China CP China CP...................................................................................................................................................1

Text..............................................................................................................................................................2

Solvency – General......................................................................................................................................3

Solvency – He-3 Mining...............................................................................................................................5

Moon Treaty Solves.................................................................................................................................6

AT Not Ratified........................................................................................................................................7

Solvency – SPSS...........................................................................................................................................8

Net Benefit – China Development...........................................................................................................9

Net Benefit – Natural Disasters.............................................................................................................10

Solvency – WFIRST.....................................................................................................................................11

CCP Net Benefit.........................................................................................................................................12

1NC........................................................................................................................................................13

Yes Collapse...........................................................................................................................................15

Space Solves Brain Drain.......................................................................................................................16

High-Tech Workers Good – Econ...........................................................................................................17

High-Tech Workers Good – CCP Stability...............................................................................................21

CCP Collapse Bad – GP Wars..................................................................................................................22

CCP Collapse Bad – US-China War.........................................................................................................23

CCP Collapse Bad – Econ........................................................................................................................25

AT Space Mil..............................................................................................................................................26

No Space Mil..........................................................................................................................................27

No Impact..............................................................................................................................................29

AT Perm.....................................................................................................................................................30

No Solvency – Illegal..............................................................................................................................31

Links to Politics......................................................................................................................................32

Links to CCP Net Benefit........................................................................................................................33

Text Counterplan text: the People’s Republic of China should _________________________ [insert mandates of aff plan]

Solvency – General China’s space capabilities are well-funded and coordinatedLouise Watt, staff writer for the AP, 7-11-2011, “China's Space Program Shoots for Moon, Mars, Venus,” AP, http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/wireStory?id=14043200This year, a rocket will carry a boxcar-sized module into orbit, the first building block for a Chinese space station.

Around 2013, China plans to launch a lunar probe that will set a rover loose on the moon. It wants to put a man on the moon, sometime after 2020. While the United States is still working out its next move after the space shuttle program, China is forging ahead. Some experts worry the U.S. could slip behind China in human spaceflight — the realm of space science with the most prestige. "Space leadership is highly symbolic of national capabilities and international influence, and a decline in space leadership will be seen as symbolic of a relative decline in U.S. power and influence," said Scott Pace, an associate NASA administrator in the George W. Bush administration. He was a supporter of Bush's plan — shelved by President Barack Obama — to return Americans to the moon. China is still far

behind the U.S. in space technology and experience, but what it doesn't lack is a plan or financial resources. While U.S.

programs can fall victim to budgetary worries or a change of government, rapidly growing China appears to have no such constraints. "One of the biggest advantages of their system is that they have five-year plans so they can develop well ahead," said Peter Bond, consultant editor for Jane's Space Systems and Industry. "They are taking a step-by-step approach, taking

their time and gradually improving their capabilities. They are putting all the pieces together for a very capable, advanced space industry." In 2003, China became the third country to send an astronaut into space on its own, four decades after the United States and Russia. In 2006, it sent its first probe to the moon. In 2008, China carried out its first spacewalk. China's space station is slated to open around 2020, the same year the International Space Station is scheduled to close. If the U.S. and its partners don't come up with a replacement, China could have the only permanent human presence in the sky.

Chinese space program is flourishingMark Brown, space correspondent for Wired UK, 7-12-2011, “China's space programme flourishes while the United States flounders,” Wired UK, http://www.wired.co.uk/news/archive/2011-07/12/china-looks-to-the-moonBut China now has a chance to catch up, as the United States' space programme is crippled by budgetry constraints. America's last shuttle launched earlier this month, and Nasa will now have to use Russian Soyuz capsules and commercial rockets to carry out manned missions. China's space programme, on the other hand, is flourishing. The country plans to send a small module into

orbit this year as it begins building a rival to the International Space Station. The floating space lab will be smaller than the

ISS, but it will open the same year that the ISS is scheduled to close down: 2020. If the International Space Station --

which is jointly owned by the US, Russia, Canada, Japan and 11 European countries -- doesn't get a successor, it could mean that China will have the only permanent settlement in space. By 2013, China also wants to have launched a new lunar probe to drop a rover onto the surface of the Moon. After 2020, the country plans to land a man on the rocky satellite. From there, the country's options open even further. "We first need to do a good job of exploring the moon and work out the rocket, transportation and detection technology that can then be used for a future exploration of Mars or Venus," Wu Weiren, chief designer of China's Moon-exploring programme, told the Associated Press.

More evidenceTaylor Dinerman, space and defense analyst for the Hudson Institute, 7-7-2011, “China's Continuing Drive For Space Power,” Hudson New York, http://www.hudson-ny.org/2242/china-space-powerSometime between now and the end of this year, China plans to launch the first module of its new space station, confirming that China is determined to become a full-fledged, independent, comprehensive, world class power in outer space. China's methodical strategy of pursing mutually-supporting civil, commercial and military

space activities is beginning to pay off. Space launch rockets can lift both civilian and military satellites; sensor technology can be adapted for both science and spying; communications systems are equally able to transmit

orders to go to war or orders for children's toys. China's civil space projects include not only the space station and the manned

Shenzhou capsules that will carry its Taikonauts to it and back, but also deep space probes such as the Chang'e 2 probe, which has now been dispatched from lunar orbit to a point almost a million miles from Earth. Its commercial activities until now have been limited to communications satellites and occasionally selling low-cost space launch services. US ITAR (International Trade in Armaments Regulations) technology export rules have, effectively prevented China from becoming a major player in the commercial space field. This has occurred in spite of efforts by some European aerospace firms to circumvent US restrictions by building so-called "ITAR Free" satellites.

Solvency – He-3 Mining China can do itCasey Kazan, columnist for the Daily Galaxy, 7-2-2008, “Is Helium 3 Exploitation China's Hidden Lunar Agenda?” The Daily Galaxy, http://www.dailygalaxy.com/my_weblog/2008/07/is-helium-3-exp.htmlEarlier this year, shortly after Russia claimed a vast portion of the Arctic sea floor, accelerating an international race for the natural resources as global warming opens polar access, China has announced plans to map "every inch" of the surface of the Moon and exploit the

vast quantities of Helium-3 thought to lie buried in lunar rocks as part of its ambitious space-exploration program. Ouyang Ziyuan, head of the first phase of lunar exploration, was quoted on government-sanctioned news site ChinaNews.com describing plans to collect three dimensional images of the Moon for future mining of Helium 3: "There are altogether 15 tons of helium-3 on Earth, while on the Moon, the total amount of Helium-3 can reach one to five million tons." "Helium-3 is considered as a long-term, stable, safe, clean and cheap material for human beings to get nuclear energy through controllable nuclear fusion experiments," Ziyuan added. "If we human beings can finally use such energy material to generate electricity, then China might need 10 tons of helium-3 every year and in the world, about 100 tons of helium-3 will be needed every year." Helium 3 fusion energy - classic Buck Rogers propulsion system- may be the key to future space exploration and settlement, requiring less radioactive shielding, lightening the load. Scientists estimate there are about one million tons of helium 3 on the moon, enough to power the world for thousands of years. The equivalent of a single space shuttle load or roughly 25 tons could supply the entire United States' energy needs for a year. Thermonuclear reactors capable of processing Helium-3 would have to be built, along with major transport system to get various equipment to the Moon to process huge amounts of lunar soil and get the minerals back to Earth. With China's announcement, a new Moon-focused Space Race seems locked in place. China made its first steps in space just a few years ago, and is in the process of establishing a lunar base by 2024. NASA is currently working on a new space vehicle, Orion, which is destined to fly the U.S. astronauts to the moon in 13 years, to deploy a permanent base. Russia, the first to put a probe on the moon, plans to deploy a lunar base in 2015. A new, reusable spacecraft, called Kliper, has been earmarked for lunar flights, with the International Space Station being an essential galactic pit stop. The harvesting of Helium-3 on the moon could start by 2025. Our lunar mining could be but a jumping off point for Helium 3 extraction from the atmospheres of our Solar System gas giants, Saturn and Jupiter.

Recent launches proveCasey Kazan, writer for the Daily Galaxy, 10-3-2010, “China Launches Second Moon Mission: Is Mining Rare Helium 3 an Ultimate Goal?” The Daily Galaxy, http://www.dailygalaxy.com/my_weblog/2010/10/china-launches-second-moon-mission-is-mining-helium-3-an-ultimate-goal.html On Friday China marked 61 years of communist rule with the launch of the Chang'e-2 lunar orbiter. The Chang'e-2, which is a part of the country’s second lunar probe, blasted off from an isolated corner of Sichuan province just some seconds before 7 a.

m. EDT. The launch will provide a boost to China’s ambition to emerge as a major space power capable of landing a man on the moon and perhaps one day exploring far beyond. The rocket will shoot the craft into the trans-lunar orbit, after

which the satellite is expected to reach the Moon in about five days. Chang'e-2 will be used to test key technologies and

collect data for future landings. The latest launch, to test key technologies and gather data, is China's second lunar mission. China says it will send a rover on its next mission, and it also has ambitions to put humans on the surface of the lunar body at some future date. The Xinhua News Agency said Chang'e-2 would circle just 15km (nine miles) above the rocky terrain in order to take photographs of possible landing locations. This is China's second lunar probe - the first was launched in 2007. The craft stayed in space for 16 months before being intentionally crashed on to the Moon's surface. So far, only three countries have managed to independently send humans into space: China, Russia and the US. In 2008, a Chinese astronaut, fighter pilot Zhai Zhigang, performed a spacewalk - the first in his country's history. He stayed outside the Shenzhou-7 capsule for 15 minutes; the exercise was seen as key to China's ambition to build an orbiting station in the near future. Economic reasons are first and foremost of the forces driving Beijing's space endeavors, explains Dean Cheng, senior Asia analyst at think tank CNA in Washington DC. "From a civilian perspective, you are fostering the development of advanced technologies," he explains. Another driver is diplomacy. A wide-ranging space program shows the rest of the world that China had arrived on the international stage. There is also a domestic motivation: success in space helped legitimise China's regime in the eyes of its population. In 2007, shortly after Russia claimed a vast portion of the Arctic sea floor, accelerating an international race for the natural resources as global warming opens polar access, China announced plans to map "every inch" of the surface of the Moon and exploit the vast quantities of Helium-3 thought to lie buried in lunar rocks as part of its ambitious space-exploration program.

Moon Treaty Solves

Moon treaty means the resources would be shared – solves your advantages and tanks solvency for their US-key warrant Glenn Reynolds, professor of law at the University of Tennessee, no date, “Key Objections to the Moon Treaty,” National Space Society, http://www.nsschapters.org/hub/pdf/MoonTreatyObjections.pdf“Common Heritage of Mankind” Language: Article XI of the Moon Treaty provides that “the Moon and its natural resources are the common heritage of [hu]mankind, which finds its expression in the provisions of this Agreement, in particular

Paragraph 5 of this Article.” Like the identical language contained in the Law of the Sea Treaty, the “common heritage“ language

of the Moon Treaty constitutes a finding that all nations of the world - whether or not they expend any effort or risk any capital -

have rights to Lunar resources. This means that any effort to develop resources would require the consent of all nations, a process

that would be slow, cumbersome and prone to blackmail. Ban on Property Rights: That this is the goal is made clear by Paragraph 3 of Article XI, which provides that: “neither the surface nor the subsurface of the Moon, nor any part thereof or natural resources in place, shall become the property of any state, international intergovernmental or non-governmental organization, national organization or nongovernmental entity or of any natural person.” Without property rights, economic development of the Moon would be frustrated - unless it were conducted by the special monopolistic regime that the treaty contemplates in Article XI, Paragraphs 5 & 7. The International Regime: According to Paragraph 5 of the Treaty, there will be established “an international regime, including appropriate procedures, to govern the exploitation of the natural resources of the Moon as such exploitation is about to become feasible.” Paragraph 7 provides (among other things) that the regime shall promote “orderly and safe development [of lunar resources], rational management [of them and the] equitable sharing by all states parties in the benefits derived from those resources.” Although the Moon Treaty itself provides little guidance on what these terms mean, the very similar Law of the Sea Treaty interprets them to involve the creation of an international authority to govern or conduct all resource extraction, with a hefty share of the proceeds going to less-developed countries regardless of whether they have any investment in the activity or not. That would discourage - if not outright prevent - the development of Lunar resources any time soon.

AT Not Ratified

Still in effect – the US doesn’t need to sign it because the UN adopted itEdyth Weeks, professor of law and international relations at Webster University and Washington University in St. Louis, 1-21-2011, “What's Wrong With the Moon Treaty?” Examiner St. Louis, http://www.examiner.com/space-policy-in-st-louis/what-s-wrong-with-the-moon-treatyThe Moon Treaty is often treated as though it is not a part of the body of international space law. There exists a tendency to refer

to this agreement as a failed treaty. However, after about nine years of proposals, negotiations and revisions by and between a

community of nations, the United Nations General Assembly on December 5, 1979 formally adopted the finalized draft of the

Moon Agreement on December 18, 1979. Thereafter, it opened for signature and ratification on December 18, 1979 (Galloway, 1980: 19). The next step, in the series of legal norms, which had been agreed upon by the international community, was for five nations to sign, ratify and deposit it with the Secretary-General of the United Nations. Although it took several years, Chile, the Philippines,

Uruguay, the Netherlands and Austria were the first five nations to sign and ratify this Agreement. Technically, consensus was achieved. The Moon Agreement entered into force on July 30th, 1984, which would be the “thirtieth day following the date of deposit of the fifth instrument of ratification”, since July 11, 1984 marked the date of the fifth instrument of ratification which was deposited with the Secretary-General of the United Nations. The political mood that existed within the United States in 1979-1984 created opposition to the signing of the Moon Treaty. Without the signature of the U.S., many other nations saw little reason to sign.

Solvency – SPSS China solves – plans already exist – just need to launchGao Ji, Hou Xinbin, and Wang Li, researchers at the China Academy of Space Technology, Winter 2010, “Solar Power Satellites Research in China,” Online Journal of Space Communication, Issue 16, http://spacejournal.ohio.edu/issue16/ji.htmlChina's first SPS research started in the late 20th century. In the new millennium, when the energy issue became a constraint on sustainable development in China, the China Academy of Space Technology submitted to the government a "Necessity and Feasibility Study Report of SPS." Later, an SPS concept design was activated, approved and funded by the Ministry of Industry and Information Technology (MIIT). CAST's present SPS system oriented study is the first to address its key components, and to define a baseline or reference system that will allow a relatively accurate determination of mass and cost in China. The CAST SPS research team conceives that there are four imperative sections for SPS development: launching approach, in-orbit construction/multi-agents, high efficiency solar conversion and wireless transmission. Except for launch, the other aspects do not seem to be insurmountable issues for China in the upcoming years.

Net Benefit – China Development

SPS solves sustainable development for ChinaGao Ji, Hou Xinbin, and Wang Li, researchers at the China Academy of Space Technology, Winter 2010, “Solar Power Satellites Research in China,” Online Journal of Space Communication, Issue 16, http://spacejournal.ohio.edu/issue16/ji.htmlSince 1968, when Dr. Peter Glaser proposed the first SPS scenario, the concept of solar power satellites has been under consideration. During those 40-plus years, the renewable energy requirement for electricity has been continuously going up. As one of the principal economies in the world, China is thirsty for energy to water its blooming industries. SPS is regarded as a reasonable path to energy production. Either from geostationary earth orbit (GEO) or in low earth orbit (LEO), this type of power system will have more direct access to the power of the sun. In analyzing the characteristics of SPS and space solar power applications, the China Academy of Space Technology (CAST) concludes that the advantages of SPS for China can be grouped into three relevant directions: sustainable economic

and social development, disaster prevention and mitigation, and the retaining of qualified personnel and the cultivating of innovative

talents. Sustainable development: With its population growth and rapid economic development, over the next 30 years China will become one of the most powerful and influential economies of the world. During this time, energy resources and

environmental issues will be serious challenges for China. To avoid the grave consequences and to learn lessons drawn

from others' mistakes, a sustainable development strategy will need to be adopted. This strategy can be expected to include renewable energy sources from outside earth to alter the heavily reliance on fossil fuels, a process that will contribute to world energy development and assure environment protection.

Net Benefit – Natural Disasters

Solves Chinese disastersGao Ji, Hou Xinbin, and Wang Li, researchers at the China Academy of Space Technology, Winter 2010, “Solar Power Satellites Research in China,” Online Journal of Space Communication, Issue 16, http://spacejournal.ohio.edu/issue16/ji.htmlDisaster prevention and mitigation: In 2005, Hurricane Katrina killed thousands of people in the U.S. Meanwhile, every year several

typhoons bother the east coast of China. From preliminary research, it appears that microwave wireless power transmission may heat the top of the clouds, thereby reducing the force of typhoons and hurricanes. In 2008, China's southern region experienced a rare snowstorm; such an extreme weather attack led to a complete paralysis of the entire southern power grid due to the frozen grid. Without wired power supplied, the economy of the Southern provinces suffered heavy losses in the first few months of 2008. Again, if there had been an operational SPS power system in China, wireless power transmission quite possibly could have unfrozen the grid, and restored power to the region. In May 2008, in the great Sichuan region, a deadly earthquake measured at 8.0 magnitude killed thousands of lives. The most important steps to be taken in mitigating the effects of that earthquake was to rebuild the human support system and provide an alternative communication system, each of which depended on the reinstatement of power supply systems. As space satellite systems can help to supply prompt restoration of terrestrial communications, and space solar power systems can achieve

wireless power transmission via microwave and laser beams, space-based solutions would have been the fastest and most appropriate way to crack those problems.

Solvency – WFIRST China can build awesome telescopesPeople’s Daily Online, 4-9-2009, “China's first space telescope to be launched between 2010 and 2011,” http://english.peopledaily.com.cn/90001/90781/90876/6633061.html"Between 2010 and 2011, China's first space telescope will be launched, and it will roam in outer space together with the Hubble Space Telescope." said Su Dingqiang, an academician at the Chinese Academy of Sciences recently at the 19th academician and expert rostrum. "Several large-size telescopes independently developed by China in recent years have caught reached the world's most advanced level." This year marks the "International Year of Astronomy" as well as the 400th anniversary of Galileo's first astronomical observation through a telescope. China, despite being a space power, has so far never launched a space telescope. Su said that the launch of the Hard X-ray Modulation Telescope (HXMT)– a telescope with the highest sensitivity and space resolution in the world— will mark the "zero breakthrough" for China's launch of space telescopes. The HXMT's specific missions will include the study of high energy astronomical bodies and high energy radiation

phenomenon as well as the directional observation of mysteries of the universe such as black holes and neutron stars. Its observed findings are expected to have major contributions to high energy astrophysics.

China is all about building huge telescopes – FAST provesIan O’Neill, astrophysics correspondent for Discovery News, 6-21-2011, “Monster Chinese Telescope the Next ET Hunter?” Discovery News, http://news.discovery.com/space/monster-chinese-telescope-the-next-et-hunter-110621.htmlIn radio astronomy, the bigger the telescope, the better. And in 2016, the Chinese are expected to blow the international radio telescope competition out of the water with the Five-hundred-meter Aperture Spherical

radio Telescope (FAST). Construction has begun in the Guizhou Province in southern China where the world's largest single dish radio telescope will take up residency in a natural depression in the landscape, not dissimilar to the world-

famous Arecibo radio telescope in Puerto Rico. However, FAST will be bigger, faster and more sensitive than Arecibo. Featuring a 500 meter diameter "dish," FAST will contain 4,400 triangular aluminum panels, suspended inside the dish, each of which can be adjusted to deform the dish's overall shape. This ability means FAST, although rooted into the Guizhou countryside, will have some generous maneuverability. One huge factor in choosing the Guizhou Province is that it is a remote location, generally free of interfering radio transmissions from populated areas. As my Discovery News colleague and radio astronomer Nicole Gugliucci always reminds us, (radio) silence is golden. Arecibo's fixed-dish design means it can only use 221 meters of its 305-meter dish at any one time. FAST will have the collecting power of the entire 305 meter Arecibo dish, and will be able to scan more of the sky in doing so -- it will be able to "tilt" its viewing angle 40 degrees from the vertical in all directions, a luxury Arecibo never had. The FAST concept began life as the Chinese contribution to the international Square Kilometer Array (SKA), but the SKA project will eventually find a home in either South Africa or Australia, using an array of smaller radio antennae, mimicking a single large telescope. In 2006, China decided to go it alone with FAST and devoted funds to its construction. Not only will the adaptive shape of FAST enable astronomers to direct this powerful radio antenna with ease, its sensitivity will be second to none. It will be able to "see" three times deeper into space than Arecibo and generate the sharpest ever radio observations of interstellar gas, pulsars, supernovae, black hole emissions and join the effort to hunt for signals from extraterrestrial civilizations.

CCP Net Benefit

1NC

Economic backsliding will cause CCP collapse in the status quoMichael Sainsbury, China Correspondent for the Australian, 7-2-2011, “After 90 years, the Chinese Communist Party struggles to keep control,” The Australian, http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/features/after-90-years-the-chinese-communist-party-struggles-to-keep-control/story-e6frg6z6-1226085903860Ninety years after its founding, 62 years after the revolution that brought it to power and a little more than 30 years after Deng Xiaoping led China's "reform and opening up", the party faces the daunting challenge of its next 30 years - indeed, the next 10. "The party's main challenge is simple - to stay in power - but to do that [it has] to continue to juggle all sorts of serious problems that threaten [its] grip on government and the state," McGregor says. "Chief among these is the economy. At the moment, China is a strange mixture of the unsustainable and the unstoppable. "The unstoppable part is the sheer

momentum of the economy, from urbanisation, rising incomes and the take-up of technology. But the unsustainable parts of the growth model are increasingly coming to the fore." Veteran party member and economist Mao Yushi, who heads the reform-minded Unirule consultancy that advises the Chinese government, says that it's true the party has strong control in social and economic resources, in the military and police. "So why do they still feel nervous?" he asks. "Because their own assessment of the current situation is not optimistic, so they want stability to be maintained by all means, regardless of order or law. But this is not healing from the roots. Stability is achieved by justice, not by force."

Investments in space attract tech workersGao Ji, Hou Xinbin, and Wang Li, researchers at the China Academy of Space Technology, Winter 2010, “Solar Power Satellites Research in China,” Online Journal of Space Communication, Issue 16, http://spacejournal.ohio.edu/issue16/ji.htmlRetaining and cultivating talent: China understands that having an innovative, qualified and skilled workforce is the basic infrastructure on which national development can proceed. Higher education in China is developing rapidly, but the state lacks talent at both ends of its research lines, that is in advanced concept research and in basic/technical sciences research. Objectively and

actually, these are currently greater problems than finding financial sources for research. CAST is of the opinion that in order to attract more outstanding personnel and to generate a magnetic field for attracting more college students into basic sciences and engineering, it is necessary for China to launch an SPS-type Apollo project to increase research and development investment in all corollary fields. This will relate to the country's goal of attaining the leading position in both energy and space technology.

Those are key to reverse economic decline and save the CCPAli Wyne, researcher at the Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs at the Kennedy School of Government, 2007, “Is China’s Economic Growth Sustainable?” Volume 15, Spring, http://web.mit.edu/murj/www/v15/v15-Features/v15-f5.pdf.The deficiencies of this prescription are increasingly manifest. Indeed, far from possessing an auto-catalytic character, as some analysts would suggest, China’s economic growth operates under a myriad of constraints. In their second annual “Failed States Index,” which tracks 12 indicators to assess countries’ vulnerability to internal upheaval, the Fund for Peace and the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace ranked China 57th out of 146 countries (a lower rank signifying greater risk). Noting growing peasant unrest over land expropriation and continuing unemployment, the survey observed that “Party officials must find new ways to mollify the masses while keeping the country’s economic engine in high gear.” 7 The predictable rejoinder to this argument is that unrest and dislocation are inevitable concomitants of economic growth. In a compelling piece that appeared in The Financial Times, Victor Mallet analogized China’s present phase of industrialization to Great Britain’s in the 19th century.8 This comparison comes under duress, however, when one notes that China is home to one-sixth of humanity. Indeed, with 160 million Chinese living under $1 per day, and 486 million living under $2 per day, the government’s failure to address income inequality could sow internal chaos on a mammoth scale. It is important, then, not to disassociate economic growth from its political consequences (and, if I had the space in which to discuss them, its social and environmental ones). The latter can critically constrain, or even reverse, the former.(iii) Even if one believes that establishing the aforementioned dichotomy – economic and political – is not problematic, one would yet find it

difficult to argue that China’s economic prospects are assured. For the past three decades, China has prospered largely

on the back of one sector: manufacturing. By virtue of its size, it was able to accrue nearly continual economies of significant scale by establishing industrial parks and conditioning its workers to achieve maximum efficiency. In 2005, manufacturing accounted for over half of China’s economic growth and manufactured goods accounted for 91% of its exports.9 Now, however, for the first time in its history, foreign direct investment (FDI) in its manufacturing sector has declined; that is to say, the sector that has all but anchored China’s expansion is no longer a guarantor of its long-term success.10 In light of this outcome, Beijing is suddenly

stressing the importance of innovation. In February 2006, for example, the Chinese government announced a “National

Medium- and Long-Term Programme for Scientific and Technological Development (2006-20).”11 Its ability to innovate, in turn,

depends on (1) the global competitive posture of its firms and (2) the quality of its labor force.

CCP collapse causes nuke warHerbert Yee, Professor of Politics and International Relations at the Hong Kong Baptist University, and Ian Storey, Lecturer in Defence Studies at Deakin University, 2002, “The China Threat: Perceptions, Myths and Reality,” RoutledgeCurzon, 5.The forth factor contributing to the perception of a China threat is the fear of political and economic collapse in the PRC,

resulting in territorial fragmentation, civil war and waves of refugees pouring into neighbouring countries. Naturally, any or all

of these scenarios would have a profoundly negative impact on regional stability. Today the Chinese leadership faces a raft of internal problems, including the increasing political demands of its citizens, a growing population, a shortage of natural resources and a deterioration in the natural environment caused by rapid industrialization and pollution. These problems are putting a strain on the central government’s ability to govern effectively. Political disintegration or a Chinese civil war might result in millions of Chinese refugees seeking asylum in neighbouring countries. Such an unprecedented exodus of refugees from a collapsed PRC would no doubt put a severe strain on the limited resources of China’s neighbours. A fragmented China could also result in another nightmare scenario—nuclear weapons falling into the hands of irresponsible local provincial leaders or warlords. From this perspective a disintegrating China would also pose a threat to its neighbours and the world.

Yes Collapse

CCP collapse is imminent – historyWu Zhong, editor of the Asia Times, 6-29-2011, “CCP rediscovers democracy, at 90,” The Asia Times, http://www.atimes.com/atimes/China/MF29Ad01.html As official preparations go into full gear, the propaganda machine is busy glorifying the CCP's "greatness" in leading the Chinese people to one victory after another. The main aim is justifying the legitimacy of the CCP's continuous rule, in hopes that it will continue for a long time - eternally if possible. But do past successes justify future legitimacy? In Chinese history, the answer is no. The Middle Kingdom's history of ruling dynasties was summed up poetically by the 14th century Chinese writer Luo Guanzhong at the beginning of his great historical novel, Romance of Three Kingdoms: "All under heaven [China], after a long period of division, tends to unite; after a long period of union, tends to divide. This has been so since antiquity." In essence, this means a dynasty that rules the whole of the Middle Kingdom with centralized power will sooner or later collapse (often because of official corruption and/or the

imperial court's loss of control on the regions) and be replaced by a new dynasty that defeated other contenders for "all under heaven" after a period of separation, chaos and war. The founding emperor of the new dynasty then agonizes over how to escape the fate of the previous dynasty, so his rule can be passed onto his offspring, one generation after another for "10,000 years". Despite their best efforts, no dynasty in written Chinese history ever achieved this, with none lasting longer than 300

years. This gave rise to the ancient Chinese saying that "One takes turns to become the emperor, and this year it might be my turn." And this vicious circle characterized China's entire 2,000-year history of feudal dynasties.

Economics driving CCP declineMichael Sainsbury, China Correspondent for the Australian, 7-2-2011, “After 90 years, the Chinese Communist Party struggles to keep control,” The Australian, http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/features/after-90-years-the-chinese-communist-party-struggles-to-keep-control/story-e6frg6z6-1226085903860But despite the ructions between the Right and the Left in the party, the demise of Maoism and the rise of the capitalist one-party

state, the legitimacy of the party's rule rests squarely on successfully running the economy. "The CCP can't keep running the economy on steroids forever," McGregor says. "Sooner or later, the bill for the huge stimulus that has pumped up the economy since the global financial crisis, and the over-investment for a decade before that, is going to come due." As an example, this week Beijing admitted that local governments across the country had run up a bill of more than $1 trillion in debt, although independent economists believe it could be as much as $3 trillion. "Combined with the sharp contraction in the workforce a few years down the road, it spells slower growth for China," McGregor says. "Double-digit growth can cover all sorts of blemishes. Once growth plateaus, the party's legitimacy will be eroded and the extent of its corruption will become less tenable."

Space Solves Brain Drain

Investment in science brings back talentDavid Zweig, chair professor at Hong Kong University of Science and Technology, 2006, “Competing for Global Talent,” Singapore Management University, http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.120.2008&rep=rep1&type=pdfHowever, government policy to invest in scientific institutions has a very important indirect influence.

Interviews by the author in fall 2004 show that increased funding for the Chinese Academy of Sciences has rejuvenated some institutes. Two units where we did interviews had declined due to the aging of their leading researchers. The Cultural Revolution stopped China from training a new generation of scientists, creating what some call a “talent fault,”51 and many of those trained after it, including the best or even second best, had gone abroad. Only money and opportunity will bring them back. Thus one institute, which had received funds for 18 “Hundred Talents” fellowships over two years, had attracted a large cohort of young and middle-aged Ph.D.s trained overseas. However, few of these returnees had been directors of institutes overseas; many were post-doctoral fellows, or assistant professors.

High-Tech Workers Good – Econ

Chinese growth is spurred by high tech workersVivek Wadhwa et al. Prof @ Duke, Senior Research Assoc @ Labor Program @ Harvard, 3-30-2009, “The American Brain Drain and Asia,” http://www.japanfocus.org/-Alex-Salkever/3112These positive impacts created by talented immigrant workers will be located wherever those workers live. So losing these talented workers will likely result in an overall reduction of patents and innovation in the United States and a corresponding rise of these types of activities in India and China. In a world where knowledge is the foundation of economic power, brains are the coin of the realm. Dramatic changes in visa policies or political unrest in China or India could quickly reverse the tide. The majority of immigrant returnees to China and India stated they might be willing to return to the United States if offered equal opportunities and permanent residency. [9] That said, relocating from one country to another is no trivial act. Return migration from the United States to China and India is not necessarily a net loss to the U.S. economy. It is quite possible that many who return to Asia maintain strong ties to the United States and even establish cross-border entrepreneurial networks that provide economic benefits to both societies. This is a topic that merits further investigation. Nonetheless, the ongoing return migration will, at a minimum, seed the economies of India and China with considerable talent in the near term and possibly help tilt-the balance of economic power over the long-term by enhancing the innovation quotient of India and China. This is likely to lessen the relative competitiveness of the United States, a result of the constant competition for the best brains on Earth.

Chinese retention of high skilled workers is key to the Chinese economyWen Jiabao, China’s Premier, 10-31-2008, “Science and China's modernization drive,” http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/opinion/2008-10/31/content_7161301.htmThe history of modernization is in essence a history of scientific and technical progress. Scientific discovery and technological inventions have brought about new civilizations, modern industries, and the rise and fall of nations. China is now engaged in a modernization drive unprecedented in the history of humankind. Over the past half century, China has made great achievements in basic science and technological innovation. It now ranks among the top nations in the annual number of papers published internationally and patent applications filed. China has also made achievements in such areas as manned spaceflight, high-performance computers, super-large-scale integrated circuits, and third-generation telecommunications technology. High-tech industry has experienced rapid growth, accounting for over 15 percent of the manufacturing industry. Francis Bacon, the 16th-century English philosopher, referred to science as a means to improve mankind's lot. Today, the hybrid rice variety developed by Chinese scientists has been adopted for planting in over 3 million hectares and has become a "golden key" to meeting China's own food needs and boosting world cereal production. Scientific and technological development in the realm of health has also increased average life expectancy in China to that of developed countries. To encourage further innovation, the Chinese government has formulated a Mid- to Long-Term Plan for Development of Science and Technology (2006-2020), which highlights research in the basic sciences and frontier technologies, with priority given to energy, water resources, and environmental protection. We strive to develop independent intellectual property rights in areas of information technology and new materials, while strengthening the application of biotechnology to agriculture, industry, population and health. The future of China's science and technology depends fundamentally on how we attract, train, and use young scientific talents today. Thus, at the core of our science and technology policy is attracting a diverse range of talents, especially young people, into science and providing them with an environment that brings out the best of their creative ideas. In the field of science and technology, we will intensify institutional reform, restructure scientific research, rationally allocate public resources, and enhance innovation capability. We advocate free academic debate under a lively academic atmosphere, where curiosity-driven exploration is encouraged and failure tolerated. Science has no boundaries. China's endeavors in science and technology need to be more integrated with those of the world, and the world needs a China that is vibrant and able to deliver more in science and technology. Just as collisions generate sparks, exchange and communication enrich imagination and creativity. Many Chinese scientists have stepped into the international academic arena, where they and their foreign colleagues learn from each other and jointly contribute to the worldwide development of science and technology. To encourage the learning and application of science among the general public, we need to embrace a scientific culture by promoting scientific rationality while cherishing Chinese cultural heritage. Enlightened by science, the rich and profound Chinese culture is bound to shine more gloriously. I firmly believe that science is the ultimate revolution. At a time when the current global financial turmoil is dealing a heavy blow to the world economy, it has become all the more

important to rely on scientific and technological progress to promote growth in the real economy.

Economic and social development must rely on science and technology, and science and technology must serve economic and social development. We will rely on science and technology to promote economic restructuring, transform development

patterns, safeguard food and energy security, and address global climate change. We are confident that China will reap a rich harvest in science and technology and that this will have positive and far-reaching effects on human civilization and the well-being of humankind.

High Skilled Returnees are key to Chinese sustainable developmentWang Huiyao, Staff writer for the China Daily, 9-14-2010, “Attracting talent globally for the future,” http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/opinion/2010-09/14/content_11297892.htmThe Chinese government has set a target to transform China into an innovative and creative country by

2020. However, this cannot be realized unless China places more emphasis on the innovative and creative talent required to build it into an innovative country. Although China is the world's largest manufacturer and exporter, it has very few brand names that are globally recognized. In order for China to climb the ladder of technology, elevate its value chain and produce well-known brands with reputations for quality, innovation and service, it has to place more emphasis on talent. The third trend shifts from attracting financial capital to attracting human capital. China's economic development model has emphasized attracting foreign capital. For years, China has ranked as a top FDI recipient country. It now has the largest foreign exchange reserve in the world, with reserves rising above $2 trillion in April 2009 and reaching a record $2.4543 trillion at the end of June 2010. China has also enjoyed a huge trade surplus for a number of years. However, in terms of the exchange of talented individuals, it has suffered a big deficit. China has sent out 1.62 million students and scholars since 1978. As of today, only 497,000 of them have returned to China. Although the total return rate now is about 30 percent, the percentage of highly qualified personnel such as United States-educated PhD graduates in science and engineering who return to China stands at only 8 percent. China has begun to recognize that having financial resources is not enough. Indeed, human resources should be the most important factor in today's knowledge-based economy. Therefore, methods for attracting human capital originally

coming out of China to return, and even attracting global talent from other countries to come to China, can have a profound impact on the country's economic, political and social transformation. The next trend shifts from the hardware to the software. China has built a large number of landmark infrastructure projects over the past 30 years. These range from the Three Gorges Dam and super-high-speed railways to the Olympic Stadium and the World Expo pavilions. But now China needs to increase its investment in its software. Specifically, the investment needs to be diverted toward education, research and

development, public health, energy conservation, environmental protection, social welfare and many other

areas related to a balanced development. This mindset change from an obsession with hardware to a focus on software requires a new strategic approach that concentrates on a talented and highly skilled workforce as well as experts and an intellectual community. The last trend discussed here moves from an investment-driven economy to a talent-driven one. Today, China's economy is still largely driven by investment. In fact, investment now represents 45 percent of the Chinese economy. It is at a level that is historically unprecedented, both in China and in any other major economy. In order to maintain economic growth and develop a balanced society in the medium-to-long term, China must rebalance the economy by placing a stronger emphasis on reducing savings and

boosting private domestic demand. The rebalancing requires a reduction in the nation's reliance on fixed investment and exports as well as a boost to domestic consumption. This will in turn require an increasing reliance on the non-tradable and well-paid sectors such as services, and less focus on the tradable sectors such as manufacturing. To complete this transition, China will have to create better paying jobs in the service sector - which includes professionals, entrepreneurs, teachers, engineers, doctors, lawyers, accountants, consultants, artists, IT specialists, technicians and social workers - and raise overall consumption levels. This in turn requires many more well-paid and well-trained talented individuals beyond migrant labor. China needs to transform its workforce from one that is labor intensive to one that is talent rich. If it does so, its currently unsustainable development model will be transformed into a talent-driven one that will give China new impetus and power to develop for the next 30 years and beyond.

China is investing in science and technology but deficiencies make its future uncertain – integrating the global knowledge commons produces sustainable Chinese growthJan van den Berg, is President of Delft University of Technology, former chairman of the IDEA League of European Universities, and former Dutch ambassador to China and the UN, 10-8-2010, “EU Must Act Fast and Share Knowledge With China,” WSJ, http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704696304575538072642688764.html.Understanding the fleeting nature of this opportunity requires an appreciation of the rapidity of China's emergence as a science and technology superpower. It is spending some 1.5% of GDP on R&D, twice the rate ten years ago, and may reach the U.S. figure of approximately 2.5% by 2020 (the EU average is about 1.8%). It has also quickly become the world's second largest producer of scientific knowledge, as measured by the number of research publications. To be sure, China's overall scientific

position right now is sometimes exaggerated. Concerns rightly persist, for instance, about whether its educational system sufficiently encourages individual creativity (often key in forging scientific breakthroughs), lack of systems thinking, and whether Chinese enterprises are capable of absorbing so much research. Such issues mean the scale of China's future achievement is uncertain. But, it is indisputable that we are witnessing the dawn of a new science and technology world order. Firstly, the era of North American and European scientific dominance is ending, with fundamental implications not just for the global economy but also geopolitics. Secondly, the diffusion of scientific expertise is helping create a globalized commons of knowledge which China's millions of scientists and engineers are well placed to tap into. This transformation is, in turn, catalyzing a more collaborative and trans-border model of cooperation which will redefine the R&D world of the 21st century. Already in China there are some 1,200 foreign R&D centres. The key opportunity here for China is to continue moving up the R&D value chain. Its firms will become innovation powerhouses and rivals to European counterparts. We will ignore this at our peril. How should Europe secure the prize of locking in collaboration with China before our opportunity disappears? Firstly, every link of the innovation chain from research to commercialization must be strengthened, including through the Europe 2020 strategy. We also must give greater urgency to national initiatives to reform R&D and innovation systems. At this crucial point, however, it will not be enough for national and EU leaders to endlessly debate plans. The time for talking is over. We must act urgently and what is required includes sound, detailed budgeting to facilitate successful implementation. Europe must capitalize on existing strengths and find synergies between Chinese growth needs, and the potential and objectives of European industry, research and consultancy. Europe's strengths include exceptionally high quality of research; ability to work in interdisciplinary fashion (which makes research increasingly effective); and a very successful international corporate sector. World-leading specialities include in health with GlaxoSmithKline and AstraZeneca, and food and nutrition with Nestlé and Unilever. In food and nutrition, there is a need in China for international scientific expertise owing to the need for better production efficiency and quality: food production scale in rural areas is below critical mass, and food quality is not suitable for export. China cannot, as yet, tackle this issue as it lacks a sufficiently robust quality assurance system. If Europe can raise its game and step up to the historical challenge it confronts, compelling value propositions can also be developed in virtually all fields of science and research, including biotechnology, medical technology, nano-electronics and embedded systems, pharmaceuticals, and creative and design. The challenges are real, but if we can surmount them, the prizes will be stronger bilateral partnerships; locking in China to world trade and investment rules; and a new foundation stone for sustainable growth.

That’s key to the Chinese economySebastian Harder, MA in Business Administration at the University of Applied Sciences at Essen, 6-28-2010, “Innovation and Economic Growth in China: Evidence from Patent Statistics”, http://www.grin.com/e-book/156344/innovation-and-economic-growth-in-china-evidence-from-patent-statisticsChina has demonstrated an enormously high rate of economic growth over a period of more than twenty years. In fact, China’s economy advances to a driving force in order to overcome the consequences of the financial crisis in 2008. This is only one reason why China has become the major object for studying economic growth as shown by thousands of publications and articles. But up to now, there have been published only few papers dealing with China’s patenting activities. This is astonishing, given the fact that innovations expressed

by patent counts are one of the key factors that drives long term growth and productivity. Today emerging state’s economies like in China turn more and more into knowledge-based economies, where intellectual property rights play an elementary role. Moreover, IP protection in form of patents can increase (as intangible asset) firm’s values. Furthermore, investment decisions are sufficiently influenced by the existence of a reliable patent system. While intellectual property and its protection have an essential impact on creating economic growth, the neglect of this relationship has much more negative influence on economy’s development. If an invention can be costless copied by a competitor it would be impossible to cover the costs of the development or even to

gain a profit out of it. Therefore, it is necessary to think about efficient incentive systems for inventors in order to reward their efforts. Unfortunately, it proves difficult to establish a patent system that maximises social welfare by providing just enough incentives to invent, while limiting the temporary monopoly given to the patentee. In general, strong patents (patent length, breadth and height) can encourage innovations but too strong patents could be contrary by reducing welfare. Given China’s weak record of protecting intellectual property rights on the one hand and its economic growth on the other hand, there seems to be a contradiction. But, a closer look reveals China’s efforts for installing an efficient patent system. For example, after passing its first Patent Law in 1986, China has amended its Patent Law several times in order to bring it in line with international norms, as well as to support its effort to enter the WTO in 2001. However, China’s enforcement system is still weak. The installation of China’s patent system goes along with an incredible patent surge at annual growth rates of 20%.

High-Tech Workers Good – CCP Stability

High skilled workers are key to Chinese economic growth – prevents CCP collapseAli Wyne, researcher at the Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs at the Kennedy School of Government, 2007, “Is China’s Economic Growth Sustainable?” Volume 15, Spring, http://web.mit.edu/murj/www/v15/v15-Features/v15-f5.pdf.The deficiencies of this prescription are increasingly manifest. Indeed, far from possessing an auto-catalytic character, as some analysts would suggest, China’s economic growth operates under a myriad of constraints. In their second annual “Failed States Index,” which tracks 12 indicators to assess countries’ vulnerability to internal upheaval, the Fund for Peace and the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace ranked China 57th out of 146 countries (a lower rank signifying greater risk). Noting growing peasant unrest over land expropriation and continuing unemployment, the survey observed that “Party officials must find new ways to mollify the masses while keeping the country’s economic engine in high gear.” 7 The predictable rejoinder to this argument is that unrest and dislocation are inevitable concomitants of economic growth. In a compelling piece that appeared in The Financial Times, Victor Mallet analogized China’s present phase of industrialization to Great Britain’s in the 19th century.8 This comparison comes under duress, however, when one notes that China is home to one-sixth of humanity. Indeed, with 160 million Chinese living under $1 per day, and 486 million living under $2 per day, the government’s failure to address income inequality could sow internal chaos on a mammoth scale. It is important, then, not to disassociate economic growth from its political consequences (and, if I had the space in which to discuss them, its social and environmental ones). The latter can critically constrain, or even reverse, the former.(iii) Even if one believes that establishing the aforementioned dichotomy – economic and political – is not problematic, one would yet find it difficult to argue that China’s economic prospects are assured. For the past three decades, China has prospered largely

on the back of one sector: manufacturing. By virtue of its size, it was able to accrue nearly continual economies of significant scale by establishing industrial parks and conditioning its workers to achieve maximum efficiency. In 2005, manufacturing accounted for over half of China’s economic growth and manufactured goods accounted for 91% of its exports.9 Now, however, for the first time in its history, foreign direct investment (FDI) in its manufacturing sector has declined; that is to say, the sector that has all but anchored China’s expansion is no longer a guarantor of its long-term success.10 In light of this outcome, Beijing is suddenly

stressing the importance of innovation. In February 2006, for example, the Chinese government announced a “National

Medium- and Long-Term Programme for Scientific and Technological Development (2006-20).”11 Its ability to innovate, in turn,

depends on (1) the global competitive posture of its firms and (2) the quality of its labor force.

CCP Collapse Bad – GP Wars

Chinese instability collapses trade and causes great power warsThomas M. Kane and Lawrence W. Serewicz, prof of security studies at the University of Hull, UK and recent Ph.D. recipient from the University of Hull. “China's Hunger: The Consequences of a Rising Demand for Food and Energy,” Parameters, Autumn 2001, pp. 63-75.Under these circumstances, China is vulnerable to unrest of many kinds. Unemployment or severe hardship, not to mention actual starvation, could easily trigger popular uprisings. Provincial leaders might be tempted to secede, perhaps openly or perhaps by quietly ceasing to obey Beijing's directives. China's leaders, in turn, might adopt drastic measures to forestall such developments. If faced with internal strife, supporters of China's existing regime may return to a more overt form of communist dictatorship. The PRC has, after all, oscillated between experimentation and orthodoxy continually throughout its existence. Spectacular examples include Mao's Hundred Flowers campaign and the return to conventional Marxism-Leninism after the leftist experiments of the Cultural Revolution, but the process continued throughout the 1980s, when the Chinese referred to it as the "fang-shou cycle." (Fang means to loosen one's grip; shou means to tighten it.)[51] If order broke down, the Chinese would not be the only people to suffer. Civil unrest in the PRC would disrupt trade relationships, send refugees flowing across borders, and force outside powers to consider intervention. If different countries chose to intervene on different sides, China's struggle could lead to major war. In a less apocalyptic but still grim scenario, China's government might try to ward off its demise by attacking adjacent countries.

CCP Collapse Bad – US-China War

Chinese economic decline causes war with the USDr. Thomas M. Kane teaches security studies at the University of Hull, UK and Dr. Lawrence W. Serewicz recently received his Ph.D. in politics from the University of Hull, UK, Fall 2001, ParametersDespite China's problems with its food supply, the Chinese do not appear to be in danger of widespread starvation. Nevertheless, one cannot rule out the prospect entirely, especially if the earth's climate actually is getting warmer. The consequences of general famine in a country with over a billion people clearly would be catastrophic. The effects of oil shortages and industrial stagnation would be less lurid, but economic collapse would endanger China's political stability whether that collapse came with a bang or a whimper. PRC society has become dangerously fractured. As the coastal cities grow richer and more cosmopolitan while the rural inland provinces grow poorer, the political interests of the two regions become ever less compatible. Increasing the prospects for division yet further, Deng Xiaoping's administrative reforms have strengthened regional potentates at the expense of central authority. As Kent Calder observes, In part, this change [erosion of power at the center] is a conscious devolution, initiated by Deng Xiaoping in 1991 to outflank conservative opponents of economic reforms in Beijing nomenclature. But devolution has fed on itself, spurred by the natural desire of local authorities in the affluent and increasingly powerful coastal provinces to appropriate more and more of the fruits of growth to themselves alone. [49] Other social and economic developments deepen the rifts in Chinese society. The one-child policy, for instance, is disrupting traditional family life, with unknowable consequences for Chinese mores and social cohesion. [50] As families resort to abortion or infanticide to ensure that their one child is a son, the population may come to include an unprecedented preponderance of young, single men. If common gender prejudices have any basis in fact, these males are unlikely to be a source of social stability. Under these circumstances, China is vulnerable to unrest of many kinds. Unemployment or severe hardship, not to mention actual starvation, could easily trigger popular uprisings. Provincial leaders might be tempted to secede, perhaps openly or perhaps by quietly ceasing to obey Beijing's directives. China's leaders, in turn, might adopt drastic measures to forestall such developments. If faced with internal strife, supporters of China's existing regime may return to a more overt form of communist dictatorship. The PRC has, after all, oscillated between experimentation and orthodoxy continually throughout its existence. Spectacular examples include Mao's Hundred Flowers campaign and the return to conventional Marxism-Leninism after the leftist experiments of the Cultural Revolution, but the process continued throughout the 1980s, when the Chinese referred to it as the "fang-shou cycle." (Fang means to loosen one's grip; shou means to tighten it.) [51] If order broke down, the Chinese would not be the only people to suffer. Civil unrest in the PRC would disrupt trade relationships, send refugees flowing across borders, and force outside powers to consider intervention. If different countries chose to intervene on different sides, China's struggle could lead to major war. In a less apocalyptic but still grim scenario, China's government might try to ward off its demise by attacking adjacent countries.

US-Sino conflict causes global nuclear war—text modifiedChalmers Johnson, author of Blowback: The Costs and Consequences of American Empire, 5/14/2001, TheNation, Pg. 20China is another matter. No sane figure in the Pentagon wants a war with China, and all serious US militarists know that China’s minuscule nuclear capacity is not offensive but a deterrent against the

overwhelming US power arrayed against it (twenty archaic Chinese warheads versus more than 7,000 US warheads). Taiwan, whose status constitutes the still incomplete last act of the Chinese civil war, remains the most dangerous place on earth. Much as the 1914 assassination of the Austrian crown prince in Sarajevo led to a war that no wanted, a misstep in Taiwan by any side could bring the United States and China into a conflict that neither wants. Such a war would bankrupt the United States, deeply divide Japan and probably end in a Chinese victory, given that China is the world’s most populous country and would be defending itself against a foreign aggressor. More seriously, it could easily escalate into a nuclear [war] holocaust. However, given the nationalistic challenge to China’s sovereignty of any Taiwanese attempt to declare its independence formally, forward-deployed US forces on China’s borders have virtually no deterrent effect.

CCP Collapse Bad – Econ

Successful Chinese growth is key to the global economyYuri Kageyama, 2-3-2005, ‘Weak Dollar’, Pitt. Trib. Rev., p lnThe truth is that despite all the noise about the weak dollar, the United States and Japan are counting on stable growth in China to keep their own economies going. Prematurely loosening the yuan's peg is almost certain to hurt China's booming economy -- and the global economy, which has become highly dependent on trade with China. Matsushita plants in China are exporting electronics products to the United States. Wal-Mart Stores Inc. is producing in China retail goods sold in Japan and the United States. "Japan will die and America will die if the Chinese economy heads downhill," said Mitsuo Imaizumi, deputy general manager at Daiwa Securities SMBC in Tokyo.

AT Space Mil

No Space Mil

No space militarization likelyJames Lewis, space analyst for CSIS, August 2004, “China as a Military Space Competitor,” CSIS, http://csis.org/files/media/csis/pubs/040801_china_space_competitor.pdfA review of what China builds and launches suggests that China’s military space effort is often more a demonstration of

technological prowess and sophistication across a broad range of space activities rather than an effort to build an operational military space capability. China has not assembled nor does it maintain the full range of capabilities in space needed for intelligence and military benefit. In some cases, China appears to build a satellite in order to show what it can do

rather than to meet an operational need. A desire to demonstrate self-reliance (an important factor of Chinese policy in many

areas beyond space) often seems to drive military space activities.1 For example, China and the European Union recently agreed that China would be one of the participants in the Galileo navigational satellite program (several other countries, including Canada and Israel are also participants). While technology transfer from Europe to China and input from China into Galileo’s design and operation will be limited, cooperation will allow China to develop a more sophisticated understanding of navigational satellites. Press reports note that China has expressed interest in Galileo’s ‘Public Regulated Service,’ which is intended for use by security services.2 Galileo is another example of how China has used foreign partnerships to speed its indigenous space effort – not through the theft of technology, but by participating in and learning from the experience of other programs. But with access to Galileo, in addition to the access to Glonass and GPS signals, why should China build and launch three Beidou navigation satellites? Three satellites are not enough for effective military use and the funds spent on Beidou could probably have been better spent on other types of satellites that could provide asymmetric advantage. Opaqueness on the part of the Chinese complicates analysis, but we can make some observations about

Chinese military space activities based on observable and quantifiable data. It is next to impossible to hide many space activities, since launches and satellites are easily observed. This launch and satellite data provides the best insights into China’s military

space efforts and suggests that they are not concentrating on asymmetric advantage and instead are exploring the range of military space capabilities, albeit on a much lesser scale than the U.S. and at a much slower pace.

Multiple reasonsMichael Katz-Hyman and Michael Krepon, analyst at and founder of the Stimson Institute, 2-12-2007 "An Arms Race in Space Isn't the Problem" Space News, http://www.stimson.org/pub.cfm?id=391If the Cold War space competition did not rise to the level of an arms race in some respects, there are strong reasons why the Chinese-U.S. competition can be even less intense. The Chinese leadership is smarter than the Soviet leadership. Beijing will not bankrupt itself in a military competition. Instead, the Chinese military will compete asymmetrically and cost-effectively. The People's Liberation Army (PLA) could employ temporary and reversible effects against U.S. satellites – the Pentagon's preference – or it could fight dirty, with kinetic energy weapons. Presumably one message of its crude A-Sat test was to clarify that, if push comes to shove, China will contest the Pentagon's objective of space control using weapons of its choosing. Beijing's ambitions in space go well beyond this objective. China's space program is also intimately connected to its economic goals and status consciousness. Beijing's status has been damaged by creating an enduring hazard to space operations in low Earth orbit. Its economic ambitions also will be jeopardized if the Cold War taboo against destroying another nation's satellites is broken. The interconnectedness of the economic and military aspects of space power – another key difference from the Cold War – constitutes another reason why an arms race in space is unlikely. The Pentagon also has learned important lessons from the Cold War. Back then, the United States had insufficient appreciation of the dangers of space debris. Now all stakeholders in space are keenly aware that debris constitutes an indiscriminate, lethal hazard. This is why the Chinese test was so irresponsible – and why Congress would further damage America's standing and security by emulating Chinese misbehavior. Perhaps the most important reason why an arms race in space between the United States and China is unlikely is because a race is not required to mess up essential satellites. A single nuclear

detonation can do extraordinary harm, as can a modest arsenal of old-fashioned kinetic energy weapons. Neither China nor the United States needs to race to mess up space.

No Impact

Minimal impact to Chinese space aggressionGeoffrey Forden, research associate at MIT specializing in Russian and Chinese space systems, 1-10-2008, "How China Loses the Coming Space War," Wired, http://blog.wired.com/defense/2008/01/inside-the-chin.htmlThe short-term military consequences of an all-out attack by China on US space assets are limited, at most. Even under the worst-case scenario, China could only reduce the use of precision-guided munitions or satellite communications into and out of the theater of operations. They would not be stopped. China could destroy a large fraction of strategic intelligence gathering capabilities; but not all of it. With a greater than normal expenditure of fuel, the remaining US spy satellites could continue to survive their crosses over China and photograph Chinese troop movements, harbors, and strategic forces but, of course, at a reduced rate. The war would, however, quickly move into a tactical phase where the US gathers most of its operational photographs using airplanes, instead of satellites. US ships and unmanned vehicles might, theoretically, have difficulty coordinating, during certain hours of the day. Most of the time, they would be free to function normally. China's space strike would fail to achieve its war aims even if the United States failed to respond in any way other than moving its low Earth orbit satellites.

US would see it coming a mile awayGeoffrey Forden, research associate at MIT specializing in Russian and Chinese space systems, 1-10-2008, "How China Loses the Coming Space War," Wired, http://blog.wired.com/defense/2008/01/inside-the-chin.htmlIf China and the US are going to come into armed conflict with each other in the next several decades, it will almost certainly be over the status of Taiwan. China has, for instance, indicated that it would be willing to use force if Taiwan took steps to formalize its independence from the main land or otherwise prevent its eventual reunification under the rule of the People’s Republic. In such a scenario, it is entirely likely China could consider trying to negate or drastically reduce the US ability to use space at a tactical level. But China could not launch the massive attack required to have anything like a significant effect on US ability to utilize space without months of careful planning and pre-positioning of special, ASAT carrying missiles around the country. It would also have to utilize its satellite launch facilities to attack any US assets in deep space: the GPS navigation satellites

and communications satellites in geostationary orbit. Most importantly, it would have to time the attack so as to hit as many US satellites as simultaneously as possible. And, despite all that movement, Beijing would somehow have to keep the whole thing secret. Failure to do so would undoubtedly result in the US attacking the large, fixed facilities China needs to wage this kind of war before the full blow had been struck. Even if the United States failed to do so, China would undoubtedly plan for that contingency.

AT Perm

No Solvency – Illegal

Cooperation is illegalFrank Wolf, Member of the US House of Representatives from the Virginia 10th, 5-11-2011, “Wolf Statement At U.S. - China Commission Hearing On Military and Civil Space Programs in China,” http://wolf.house.gov/index.cfm?sectionid=34&sectiontree=6,34&itemid=1724"At the same time that the 2010 Nobel Prize recipient Liu Xiaobo was jailed, the 2009 Nobel Prize winner, President Obama, was hosting a

state dinner for Chinese premier Hu Jintao and committing the U.S. to more cooperation on space with China. One of

the world's worst human rights abusers does not deserve to be rewarded with greater ‘cooperation’ with the U.S. "For these reasons, I have been very concerned by this administration’s apparent eagerness to work with China on its space program. The U.S. has no business cooperating with the PLA to help develop its space program. "That is why I included language in the Fiscal Year 2011 Continuing Resolution preventing NASA and the Office of Science and

Technology Policy from using federal funds ‘to develop, design, plan, promulgate, implement or execute a bilateral policy, program,

order, or contract of any kind to participate, collaborate, or coordinate bilaterally in any way with China or any Chinese-owned company.’

Links to Politics

Cooperation causes GOP backlash – think China is evilMatthew Pennington, staff writer for AP, 7-15-2011, “US lawmaker wields budget ax over China space ties,” Atlanta Journal-Constitution http://www.ajc.com/news/nation-world/us-lawmaker-wields-budget-1019535.htmlWASHINGTON — A Republican lawmaker is looking to make the Obama administration pay a price for what he sees as its

defiance of Congress in pursuing cooperation with China in science and space technology. A proposal by Rep. Frank Wolf, a fierce critic of Beijing, would slash by 55 percent the $6.6 million budget of the White House's science policy office. The measure was endorsed by a congressional committee this week, but faces more legislative hurdles, and its prospects are unclear. President Barack Obama has sought to deepen ties with China, which underwrites a major chunk of the vast U.S. national debt and is emerging a challenge to American military dominance in the Asia-Pacific region. Among the seemingly benign forms of cooperation he has supported is in science and technology. Last year NASA's administrator visited China, and during a high-profile state visit to Washington by China's President Hu Jintao in January, the U.S. and China resolved to "deepen dialogue and exchanges in the field of space." Wolf, R-Va., argues that cooperation in space would give technological assistance to a country that steals U.S. industrial secrets and launches cyberattacks against the United States. He says Obama's chief

science adviser, John Holdren, violated a clause tucked into budget legislation passed this year that bars the White House Office

of Science and Technology Policy and NASA from technological cooperation with China. He says Holdren did so by meeting

twice with China's science minister in Washington during May. "I believe the Office of Science and Technology Policy is in violation

of the law," Wolf told The Associated Press, adding that cutting its budget is the only response available to him. Wolf chairs a House subcommittee that oversees the office's budget. The punishment he proposes reflects his

deep antipathy toward China, which he accuses of persecuting religious minorities, plundering Tibet and supporting genocide in the Darfur region of Sudan by backing Sudanese President Omar al-Bashir. He described the Obama administration's policy toward the Asian power as a failure and railed against the president for hosting Hu at the White House. Caught at the sharp end is Holdren's office, whose mandate is to develop sound science and technology policies by the U.S. government and pursue them with the public and private sectors and other nations. Holdren told a Congressional hearing chaired by Wolf days before his May meetings with Chinese Science Minister Wan Gang that he would abide by the prohibition on such cooperation with China, but then spelled out a rather large loophole: that it did not apply in instances where it affected the president's ability to conduct foreign policy. At another Congressional hearing shortly afterward, Wolf's annoyance was clear. He

threatened to "zero out" Holdren's office.

Links to CCP Net Benefit

Talent competition is zero-sum – gains in the U.S. hurt ChinaRosalie L. Tung, The Ming & Stella Wong Professor of International Business, Simon Fraser University, Canada, 2008, “Brain circulation, diaspora, and international Competitiveness,” European Management Journal (2008) 26, 298– 304 Science DirectUsing the example of the US and China alone, the above suggests that both countries are, to a large extent, tapping upon the same talent pool for their international competitiveness. Hence, the looming ‘‘war for talent’’. This

competition will likely intensify in the years ahead for several reasons: from the US standpoint, according to the US Bureau of Labor Statistics, there will be a shortfall of ten million workers in the US by 2010 (Manpower White Paper, 2007). In their 2006 survey entitled, Workplace Forecast, the Society for Human Resource Management predicted a ‘‘shortage of qualified candidates in positions that require degrees in science, technology, engineering and mathematics’’ (Schramm, 2006). As noted above, the US currently relies heavily on the decisions of many foreign-born US-educated science and engineering graduates to remain in that country. However, given the growing boundaryless nature of human talent and the concerted efforts made by governments of the COO of

many of the e´migre´s, there is cause for concern in the US. From the Chinese perspective, even though it is the most populous

country in the world, it has a major shortfall in managerial talent. In 2005, Farrell and Grant (2005) at McKinsey noted that

China will need 75,000 executives with international experience, whereas the country only had 5000.

This led them to characterize the situation in China as the ‘‘shortage among plenty’’. This heavy demand for managerial talent comes from two major fronts: One, from foreign-invested enterprises (FIEs) in China – as noted earlier, since 2002, China has been the most attractive destination for FDI from around the world. Furthermore, many of these FIEs have chosen to locate their R&D facilities in China. According to UNCTAD (2005), China is the top choice for R&D expansion, ahead of the US and India. Two, China’s ‘‘go global’’ policy whereby the government seeks to develop 20–25 world-class multinational companies, or national champions, by 2010. Perhaps the most visible symbol of China’s outward FDI activities is Lenovo’s purchase of the IBM’s PC division (Luo and Tung, 2007; Liu, 2008). In her studies of Chinese and non-Chinese students in Canada, Tung (2007) found that: one, many Chinese students in business administration, engineering and computer science are willing to return to work in China, although none of them wanted to work for a Chinese company. Most preferred to work for FIEs or set up their own companies. This finding is consistent with the World HR Lab Report of over 3000 Chinese students overseas (2004) and Tung (2006). Two, many non-Chinese students in Canada were willing to work for Chinese companies in North America, but less so for Chinese companies in China. Three, most Chinese students wanted to work in Shanghai and Beijing, the most developed cities in China. This finding is again consistent with the World HR Lab Report (2004) and Tung (2006). This finding highlights a potential concern, namely that the gap between the developed and less developed regions within China could widen rather than decrease as the Chinese government has hoped for. In a study of ex-host country nationals (EHCNs) (or returnees) to Central and East European (CEE) countries, all of whom were recipients of the Soros Foundation scholarship and hence were required to work for a period of time in their respective home countries to fulfill the terms of that scholarship, Tung and Larazova (2006) found that EHCNs of CEE countries that were high on the human development index (HDI) were more likely to remain in their home country after fulfilling the return requirement of the Soros scholarship. In contrast, many EHCNs of CEE countries that ranked medium on the HDI indicated that they planned to leave their COO after they have satisfied the return requirement. None of the respondents in Tung and Lazarova study came from countries that ranked low on HDI. Thus, this finding also suggests that the greater likelihood of EHCNs to remain in the more developed countries/ regions can exacerbate the gap between the ‘‘have’s’’ (more developed) and ‘‘have-not’s’’ (less developed) countries or regions. These findings have tremendous implications for a country/region’s ability to compete for talent and, ultimately, its competitiveness.