO in Laos allege that it would collapse without expatriate advisers. LAO-UXO may be more robust than that, but an exodus of expatriates would likely cause foreign donors to lose confidence, causing LAO-UXO to shut down from lack of funds. A recent U.N. policy review, noting the prevalence of "poor management compounded by inappropriate and unsupportive U.N. administrative and budgetary mechanisms, lack of forward planning and disputed lines of authority," recommended that the United Nations "not be involved in the direct implementation of mine action activities."1

Even the most effecient programs are expensive. Total monthly expenses for the Afganistan Mine Action Program, for example, run $800 (U.S.) per deminer, only $150 (U.S.) of which is actual wages; the rest is The unfortunate result of all these factors is that clearance costs more than most agricultural land is worth. This eliminates one of the most powerful incentives for investing in deminingthe lure of positive returns on investments. Private landowners
will not invest in land clearance unless they expect to make a profit in order to support their families. Likewise, a government ministry in a poor country will not invest in clearing large areas if it cannot expect positive net revenues, even considering the economic and social value of avoiding injuries and deaths. It must invest its limited funds in growth and development, not simply spend in ways that may produce net reductions in collective economic well being. Improvements in Planning

equipment, transport, food accommodations, insurance, medical support, etc. Total costs for the programs five expatriate supervisors reach $250,000 (U.S.) each.2

Nations has responded to critiques by beginning to focus on the coordination among, rather than the actual operations of, NGOs. Additionally, in

picture is not entirely dismal. Coordination between military and civilian organizations has improved, and the United an attempt to match needs with available resources, demining planners now apply triage to lands (i.e., prioritize them according to risk and necessity and authorize "treatment" according to these priorities). Obviously, acute threats such as mined schoolyards and water sources are treated immediately even at great cost. Ideally, public infrastructure and transportation are cleared next, then private infrastructure and productive lands, and finally low-value lands such as pastures and wastelands. The desired
treatments for these various levels of need have evolved into three accepted risk-reduction "treatment levels." From the top, Level 3 is complete clearing (the most expensive), akin to acute care; Level 2 is demarcation of minefield perimeters (meant to put mined land in a safe holding pattern while making the unmined surrounding land available); and Level 1 is an aspirin-like treatment, generating general location data and impact information for planning purposes, accompanied by mine awareness training that is often ineffective. Unfortunately,

Demining The

funds are too limited in many cases even to clear the most critical

SDI 2007 5 Week

79 Landmines Neg

because Level 2 surveys apply the same labor-intensive techniques used for clearance itself, which is very expensive, especially in densely vegetated areas. In order

areas, much less mark mine fields to keep people safely out. Even when funds are available, the middle level of care is largely unattainable

to make serious headway, overall performance must increase dramatically without expecting increased public funding. The challenge is enormous, and responsible agencies must go beyond easy fixesthey must make substantial changes in their organization and procedures and bring along donors and affected constituencies in both mined and donor countries. Getting started requires three strategic responses: adopting the utilitarian public-health philosophy. immediately implementing measures to improve performance within existing institutional constraints. providing a several-year effort to create systemic flexibility, improve options and transition demining institutions towards a true public-health demining system.

Technology is critical to demining operations Rand Review 03 (a nonprofit institution to improve policy through research and analysis, Spring, $50 million
needed for landmine detection, Vol 27, No 1) A major research and development program costing about $50 million over five to eight years is needed to sharply accelerate efforts to remove landmines that kill thousands of civilians each year in 90 nations, according to a RAND report. "There is a desperate need for better landmine detection equipment," said Jacqueline MacDonald, an engineer and coauthor of the report. "Technology is available to create better tools to remove landmines, but nothing will be developed unless there is investment in a wellorganized, focused research program." The report said research is needed to develop new technology that can replace the World War II-era equipmentthe mainstay of worldwide efforts to remove landmines. Researchers cited the need for a new generation of landmine detectors that would be more accurate and reliable to speed landmine removal. Today's landmine detection equipment is primitive, relying on technology that results in a high number of false alarms, according to researchers. Landmine detectors used today operate via a technology that is unable to distinguish landmines from other metallic materialsby far the greatest limitation of the process.

US technological leadership and research advancement make it the best actor for solvency Sahlin 98(Global Mine Clearance: An Achievable Goal? Carl T. Sahlin, Senior Military Fellow at INSS Number 143, August
1998 Jr. SF Banner http://www.ndu.edu/inss/strforum/SF143/forum143.html) As long as the United States is the pre-eminent world power, it will be looked to for leadership in mine clearance. About 10 years ago the United States joined the fledgling humanitarian mine clearance effort around the world. Since that time we have generally expanded our effort by simply doing more of what was done before. While that approach got mines out of the ground, it will not suffice to meet President Clinton's goal and the world's expectation of us. The May 1998 Washington Conference acknowledged that 110 million mines may be a counterproductive overestimation. The conference attendees agreed to revise and lower the estimate. This decision acknowledges that the number of mines is not as central to the issue as the number of victims. The "one at a time" clearance method of the past requires technological augmentation to reach the President's goal. The problem is further complicated by the profusion of areas that are declared minefields but are in fact only "suspected" or may consist of only one mine, the one that exploded. A two-part enhanced technology effort is emerging as a cornerstone of the U.S. approach to mine clearance. First, use technology to cut the problem down to size; and second, use technology to find and clear the mines. Highly accurate surveys are needed to separate suspected from confirmed areas and, further, to limit the actual mined areas to their real boundaries. Some currently available satellite and global positioning satellite (GPS) technology may, with further development, be useful. Using this technology to reliably rule out suspected areas, much land can be returned to use without the expense of painstakingly clearing each square foot. With suspected areas ruled out, further development of fast, cheap clearance should be the remaining priority. The Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) is developing, among other projects; computer-assisted technology to mimic the processing a dog's nose and brain do to differentiate smells. This research is promising and may result in very low risk mine clearance. Further research in this area coupled with highly accurate surveys could make the concept of land mines in war obsolete.