Cornell HKHANE Aff

EMP AFF Index

EMP AFF Index11AC Plan3Solvency4Future Wars Adv5Future Wars Adv6Accidents Adv7Accidents Adv8Accidents Adv9Rogue EMP Adv10Rogue EMP Adv11Rogue EMP Adv12Rogue EMP Adv13Rogue EMP Adv14China Advantage15China Advantage16General Topicality 1217General Topicality 2218General Topicality 1AR 1219General Topicality 1AR 2220More Topicality21Future Wars Conflicts Likely22Future Wars Ext23AT Limited War Winter24Accidents- LoW Bad25AT FS Remains - Russia26AT FS Remains - China27AT FS Remains - Subs28Rogue- Seeking29China Solves NoKo30Rogue Satelites31Rogue- AT No Tech32Rogue- AT No Long Range Missiles33Rogue- AT Uncertain Effects34Rogue- AT Attribution35Iran Ev36NoKo Ev37Terrorism Adv38Terrorism Adv39Terrorism Ext40China- AT Attribution41Space Militarization Adv 142Space Militarization Adv 243Space Militarization Adv 344Space Ext45Data Sharing Adv46Data Sharing Adv47Data Sharing Adv48

1

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Data Sharing- Uniqueness49Data Sharing- Data Needed50Russia Data Sharing (Testing)51Russian ARMS control52Modeling Advantage 153Modeling Advantage- Israel54Modeling Advantage- Israel55Modeling Advantage- China56Modeling Advantage- Solvency57Israeli Strikes Bad58Testing Advantage59EMPacts Econ60EMPacts Heg61EMPacts Earthquake62EMPacts GPS63EMPacts Satelites64EMPacts Healthcare65Morality Advantage66AT Verifiability67AT Verifiability68Verifiability Extensions69AT CMR70Politics Link Answers71Politics Link Answers72Politics Link Turn73AT Geomagnetic Storms74AT Geomagnetic Storms75AT Blackout Alt Causes76AT Alternative EMP forms77AT Protective Measures78AT Protective Measures79AT Low Altitude Nuclear Explosions80CP Theories81AT Hardening CP82AT Hardening CP83AT NMD CP84AT PAROS CP85AT Asteroids PIC86AT Japan Rearm87AT Consult Japan88AT Primacy DA89AT Primacy DA90AT Damage Limitation91AT Damage Limitation92AT Damage Limitation93AT Deterrence DA94AT Deterrence DA95AT Deterrence DA96AT Deterrence DA97

2

Cornell HKHANE Aff

No US Second Strike98Yes US Second Strike99Yes US Second Strike100AT Security Kritik101AT Kritiks102AT Religion K103AT Psychoanalysis104Negative105Not Topical106Tix Links107GOP Link108AT Terrorist EMP109AT State EMP110AT RussiaChina EMP111AT Proliferators EMP112EMPacts False113AT Strait of Hormuz114Alt Cause- Geomagnetic Storms115China Turn116AT PGS Prolif117No Solvency- Conventional EMPs118Conventional EMPs Shift119Conventional EMPs Shift120AT Warfighting Advantage121Nuclear Winter Imagery Good122Regional Nuclear War123Regional Nuclear War125No EMP- Norms Now126Russia CMR Link127Infrastructure CP128NMD CP129LoW key to Stability130

3

Cornell HKHANE Aff

1AC Plan

Plan The United States federal government should ban high-altitude nuclear explosions

4

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Solvency

Plan eliminates electromagnetic pulse warfare

Johnston 9 Robert Wm- PhD in physics from UT-Dallas ldquoHigh-altitude nuclear explosionsrdquo 28 January 2009

Several effects are relatively unique to high altitude bursts Electromagnetic pulse (EMP) is important only for high altitude bursts For such detonations ionization

of the upper atmosphere can produce a brief intense pulse of radio frequency radiation which can damage or disrupt electronic devices For explosions above most of the atmosphere EMP can affect large areas

Ionization of the atmosphere from explosions in the atmosphere can interfere with radar and radio communications for short periods

Charged particles produced by explosions above the Earths atmosphere can be captured by the Earths magnetic field temporarily creating artificial radiation belts that can damage spacecraft and injure astronautscosmonauts in orbit

5

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Future Wars Adv

Future great power wars will be initiated with EMP strikes

Lewallen 2 John- Political Science at Whitman University organizer of the Nuclear Peace Action Group Fulbright Scholarship recipient Public Ocean Access Network ldquoHigh-Altitude Nuclear Warrdquo Nuclear Press p30

ldquoIn all the war games in which I have been present and all the ones which I have studied when I have not been present the attack the red attack always begins with an EMP laydown on blue that is a Soviet laydown on the continental United States by multiple megaton high-altitude burstsrdquo-Dr Lowell Wood Nuclear EMP Hearings p173Any major nuclear war these days seems sure to be a two-stage affair First one or several high-altitude nuclear explosions will occur wiping out all unprotected and imperfectly- protected military and civilian electronics within line of sight of the burst If Dr Lowell Wood and Mr William Graham are correct in their 1999 assessment of US nuclear strategic EMP hardening there might not be much left of the US nuclear retaliatory system after the initial EMP attack 35 The second stage low-altitude nuclear war might or might not coincide with or follow the initial high-altitude nuclear EMP strike Certainly all national leaders should have an EMP-hardened communication system to compare notes after the first high-altitude nuclear bomb goes off

In the absence of EMP strikes mutual interest would de-escalation nuclear war

Quinlan 9 Michael- Director of the Ditchley Foundation former British defence strategist and former Permanent Under-Secretary of State ldquoThinking about nuclear weapons principles problems prospectsrdquo p63

There are good reasons for fearing escalation These include the confusion of war its stresses anger hatred and the desire for revenge reluctance to accept the humiliation of backing down the desire to get further blows in first Given all this the risks of escalation are grave in any conflict between advanced powers and Western leaders during the cold war were rightly wont to emphasize them in the interests of deterrence But this is not to say that they are virtually certain or even necessarily odds-on still less that they are so for all the assorted circumstances in which the situation might arise in a nuclear world to which past experience is only a limited guide It is entirely possible for example that the initial use of nuclear weapons breaching a barrier that has held since 1945 might so horrify both sides in a conflict that they recognized an overwhelming common interest in composing their differences The human pressures in that direction would be very great Even if initial nuclear use did not quickly end the fighting the supposition of inexorable momentum in a developing exchange with each side rushing to overreaction amid confusion and uncertainty is implausible It fails to consider what the situation of the decision-makers would really be Neither side could want escalation Both would be appalled at what was going on Both would be desperately looking for signs that the other was ready to call a halt Both given the capacity for evasion or concealment which modern delivery platforms and vehicles can possess could have in reserve significant forces invulnerable enough not to entail use-or-lose pressures (It may be more open to question as noted earlier whether newer nuclear-weapon possessors can be immediately in that position but it is within reach of any substantial state with advanced technological capabilities and attaining it is certain to be a high priority in the development of forces) As a result neither side can have any predisposition to suppose in an ambiguous situation of fearful risk that the right course when in doubt is to go on copiously launching weapons And none of this analysis rests on any presumption of highly subtle or pre-concerted rationality The rationality required is plain

6

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Future Wars Adv

Nuclear planners know that EMP strikes make limited war impossible and are therefore forced to launch a full out nuclear strike at the onset of conflict

CDI 2 Center for Defense Information ldquoRethinking the Unthinkablerdquo The Washington Post July 28 2002 httpwwwcdiorgnuclearrethinking-prcfm

Yet counterforce theories to Blair were equally removed from operational reality The notion that a nuclear war might be rationally fought over an extended periodmdashthat it might involve a number of nuclear exchanges yet result in negotiations before things really got out of handmdashwas never more than pie-in-the-sky academic nonsense The main reason Blair saysmdashas military leaders have always understood in spadesmdashwas that in the early stages of a nuclear war command and control systems on both sides would be extremely vulnerable to what was called decapitation The pilots and battle staff responsible for the airborne SAC command post known at the time as Looking Glass were acutely aware of the decapitation problem Blair says Once the bombs start falling they used to tell him were totally screwed To make matters worse in the early 70s it was discovered that a single high-altitude nuclear explosion would release an intense pulse of electromagnetic energy that would massively disrupt communications and avionics Planes would be falling out of the sky Some aspects of the command and control system could bemdashand subsequently weremdashhardened against attack But some could not And the systems overall vulnerability Blair says meant that no matter how much concrete was packed around a Minuteman missile riding out a first strike was not a viable basis for strategy So what were the military planners to do The answer was to gear the whole war plan to launch on warning This was not acknowledged publiclymdashit was too controversial Blair saysmdashbut insiders knew that the system was designed to force a quick decision and get the missiles out of their silos as soon as possible after learning of an enemy attack Both sides were prepared to do this though the Soviets didnt put their launch-on-warning system in place Blair learned until that scary period in the early Reagan years Call this deterrence if you want Youve certainly got two sides facing off with each armed so heavily as to give the other pause Or call it counterforce All those missiles can be aimed at military targets and fired preemptively at any time But to Blair the label is beside the point What matters is the decision to place thousands upon thousands of potential Hiroshimas on hair-trigger alert in systems within which even a minor error carries the potential for unimaginable horror With a missile taking only 30 minutes to travel from the Soviet Union to the United Statesmdashand far less if delivered from an offshore submarinemdashthe launch-on-warning timetable is impossibly tight In the North American Aerospace Defense Commands bombproof bunker beneath Colorados Cheyenne Mountain they have three minutes from the time the first sensor report comes in to the time they have to say Were under attack Blair says Three minutes Then comes an emergency conference and an officer in Omaha briefs the president And do you know how much time hes allowed to give that briefing Thirty seconds

Plan solves EMP first-strike paranoia and nullifies the benefits of an all out nuclear war

Lewallen 99 John- Public Ocean Access Network ldquoThe Blackout Bomb What It Means To Yourdquo httpnonuclearnettheblackoutbombhtm

Major Stokes did not connect this statement to high-altitude EMP nuclear weaponry In fact his study of Chinarsquos real and imagined electronic weaponry has only cursory mention of EMP Is the Blackout Bomb so secret and potentially panic-causing that even many military strategists are in the dark about its true significance Dr Lowell Wood noted in verbal testimony at the 1997 EMP hearing in Congress that nuclear strategists in the United States do war simulations based on the presumption that a capable enemy would begin hostilities with high-altitude EMP weaponry Since the Russians and Chinese know that we are ready to lay heavy EMP on them at the outset of hostilities they try to be prepared to do the same to us preferably first Therefore if we careen closer to nuclear conflict with Russia or China the advantage of first-strike EMP escalates rapidly

7

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Accidents Adv

EMP warplans force adversaries to adopt a launch on warning policy creating intense time pressure

Schnurr 9 Avi- Executive Director of Israels Missile Defense Association reviewed US technology policy for the the Department of Defense the White House Homeland Security Council Congress and the National Academy of Sciences ldquoThe EMP Threat A Strategic Review of Geopolitical Risk Scenariosrdquo 27th July 2009 httpwwwhenryjacksonsocietyorgstoriesaspid=1227

When scientists saw this it began a new race in the Cold War in which a nuclear exchange would start with an attack intended to disable or destroy infrastructure During the Cold War the U nited S tates had engineers whose entire professions were simply to do EMP testing either in laboratories or with underground nuclear blasts They also protected hardware and command and control systems from these kinds of effects An example of EMP as a Cold War tactic actually came after the Cold War In 19 95 Norway decided it wanted to do an upper atmosphere weather test so they asked NASA to use one of its decommissioned nuclear boosters Norway notified the countries in the area including Russia that they were going to launch this weather test but the person in Russia responsible for taking this information to the defence authorities was sick and his replacement did not understand the protocol In Russia there are three individuals who can recommend a nuclear attack to the president the Prime Minister the Defense Minister and the Interior Minister each of whom could do so independently On this occasion all three were together meeting with the Russian president when someone ran into the room interrupting that they saw a launch coming from the North Sea The Defense Minister turned to Boris Yeltsin and said ldquoDo it Do it now This is it this is the attack Launch all of our missilesrdquo Yeltsin opened his little black box but did nothing When I first heard this story it made no sense to me Why would all of the warheads be launched with one missile coming in before itrsquos even clear that itrsquos heading toward Russia Obviously if they had waited a little bit longer they would have seen that it was only heading in the general direction but this harkens back to the Cold War mindset Both sides were so worried about the possibility of their infrastructures being destroyed by EMP and that they would not be able to launch a counter strike that the protocol said that if there was one missile coming in and it looked as if it could be an attack a response must be made very early This is the reason there is so little time Fear of an EMP attack in 19 95 almost launched World War III The EMP threat is the reason the US president still walks around with someone following him everyday carrying what they call the presidential ldquofootballrdquo The EMP was a primary focus of the US military during the Cold War Thereafter with a sense that the nuclear threat was diminishing the focus on EMP also diminished However in more recent times the Pentagon is beginning again to take it seriously by hardening infrastructure and adopting all of the EMP Commissionrsquos recommendations

8

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Accidents Adv

Launch on warning coupled with the intense time pressure results in massive nuclear war

Cirincione 9 Joseph- President of the Ploughshares Fund ldquoThe Continuing Threat of Nuclear Warrdquo in Global Catastrophic Risks by Nick Bostrom Milan M Ćirković p 383-4

Although much was made of the 1994 joint decision by Presidents Bill Clinton and Boris Yeltsin to no longer target each other with their weapons this announcement had little practical consequences Target coordinates can be uploaded into a warheads guidance systems within minutes The warheads remain on missiles on a high alert status similar to that they maintained during the tensest moments of the Cold War This greatly increases the risk of an unauthorized or accidental launch Because there is no time buffer built into each states decision-making process this extreme level of readiness enhances the possibility that either sides president could prematurely order a nuclear strike based on flawed intelligence Bruce Blair a former Minuteman launch officer now president of the World Security Institute says If both sides sent the launch order right now without any warning or preparation thousands of nuclear weapons ndash the equivalent in explosive firepower of about 70000 Hiroshima bombs ndash could be unleashed within a few minutes4 Blair describes the scenario in dry but chilling detail If early warning satellites or ground radar detected missiles in flight both sides would attempt to assess whether a real nuclear attack was under way within a strict and short deadline Under Cold War procedures that are still in practice today early warning crews manning their consoles 247 have only three minutes to reach a preliminary conclusion Such occurrences happen on a daily basis sometimes more than once per day if an apparent nuclear missile threat is perceived then an emergency teleconference would be convened between the president and his top nuclear advisers On the US side the top officer on duty at Strategic Command in Omaha Neb would brief the president on his nuclear options and their consequences That officer is allowed all of 30 seconds to deliver the briefing Then the US or Russian president would have to decide whether to retaliate and since the command systems on both sides have long been geared for launch-on-warning the presidents would have little spare time if they desired to get retaliatory nuclear missiles off the ground before they and possibly the presidents themselves were vaporized On the US side the time allowed to decide would range between zero and 12 minutes depending on the scenario Russia operates under even tighter deadlines because of the short flight time of US Trident submarine missiles on forward patrol in the North Atlantic Russias early warning systems remain in a serious state of erosion and disrepair making it all the more likely that a Russian president could panic and reach a different conclusion than Yeltsin did in 19956 As Russian capabilities continue to deteriorate the chances of accidents only increase Limited spending on the conventional Russian military has led to greater reliance on an ageing nuclear arsenal whose survivability would make any deterrence theorist nervous Yet the missiles remain on a launch status begun during the worst days of the Cold War and never turned off As Blair concludes Such rapid implementation of war plans leaves no room for real deliberation rational thought or national leadership Former chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee Sam Nunn agrees We are running the irrational risk of an Armageddon of our own making The more time the United States and Russia build into our process for ordering a nuclear strike the more time is available to gather data to exchange information to gain perspective to discover an error to avoid an accidental or unauthorized launch

9

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Accidents Adv

This causes extinction

Helfand amp Pastore 9 Ira- President of Physicians for Social Responsibility and John- Former President of Physicians for Social Responsibility ldquoUS-Russia nuclear war still a threatrdquo

President Obama and Russian President Dimitri Medvedev are scheduled to Wednesday in London during the G-20 summit They must not let the current economic crisis keep them from focusing on one of the greatest threats confronting humanity the danger of nuclear war Since the end of the Cold War many have acted as though the danger of nuclear war has ended It has not There remain in the world more than 20000 nuclear weapons Alarmingly more than 2000 of these weapons in the US and Russian arsenals remain on ready-alert status commonly known as hair-trigger alert They can be fired within five minutes and reach targets in the other country 30 minutes later Just one of these weapons can destroy a city A war involving a substantial number would cause devastation on a scale unprecedented in human history A study conducted by Physicians for Social Responsibility in 2002 showed that if only 500 of the Russian weapons on high alert exploded over our cities 100 million Americans would die in the first 30 minutes An attack of this magnitude also would destroy the entire economic communications and transportation infrastructure on which we all depend Those who survived the initial attack would inhabit a nightmare landscape with huge swaths of the country blanketed with radioactive fallout and epidemic diseases rampant They would have no food no fuel no electricity no medicine and certainly no organized health care In the following months it is likely the vast majority of the US population would die Recent studies by the eminent climatologists Toon and Robock have shown that such a war would have a huge and immediate impact on climate world wide If all of the warheads in the US and Russian strategic arsenals were drawn into the conflict the firestorms they caused would loft 180 million tons of soot and debris into the upper atmosphere mdash blotting out the sun Temperatures across the globe would fall an average of 18 degrees Fahrenheit to levels not seen on earth since the depth of the last ice age 18000 years ago Agriculture would stop eco-systems would collapse and many species including perhaps our own would become extinct

10

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Rogue EMP Adv

Iran is on the brink of achieving EMP capability to be used against the US

Timmerman 8 Kenneth R- director of the Foundation for Democracy in Iran 2006 Nobel Peace Prize Nominee ldquoUS Intel Iran Plans Nuclear Strike on USrdquo News Max 29 Jul 2008

Iran has carried out missile tests for what could be a plan for a nuclear strike on the United States the head of a national security panel has warned In testimony before the House Armed Services Committee and in remarks to a private conference on missile defense over the weekend hosted by the Claremont Institute Dr William Graham warned that the US intelligence community ldquodoesnrsquot have a storyrdquo to explain the recent Iranian tests One group of tests that troubled Graham the former White House science adviser under President Ronald Reagan were successful efforts to launch a Scud missile from a platform in the Caspian Sea ldquoTheyrsquove got [test] ranges in Iran which are more than long enough to handle Scud launches and even Shahab-3 launchesrdquo Dr Graham said ldquoWhy would they be launching from the surface of the Caspian Sea They obviously have not explained that to usrdquo Another troubling group of tests involved Shahab-3 launches where the Iranians detonated the warhead near apogee not over the target area where the thing would eventually land but at altituderdquo Graham said ldquoWhy would they do thatrdquo Graham chairs the Commission to Assess the Threat to the United States from Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP) Attack a blue-ribbon panel established by Congress in 2001 The commission examined the Iranian tests ldquoand without too much effort connected the dotsrdquo even though the US intelligence community previously had failed to do so Graham said ldquoThe only plausible explanation we can find is that the Iranians are figuring out how to launch a missile from a ship and get it up to altitude and then detonate itrdquo he said ldquoAnd thatrsquos exactly what you would do if you had a nuclear weapon on a Scud or a Shahab-3 or other missile and you wanted to explode it over the United Statesrdquo Several participants in last weekendrsquos conference in Dearborn Mich hosted by the conservative Claremont Institute argued that Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was thinking about an EMP attack when he opined that ldquoa world without America is conceivablerdquo

So is North Korea

Wilson 8 Clay- Specialist in Technology and National Security Foreign Affairs Defense and Trade Division ldquoHigh Altitude Electromagnetic Pulse (HEMP) and High Power Microwave (HPM) Devices Threat Assessmentsrdquo Congressional Research Service March 26 2008

Reportedly several potential US adversaries such as Russia or China are now capable of launching a crippling HEMP strike against the United States with a nuclear-tipped ballistic missile and other nations such as North Korea could possibly have the capability by 201532 Other nations that could possibly develop a capability for HEMP operations over the next few years include United Kingdom France India Israel and Pakistan

11

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Rogue EMP Adv

US First strike capabilities prevent China from curbing Iranian and North Korean nuclear ambitions

Wu 8 Anne- Managing the Atom Project at the Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs at Harvard University ldquoEngage China in Nuclear-Proliferation Issuerdquo Providence Journal October 27

Chinas crucial role has not been diminished since the North Korean denuclearization process started in 2003 even if the United States later started direct dialogue with Pyongyang Indeed it was just reported that Washington expects Pyongyang to submit to China a list of verification steps it would allow in return for being removed from the US terrorism-sponsor list Yet the North Korean issue only represents one piece of international non-proliferation efforts At a time when the global non-proliferation regime is weakened in the absence of consensus on priority and process China and the US share a common interest and responsibility to strengthen measures that prevent the proliferation of nuclear weapons The two countries both agree and disagree on nuclear non-proliferation Internationally the two countries are committed to promoting non-proliferation within frameworks such as the United Nations the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG) Regionally they maintain consultations on the nuclear issue on the Korean Peninsula and in Iran Bilaterally they have intensified dialogues and cooperation on export control and intelligence sharing as well as in other areas Yet differences ranging from strategic to practical issues remain The next president together with the Chinese leadership must lead by example through more effective cooperation The United States and China should be the strongest advocates for reducing the currency of nuclear weapons One thing in the way of their partnership is their differing views on their own nuclear weapons Since going nuclear in 1964 China has been committed to a policy of no-first-use of nuclear weapons and no use of nuclear weapons against non-nuclear states or in nuclear-free zones The United States on the other hand reserves its right as part of its nuclear doctrine to strike others in a pre-emptive manner Many Chinese believe that it is unfair for the US to ask other countries to not develop nuclear weapons while it maintains a huge nuclear stockpile And its policies are counterproductive because they continue to provide legitimacy to nuclear weapons in international affairs The United States and China must bridge their respective perceptions of potential nuclear threat and approaches to non-proliferation in order to work together to tackle the most urgent nuclear problems The United States could engage China more effectively on concerns such as the North Korean and Iranian nuclear issues by recognizing Chinas own interests Denuclearization efforts will not succeed without Chinas support and the perception that the United States is only using Chinas influence to reduce a nuclear threat to itself is detrimental to bilateral relations Regarding North Korea and Iran China envisions nuclear non-proliferation as a broad security concept that encompasses all-around solutions China believes that the fundamental purpose of non-proliferation is to safeguard and promote regional and international peace and security To achieve these goals non-proliferation should be pursued in a diplomatic manner that eschews coercion and other hostile measures China also advocates equilibrium between non-proliferation peaceful uses of nuclear energy and disarmament Because of its perceived balanced stance on North Korea and Iran China occupies the formidable middle ground and could play a constructive role in facilitating a solution that avoids full-scale crisis The United States should encourage China to continue its constructive intervention no nuclear-weapons program no escalating confrontations but continued flexible dialogue Otherwise should any of the parties up the ante the international community will lose a valuable avenue to mitigate the crisis

12

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Rogue EMP Adv

Plan prevents rogue acquisition of EMP weapons by garnering Russian and Chinese support

Lewallen 2 John- Political Science at Whitman University organizer of the Nuclear Peace Action Group Fulbright Scholarship recipient Public Ocean Access Network ldquoHigh-Altitude Nuclear Warrdquo Nuclear Press p26-27

That is not to say that there is no danger of missile attack against the US from ldquorogue statesrdquo which may be defined as ldquopoor nations who do not accept the military dominations of the United Statesrdquo More than thirty nations have Scud missiles capable of flinging a nuclear weapon into orbit over Earth and several nations are known to have nuclear weapons 25 In addition arms in general and nuclear weapons in particular are commodities on the world market Despite many treaties and restrictions deigned to staunch the proliferation of nuclear weapons and missiles among nations there is abundant evidence that nuclear missiles are spreading around 26 The pace and scope of nuclear missile proliferation is largely determined by China Russia and the United States If relations are peaceful in the Nuclear Triangle the three nations are inclined to serve their mutual interests in keeping nuclear missiles out of the hands of other powers If the atmosphere of nuclear confrontation heats up in the Nuclear Triangle nuclear missile proliferation accelerates as the three adversaries are driven to arm allies Russia President Vladimir Putin an adroit player of US fears that ldquorogue nationsrdquo might obtain long-range nuclear missiles has positioned himself so that he can threaten to instantly supply long-range nuclear missiles to Americarsquos worst nightmare du jour be it North Korea Ira Iran Libya Cuba or Syria27

EMP strikes are the most likely scenario for rogue lashout

Schneider 7 Mark- National Institute for Public Policy The Emerging EMP Threat to the United States United States Nuclear Strategy Forum No 6 November 2007

Weapons of mass destruction are potentially attractive to rogue states because these weapons can provide an asymmetric response to US conventional superiority International arms control treaties have made chemical and biological weapons the nearly exclusive prerogative of rogue states However the ability of rogue states to inflict effective attacks even with WMD payloads requires certain technical capabilities in the delivery systems Good accuracy is minimally necessary for WMD attacks on major urban industrial centers and for EMP attacks43 According to Dr Lowell Wood ldquoBecause a very small number ndash potentially one ndash nuclear weapon exploded at high altitude over an American expeditionary force attempting forced entry against a major regional power could potentially tip the balance against our efforts all such powers who contemplate confronting us will be incentivized to develop acquire or retain nuclear weaponryrdquo44 A key conclusion of the EMP commission report was that ldquoA determined adversary can achieve an EMP attack capability without having a high level of [technical] sophisticationrdquo45 From a political standpoint including alliance cohesion the most damaging form of attack by a rogue state would be WMD attacks or EMP attacks launched against the capitals or the major cities of the United States its friends or allies The US National Strategy for Combating the Proliferation of Weapons of Mass Destruction recognized that we must respond to any WMD attack rapidly and that ldquothe primary objective of a response is to disrupt an imminent attack or an attack in progress and eliminate the threat of future attacksrdquo46 The objective of rogue state WMD attacks could possibly be to shock the attacked populations into demanding that the war be ended promptly It would be the intent of such adversaries that such attacks would be so destructive that they would break up coalitions and cause our allies to deny the US critical basing rights Attacks might even be directed against nations that were not active participants in the conflict much as in the way Saddam Hussein attacked Israeli cities during Operation Desert Storm Catastrophic attacks using modern weapons of mass destruction can inflict casualties at levels that have not been experienced since World War II Nuclear EMP attack could be attractive to the less technically sophisticated rogue states because of the extensive damage that could be inflicted on a technologically superior adversary with a relatively crude ballistic missile In order to be able to employ high altitude EMP strikes the rogue state would not have to develop reentry vehicles or ballistic missiles with precision accuracy

13

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Rogue EMP Adv

A rogue EMP strike would collapse the economy

Timmerman 8 Kenneth R- director of the Foundation for Democracy in Iran 2006 Nobel Peace Prize Nominee ldquoUS Intel Iran Plans Nuclear Strike on USrdquo News Max 29 Jul 2008

The commission warned in a report issued in April that the United States was at risk of a sneak nuclear attack by a rogue nation or a terrorist group designed to take out our nationrsquos critical infrastructure If even a crude nuclear weapon were detonated anywhere between 40 kilometers to 400 kilometers above the earth in a split-second it would generate an electro-magnetic pulse [EMP] that would cripple military and civilian communications power transportation water food and other infrastructure the report warned While not causing immediate civilian casualties the near-term impact on US society would dwarf the damage of a direct nuclear strike on a US city ldquoThe first indication [of such an attack] would be that the power would go out and some but not all the telecommunications would go out We would not physically feel anything in our bodiesrdquo Graham said As electric power water and gas delivery systems failed there would be ldquotruly massive traffic jamsrdquo Graham added since modern automobiles and signaling systems all depend on sophisticated electronics that would be disabled by the EMP wave ldquoSo you would be walking You wouldnrsquot be driving at that pointrdquo Graham said ldquoAnd it wouldnrsquot do any good to call the maintenance or repair people because they wouldnrsquot be able to get there even if you could get through to themrdquo The food distribution system also would grind to a halt as cold-storage warehouses stockpiling perishables went offline Even warehouses equipped with backup diesel generators would fail because ldquowe wouldnrsquot be able to pump the fuel into the trucks and get the trucks to the warehousesrdquo Graham said The United States ldquowould quickly revert to an early 19th century type of countryrdquo except that we would have 10 times as many people with ten times fewer resources he said ldquoMost of the things we depend upon would be gone and we would literally be depending on our own assets and those we could reach by walking to themrdquo Graham said America would begin to resemble the 2002 TV series ldquoJeremiahrdquo which depicts a world bereft of law infrastructure and memory In the TV series an unspecified virus wipes out the entire adult population of the planet In an EMP attack the casualties would be caused by our almost total dependence on technology for everything from food and water to hospital care Within a week or two of the attack people would start dying Graham says ldquoPeople in hospitals would be dying faster than that because they depend on power to stay alive But then it would go to water food civil authority emergency services And we would end up with a country with many many people not surviving the eventrdquo Asked just how many Americans would die if Iran were to launch the EMP attack it appears to be preparing Graham gave a chilling reply ldquoYou have to go back into the 1800s to look at the size of populationrdquo that could survive in a nation deprived of mechanized agriculture transportation power water and communication ldquoIrsquod have to say that 70 to 90 percent of the population would not be sustainable after this kind of attackrdquo he said America would be reduced to a core of around 30 million people mdash about the number that existed in the decades after Americarsquos independence from Great Britain The modern electronic economy would shut down and America would most likely revert to ldquoan earlier economy based on barterrdquo the EMP commissionrsquos report on Critical National Infrastructure concluded earlier this year

14

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Rogue EMP Adv

This means Global War

Mead 9 [Walter Russell Senior Fellow in US Foreign Policy at the Council on Foreign Relations New Republic February 4 2009]

So far such half-hearted experiments not only have failed to work they have left the societies that have tried them in a progressively worse position farther behind the front-runners as time goes by Argentina has lost ground to Chile Russian development has fallen farther behind that of the Baltic states and Central Europe Frequently the crisis has weakened the power of the merchants industrialists financiers and professionals who want to develop a liberal capitalist society integrated into the world Crisis can also strengthen the hand of religious extremists populist radicals or authoritarian traditionalists who are determined to resist liberal capitalist society for a variety of reasons Meanwhile the companies and banks based in these societies are often less established and more vulnerable to the consequences of a financial crisis than more established firms in wealthier societies As a result developing countries and countries where capitalism has relatively recent and shallow roots tend to suffer greater economic and political damage when crisis strikes--as inevitably it does And consequently financial crises often reinforce rather than challenge the global distribution of power and wealth This may be happening yet again None of which means that we can just sit back and enjoy the recession History may suggest that financial crises actually help capitalist great powers maintain their leads--but it has other less reassuring messages as well If financial crises have been a normal part of life during the 300-year rise of the liberal capitalist system under the Anglophone powers so has war The wars of the League of Augsburg and the Spanish Succession the Seven Years War the American Revolution the Napoleonic Wars the two World Wars the cold war The list of wars is almost as long as the list of financial crises Bad economic times can breed wars Europe was a pretty peaceful place in 1928 but the Depression poisoned German public opinion and helped bring Adolf Hitler to power If the current crisis turns into a depression what rough beasts might start slouching toward Moscow Karachi Beijing or New Delhi to be born The United States may not yet decline but if we cant get the world economy back on track we may still have to fight

15

Cornell HKHANE Aff

China Advantage

China believes the US will use nuclear EMP attacks in future wars

Pry 5 Dr Peter Vincent- EMP Commission Staff ldquoForeign Views Of Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP) Attackrdquo Before The United States Senate Subcommittee On Terrorism Technology And Homeland Security March 8 2005 httpwwwendtimesreportcomEMP_attackhtml

Many foreign analysts perceive nuclear EMP attack as falling within the category of electronic warfare or information warfare not nuclear warfare Indeed the military doctrines of at least China and Russia appear to define information warfare as embracing a spectrum ranging from computer viruses to nuclear EMP attack For example consider the following quote from one of Chinarsquos most senior military theoristsndashwho is credited by the PRC with inventing information warfarendash appearing in his book World War the Third World WarndashTotal Information Warfare ldquoWith their massive destructiveness longrange nuclear weapons have combined with highly sophisticated information technology and computer technology today and warfare of the looming 21st century information war under nuclearInformation war and traditional war have one thing in common namely that the country which possesses the critical weapons such as atomic bombs will have lsquofirst strikersquo and lsquosecond strike retaliationrsquo capabilities As soon as its computer networks come under attack and are destroyed the country will slip into a state of paralysis and the lives of its people will ground to a halt Therefore China should focus on measures to counter computer viruses nuclear electromagnetic pulse and quickly achieve breakthroughs in those technologies in order to equip China without delay with equivalent deterrence that will enable it to stand up to the military powers in the information age and neutralize and check the deterrence of Western powers including the United Statesrdquo (2001)

This forces China to pursue EMP warfare and space militarization

Kueter 7 Jeff- president of the George C Marshall Institute ldquoChinarsquos Space Ambitions ndash And Oursrdquo The New Atlantis Number 16 Spring 2007 pp 7-22

A more important motivation for Chinarsquos investment in civil and military space is of course the countryrsquos perception of its security environment and its understanding of the evolution of modern warfare The Chinese have concluded from observing recent warsmdashincluding Operation Desert Storm NATO operations in the Balkans and the present wars in Afghanistan and Iraqmdashthat ldquothe PLArsquos past approach to wars which relied heavily on mass mobilization and preparation for all-out warfare are frankly no longer appropriaterdquo according to China scholar Dean Cheng of the Center for Naval Analyses Chinese analysts have reached several conclusions about the characteristics of future wars They will extend from operations on the land at sea and in the air to the electromagnetic spectrum and into outer space They will demand widely spread forces operating over large geographic areas demonstrating precise operational coordination and timing and requiring multiple military services working together Future wars will be characterized by long-range operations involve the decisive use of precision-strike weapons and require much higher rates of expenditure of munitions Operations will occur more rapidly and conflicts will conclude more quickly American strategists have reached similar conclusions as is reflected in the doctrines of the US military services embodied in the annual US defense budgets and written into recent Quadrennial Defense Reviews These conclusions have shaped Chinarsquos overall military modernization efforts as well as its outer-space ambitions

16

Cornell HKHANE Aff

China Advantage

Chinarsquos fears are reflected in their acquisition of space warfare and EMP capabilities

Wilson 8 Clay- Specialist in Technology and National Security Foreign Affairs Defense and Trade Division ldquoHigh Altitude Electromagnetic Pulse (HEMP) and High Power Microwave (HPM) Devices Threat Assessmentsrdquo Congressional Research Service March 26 2008

According to a 1999 DOD report China has been actively pursuing the development of electromagnetic pulse weapons and has devoted significant resources to development of other electronic warfare systems and laser weapons The report also noted that Chinarsquos leaders view offensive counter space weapons and other space-based defense systems as part of inevitable scenarios for future warfare The report noted that China could have as many as 60 ICBMs capable of striking the United States by 2010 Also China may replace 20 of its current ICBMs with a longer-range missile by the end of this decade or sooner36

Space weaponization leads to extinction

Mitchell 1 Gordon R- member of CSIS Working Group on Theater Missile Defenses in the Asia-Pacific Region Fletcher Forum On World Affairs Winter 2001

Deployment of space weapons with pre-delegated authority to fire death rays or unleash killer projectiles would likely make war itself inevitable given the susceptibility of such systems to ldquonormal accidentsrdquo It is chilling to contemplate the possible effects of a space war According to Bowman ldquoeven a tiny projectile reentering from space strikes the earth with such high velocity that it can do enormous damagemdasheven more than would be done by a nuclear weapon of the same size In the same laser technology touted by President Reagan as the quintessential tool of peace David Langford sees one of the most wicked offensive weapons ever conceived ldquoOne imagines dead cities of microwave-grilled peoplerdquo Given this unique potential for destruction it is not hard to imagine that any nation subjected to a space weapon attack would escalate by retaliating with maximum force including use of nuclear biological andor chemical weapons An accidental war sparked by a computer glitch in space could plunge the world into the most destructive military conflict ever seen

Plan solves space weaponization by breaking the feedback loop

Lewallen 2 John- Political Science at Whitman University organizer of the Nuclear Peace Action Group Fulbright Scholarship recipient Public Ocean Access Network ldquoHigh-Altitude Nuclear Warrdquo Nuclear Press Pg34

A strategic feedback loop would seem to make it at least ldquostrongly possiblerdquo that the United States China and Russia have high-powered EMP bombs in Earth orbit today The ability to wipe out an adversaryrsquos electronics continent-wide pretty much any time with a maneuverable EMP satellite bomb would confer major if not overwhelming advantage to the aggressor So if the other guy probably has EMP satellite bombs we need them too

17

Cornell HKHANE Aff

General Topicality 12

We reduce missions

Kristensen 98 Hans M- Director of the Nuclear Information Project at the Federation of American Scientists ldquoNuclear Futures Proliferation of Weapons of Mass Destruction and US Nuclear Strategy British American Security Information Council Basic Research Report 982

Other exotic design concepts stem from the emphasis on underground and deeply buried targets and the concern to limit the collateral damage from the use of nuclear weapons These are all prime features of the counterproliferation effort Research contracts for 1997 outlined by the Defense Special Weapons Agency (DSWA) formerly the Defense Nuclear Agency include adjusting Electromagnetic Pulse ( EMP) data for nuclear weapons to allow war planners to assess wide-area distributed target damages ldquoinflicted by nuclear weaponsrsquo EMP effectsrdquo The project aims to lower the burst height of nuclear weapons EMP by two-thirds from the existing boundary of 100 km altitude to 30 km and to revamp the capability to compute air and ground bursts EMP fields as well as shallow buried bursts The project will also investigate alternatives to potential design modification and weapon delivery with the aim to ldquolimit or minimize collateral damagerdquo from the use of nuclear weapons Models for using EMP to knock out blast and shock-hardened buried targets will be developed in order to ldquodevise a new tool for PC-based weapon lethality prediction and target damage assessment [hellipfor use by] USSTRATCOM and other regional commandshellip for their specific missions applications rdquo112

And the mission is current- strike plans prove

Kristensen 9 Hans M Reply to Response to ldquoPentagon Misses Warhead Retirement Deadlinerdquo October 13 2009 httpwwwfasorgblogssp200910w62php

In theory yes and EMP or High-Altitude EMP (HEMP) has been part of US and Russian nuclear strike planning for decades Some also believe China might also use it in a war But in recent years some people have warned about scenarios ranging from DPRK Iran or terrorist organizations using EMP against the United States or its allies to disrupt critical electronic infrastructure An EMP Commission has even been established by Congress in 2001

We reduce size

Lewallen 2k John- Public Ocean Access Network ldquoThe Blackout Bombrdquo North Coast Express Spring 2000 httpsonicnet~doretkIssues00-03-SPRtheblackhtml

Any future global war is likely to begin with a few Blackout Bombs China Russia the U nited S tates and other nuclear powers have several nuclear missiles and perhaps weaponized satellites designed to lay down EMP over continent-size areas instantaneously While every nation on Earth is vulnerable to attack from the United States the United States is vulnerable indeed defenseless to a secret class of nuclear weapons which has captured the attention of the major nuclear powers--China Russia Britain France and the United States itself--for the past thirty-eight years

18

Cornell HKHANE Aff

General Topicality 22

Plan reduces roles

Buchan et al 3 Glenn C David Matonick Calvin Shipbaugh Richard Mesic ldquoFuture Roles Of US Nuclear Forces Implications For US Strategyrdquo RAND sponsored by the United States Air Force

In addressing the role nuclear weapons might play in contemporary US national security policy the first step is a ldquoback to basicsrdquo review of nuclear weapons mdashwhat they do what makes them unique and how they have served US security interests in the past WHAT NUCLEAR WEAPONS DO The most fundamental characteristic of nuclear weapons is their almost unlimited destructive power That destructiveness manifests itself in two ways First is the potentially apocalyptic effects of a large-scale war fought with nuclear weapons That obviously has been the driving force behind movements to reduce or eliminate nuclear weapons since the dawn of the nuclear age Second is the enormous destructive power that can be put into a small package which can then be delivered by any one of a number of means A single nuclear detonation can destroy virtually any individual target or lay waste to large areas (eg destroy a city) That characteristic changed the nature of war dramatically It appeared to make defense in the traditional sense virtually impossible because of the damage that even a single nuclear weapon that leaked through defenses could cause Also when coupled with long-range delivery systems (particularly long-range bombers and ballistic missiles) nuclear weapons allowed those possessing them to destroy an enemyrsquos homeland without necessarily having to defeat its military forces first Thus nuclear weapons if used effectively could prevent an enemyrsquos military from achieving the most fundamental objective of any military establishment protecting its homeland That changed the traditional concepts of warEven in strictly military terms nuclear weapons are simply more effective than other weapons in destroying targets Table 21 shows some classes of targets against which nuclear weapons are particularly effective As experience with the weapons grew so did the range of potential applications Some took advantage of special effects of nuclear weapons other than just heat and blast Electromagnetic pulse (EMP) and radar and communications blackout are examples These characteristics of nuclear weapons offered attractive strategic advantages to those who owned them bull Coercion of enemies by threat or use of nuclear weapons (eg the US nuclear attacks on Japan to coerce Japan to surrender unconditionally and end World War II)bull Deterrence of a range of actions by threat of nuclear use bull A means of offsetting an imbalance of conventional forces (eg the US rationale for its nuclear posture in Europe the original motivation for the Swedish nuclear weapons program which never came to fruition)

19

Cornell HKHANE Aff

General Topicality 1AR 12

Extend that we reduce the missions of the nuclear weapons arsenal Kristensen indicates STRATCOM has specific missions employing EMPs Additionally Dunn indicates that high-altitude nuclear explosions have been in our strike plans since the early stages of the Cold War

Additionally war games prove we have EMP missions in early stages of nuclear warfare

Berry 8 Ken Research Coordinator ICNND ldquoNew Weapons Technologyrdquo International Commission on Nuclear Non-proliferation and Disarmament

An aggressor state deploying such weapons could destroy the vast majority of a target countryrsquos electronics including computers cars phones and the power grid All nuclear armed states have the capacity to achieve this and it has been estimated that as little as three high altitude nuclear explosions could blanket an area the size of continental US40 Western Europe Australia or Brazil Open source material has indicated that the US China France and Russia have all used the tactic of an EMP as a surprise first strike in war games 41 Chinese military writings have described scenarios where EMPmdashpresumably non-nuclearmdashis used against US aircraft carriers in a conflict over Taiwan42 A survey of worldwide military and scientific literature found widespread knowledge about EMP and its potential military utility in countries including Taiwan Israel Egypt India Pakistan Iran and North Korea Moreover some terrorist organizations have apparently sought information relating to EMP produced by nuclear weapons as well as on the technology of directed energy weapons These are small non-nuclear weapons that produce an EMP-like effect but over a very much more restricted area43

Extend that we reduce size- Lewallen says we have nuclear missiles designed for HANEs

And missiles are part of the nuclear weapons arsenal

Los Alamos National Laboratory 9 httpwwwlanlgovnatlsecuritynuclearstockpile Accessed 08-05-09The stockpile also called the nuclear arsenal refers to a countrys supply of readily available nuclear weapons The term nuclear weapons refers to the explosive warheads and the bombs and missiles that can deliver them to enemy targets

Extend that we reduce roles Buchan says that EMP attacks perform vital roles of the nuclear arsenal because of their unique effect including coercion deterrence and asymmetric warfare

Here is evidence that high altitude EMP strikes are key tools in asymmetric warfare

Weston 9 Maj Scott A USAF ldquoExamining Space Warfare Scenarios Risks and US Policy Implicationsrdquo Air amp Space Power Journal - Spring 2009

The United States has just one counterspace weaponmdashan electronic counter communication system specifically designed and fielded with the intent of disrupting enemy satellite communications23 Recently however we successfully utilized the Standard Missile 3 in a dual-use role as a kinetic ASAT weapon24 Although the political repercussions from creating additional space debris will likely prohibit further tests the missile and supporting systems are already fielded in an antiballistic missile (ABM) role therefore we consider it an ASAT system that we could field in the near term The U nited S tates can also conduct asymmetric space attacks (eg an EMP produced by exploding a US nuclear-tipped ballistic missile in space ) Since the United States possesses nearly half of all orbiting satellites such an indiscriminate attack would do more harm to US interests than to those of the enemy But what about our opponentsrsquo capability Does a space weapon ldquogaprdquo exist

20

Cornell HKHANE Aff

General Topicality 1AR 22

Lean aff on topicality the information is highly classified making it impossible for us to definitively prove US nuclear EMP posture

Ruppe 4 David ldquoPlausibility of EMP Threat Classified Expert Saysrdquo Global Security Newswire September 24 2004

When asked following his presentation whether US scientists have developed and tested a kilotons-scale weapon to demonstrate its EMP capability Wood said he could not comment The commission conducted assessments of what the United States and others know about such weapons and questions about such matters were addressed in a classified session with members of Congress following a public presentation of the commissionrsquos report he said ldquoWe presented in open session then we went up and spent another few more hours and presented in closed session where they asked and were given answersrdquo to such questions he said ldquoBut they are members and it was a tightly closed environment a doom roomrdquo he said ldquoIrsquod be willing to take the chance to inform the American people about what the situation is but Irsquom forbidden by law to do sordquo

EMP strikes play a prominent mission in the 2001 NPRrsquos tailored deterrence

Stearns-Boles 7 Sherry L- Air Force Space Command (AFSPC) Chair to Air University (AU) ldquoThe Future Role And Need For Nuclear Weapons In The 21st Centuryrdquo US Air Force 2007

The first official reference to tailored deterrence occurred in the 2001 NPR Spring and Gudgel assessed the tailored deterrence doctrine for nuclear weapons in accordance with the latest NPR [a prescription for] a flexible nuclear weapons policy This is necessary in todaylsquos environment of multiple players with different strengths which has replaced the two-player model of the Cold War [N]ew military requirements should be developed to address this changed environment and to ensure a modern strategic force that is capable of dealing with different missions- Leadership and command and control targets which operate from heavily fortified underground locations- Hostile nuclear coalitions which may include rogue states failed or failing states and powerful terrorist groups based in sanctuary states- New nuclear-armed allies which may or may not have confidence in the United Stateslsquo deterrent ability and- Electromagnetic pulse (EMP) weapons an effective deterrent that adversaries may not be able to wield 129

The New Triad includes EMP strikes

Guthe 2 Kurt- Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments ldquoThe Nuclear Posture Review How Is the ldquoNew Triadrdquo Newrdquo 2002

Differences in the damage mechanisms of New Triad strike capabilities should promote effects based targeting Effects-based targeting is intended not simply to destroy targets but to do so in a way that produces broader military political economic and social effects that further operational and strategic objectives106 The damage mechanisms for nuclear weapons include blast thermal radiation nuclear radiation and electromagnetic phenomena (electromagnetic pulse for example ) Those for nonnuclear munitions are blast fragmentation penetration and fire Damage mechanisms for offensive information operations include software tools (such as malicious code) that manipulate or destroy computer networks within military economic or telecommunications infrastructures and directed energy from high-power microwave weapons that can knock out military or commercial electronic systems Because their damage mechanisms have disparate direct (or first-order) physical effects on targets nuclear weapons nonnuclear munitions and information operations must be compared and traded off in terms of their capabilities for achieving indirect (or higher-order) effects that impair the ability or weaken the will of the enemy to fight The problem is not one of calculating how many more high-explosive weapons are needed in lieu of a single nuclear weapon to produce sufficient blast to destroy a given target Instead the problems will lie in acquiring more detailed intelligence and better understanding of critical vulnerabilities in targets and target systems predicting the effects when different strike capabilities are applied against these vulnerabilities assessing actual effects under wartime conditions (the consequences of offensive information operations may be especially hard to ascertain)

determining the linkages among effects outcomes and objectives and deciding how best to employ the various means of attack

21

Cornell HKHANE Aff

More Topicality

Kristensen 97 Hans M- Director of the Nuclear Information Project at the Federation of American Scientists ldquoTargets of Opportunityrdquo Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists SeptemberOctober 1997

The Defense Special Weapons Agencys 1997 projects include adjusting electromagnetic pulse (EMP) data for nuclear weapons to allow war planners to assess the damage that would be inflicted by nuclear weapons EMP effects The project will also investigate possible design modification and delivery methods that could ldquolimit or minimize collateral damagerdquo Models for using EMP to knock out hardened targets will be developed to devise a new tool for PC-based weapon lethality prediction and target damage assessmentsrdquo28

Dunn 6 JR- editor of the International Military Encyclopedia ldquoThe EMP Threat ElectroMagnetic Pulse Warfarerdquo American Thinker April 21 2006

EMP was discovered as a byproduct of the Starfish Prime nuclear test on July 9 1962 A 15 megaton bomb set off 240 miles over the Central Pacific blew up street lights and TV sets in Hawaii 1000 miles away created a mock aurora visible even further and destroyed a number of orbiting satellites including the Telstar I the pioneering telecommunications satellite In short order nuclear attack plans were modified to commence with an EMP strike over enemy territory Military electronics underwent a hardening process with the development of chips and other components resistant to EMP Today even military jets and missiles are constructed to withstand the effect (The same processes would work for civilian application as well but in most cases would be prohibitively expensive)

The US is continuing to develop nuclear EMP weapons

Merkle 97 Major Scott W- Air Command and General Staff College Maxwell Air Force Base ldquoNon-Nuclear EMP Automating the Military May Prove a Real Threatrdquo Military Intelligence Professional Bulletin

So to this extent the plot of Goldeneye is plausible Any of several nations with nuclear weapons and the capacity to launch them into space including the United States Russia China and even Israel could conceivably pulse us back to shall we say a simpler time when operations orders were done orally with a sandtable instead of with the high-speed graphics and charts that turn into an encyclopedia that few people care to read Even more unsettling however is the fact that the US Defense Technology Plan confirms that development of advanced EMP weapons continues to this day and not just by the Americans According to a report drafted by conservative members of the French National Assembly in 1992 EMP weapons testing was a recommended goal during Frances 1995 underground nuclear tests6

22

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Future Wars Conflicts Likely

There probability of great power nuclear war in the next 50 years is 40 percent (1 - 9950)

Hellman 8 Dr Martin- Stanford Professor of Engineering 2008 ldquoRisk Analysis of Nuclear Deterrencerdquo httpwwwnuclearriskorgpaperpdf

Since conditional probabilities were used they can be multiplied yielding an estimated range of (2E-4 5E-3) for lCMTC the failure rate of deterrence based on just this one failure mechanism The upper limit 5E-3 is within a factor of two of my estimate that the failure rate of deterrence from all sources is on the order of one percent per year and even the lower limit is well above the level that any engineering design review would find acceptable Because this estimate is based on a simplified time invariant model it does not apply to the current point in time when relations between the US and Russia are significantly better than they were on average during the last 50 years However that does not invalidate its conclusions Russian-American relations are deteriorating and new trigger mechanisms are coming into playmdashnotably nuclear proliferation terrorism and the expansion of NATO right up to the Russian bordermdashmaking it possible that the next 50 years could be even more dangerous than the last Furthermore atypical times have a disproportionate effect on risk A significant fraction of the total risk during the last 50 years occurred during the 13 days of the Cuban missile crisismdasha period that constituted just 007 of that time period Because crises produce so much of the overall risk it is important to look beyond todayrsquos relatively benign world and also consider the rare disruptive times when events

The past conflicts our Hellman analysis investigates arose for a variety of reasons They cannot access solvency for all possible scenarios of conflict

Hellman 8 Dr Martin- Stanford Professor of Engineering 2008 ldquoRisk Analysis of Nuclear Deterrencerdquo httpwwwnuclearriskorgpaperpdf

As noted above there have been at least three possible initiating events in the first 50 years of nuclear deterrence the Cuban missiles in 1962 President Reaganrsquos threat to reimpose a naval blockade of Cuba in the 1980s and the current deployment of an American missile defense system in Eastern Europe Taking the average rate of occurrence of these possible initiating events three in 50 years results in an estimate lIE = 006 A higher estimate would result if other crises were included as possible initiating events Examples include the Berlin crisis of 1961 the Six-Day War of 1967 and the Yom Kippur War of 1973 all of which involved at least implied nuclear threats To temper the possibility of this article being seen as alarmist it only considers the first three possible initiating events and therefore uses lIE = 006

23

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Future Wars Ext

Unfortunately future great power wars will be initiated with EMP strikes

Lewallen 2k John- Public Ocean Access Network ldquoThe Blackout Bombrdquo North Coast Express Spring 2000 httpsonicnet~doretkIssues00-03-SPRtheblackhtml

Any future global war is likely to begin with a few Blackout Bombs China Russia the United States and other nuclear powers have several nuclear missiles and perhaps weaponized satellites designed to lay down EMP over continent-size areas instantaneously While every nation on Earth is vulnerable to attack from the United States the United States is vulnerable indeed defenseless to a secret class of nuclear weapons which has captured the attention of the major nuclear powers--China Russia Britain France and the United States itself--for the past thirty-eight years

EMP-gtwar

Lewallen 2 John- Political Science at Whitman University organizer of the Nuclear Peace Action Group Fulbright Scholarship recipient Public Ocean Access Network ldquoHigh-Altitude Nuclear Warrdquo Nuclear Press Pg43

If it comes the next global war almost certainly will begin with high-altitude nuclear EMP Anything done or refrained from to reduce international conflict and promote international cooperation will help humanity avoid the awesome setback of global war The nation-state system itself is perhaps the most dangerous factor auguring high-altitude nuclear war It is perhaps amazing that we humans have gone the past fifty-five years without anyone blowing up a nuclear bomb How much longer can we tickle the dragonrsquos tail before the fundamental flaw of competing armies with nuclear weapons finishes us off The United States fond of calling itself the worldrsquos only superpower has the same tendency as past military empires (although not a self-acknowledged empire) a strong and perhaps inevitable drive to move from world preeminence to world domination The US military-industrial complex is set up to endlessly conceive design produce and deploy new strategic weaponry

24

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT Limited War Winter

a) Quinlin indicates that nuclear war would deescalate after the first detonation War wouldnrsquot escalate to even 100 nukes

b) Nuclear testing disproves their theory

Sublette 1 Carey ldquoGallery of US Nuclear Testsrdquo 6 August 2001 httpnuclearweaponarchiveorgUsaTestsBetween 16 July 1945 and 23 September 1992 the United States of America conducted (by official count) 1054 nuclear tests and two nuclear attacks The number of actual nuclear devices (aka bombs) tested and nuclear explosions is larger than this but harder to establish precisely Some devices that were tested failed to produce any noticeable explosion (some by design some not) other tests (by official definition) were actually multiple device detonations It is not clear whether all multiple device tests have yet been identified and enumerated

c) Their study assumes countervalue targeting which is important because only cities are ignited into firestorms Great powers use counterforce targeting which targets silos in the middle of the desert or Siberia

Madrigal 9 Alexis ldquolsquoRegionalrsquo Nuclear War Would Cause Worldwide Destructionrdquo WIRED Science April 7Millsrsquo work which appears online today in the Proceedings of the National Academies of Science used a model from National Center for Atmospheric Research to look at the impact of throwing 5 million metric tons of black carbon or soot into the atmosphere He found that when a cluster of cities are burning together they end up creating their own weather pumping soot 20000 feet into the atmosphere Once there sunlight would heat the smoke and drive it up 260000 feet above the earthrsquos surface

d) Robock admits limited nuclear war would not cause winter Our Helfand evidence indicates 1000 nukes are needed to cause winter

Harrell 9 Eben ldquoRegional Nuclear War and the Environmentrdquo TIME Jan 22 2009Alan Robock a Professor in the Department of Environmental Sciences at Rutgers University who participated in the original nuclear winter research recently completed a study on the results of a nuclear war between India and Pakistan He spoke with TIME from his office in New Brunswick New Jersey CONTINUED Your study predicts mass cooling With all the heat and radioactivity of the explosions why wouldnt nuclear war warm the planet It has nothing to do with the radioactivity of the explosions mdash although that would be devastating to nearby populations The explosions would set off massive fires which would produce plumes of black smoke The sun would heat the smoke and lift it into the stratosphere mdash thats the layer above the troposphere where we live mdash where there is no rain to clear it out It would be blown across the globe and block the sun The effect would not be a nuclear winter but it would be colder than the little ice age [in the 17th and 18th centuries] and the change would happen very rapidly mdash over the course of a few weeks

25

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Accidents- LoW Bad

Hair trigger alert creates a high risk of extinction

Blair 8 Bruce G- president of the Center for Defense Information and World Security Institute former senior fellow in foreign policy for the Brookings Institution and former Minuteman officer ldquoDe-alerting Strategic Forcesrdquo Reykjavik Revisited Steps Toward a World Free of Nuclear Weapons published by the Hoover Institute httpmediahooverorgdocuments9780817949211_ch2pdf

There are a host of reasons why removing forces from launch ready alert and abandoning archaic nuclear war-fighting strategies are urgent priorities Beyond the familiar arguments about the danger of accidental nuclear attack triggered by false alarms and unauthorized launches by unreliable personnel lurk shadowy new threats stemming from terrorist scenarios and growing cybernetic threats to the nuclear command and warning systems In an era of terrorism and information warfare staking the survival of humanity on the assumption that imperfect human and technical systems of nuclear command and control will forever prevent a disastrous breakdown of safeguards against mistaken or unauthorized use of nuclear weapons is simply imprudent in the extreme An in-depth discussion of the potential exploitable weaknesses in nuclear command systems is beyond the scope of this analysis but a few general observations are pertinent First many of the deficiencies are unknown some will never be found and others will not be discovered until it is too late The complexity of command systems prevents a full reckoning of the risks run by hair-trigger postures Periodic investigations routinely discover glaring weaknesses however For instance a Pentagon investigation conducted by an independent commission in the 1990s at the behest of then Sen Sam Nunn to evaluate the effectiveness of US nuclear safeguards against unauthorized launch found dozens of major deficiencies14 This commission recommended a multitude of remedies including installing a special new safeguard on Trident subsmdashthe inner safe described earliermdashto create a technical barrier to unauthorized launch Second many of the deficiencies that are identified and addressed turn out not to have been corrected The introduction of ldquoenable coderdquo devices into Minuteman launch centers in the 1960s is a case in point In theory the devices required launch crews to receive an eight-digit code from higher authority in order to arm their missilesrsquo warheads prior to launch In practice the Strategic Air Command unbeknownst to higher authority (such as former Defense Secretary Robert McNamara who initiated and pressed for this safeguard) configured the devices so that they were always set to all zerosmdashthat was the secret password known to all launch crews This circumvention persisted until 1976 when actual codes were finally introduced In the interim the posture ran a higher risk of unauthorized launch by crew members or others who might have gained access to the launch centers including terrorists15 Third the nuclear command systems today operate in an intense information battleground on which more than 20 nations including Russia China and North Korea have developed dedicated computer attack programs16 These programs deploy viruses to disable confuse and delay nuclear command and warning processes in other nations The US Strategic Command is no exception Information warfare is now one of its core missions At the brink of conflict nuclear command and warning networks around the world may be besieged by electronic intruders whose onslaught degrades the coherence and rationality of nuclear decision making The potential for perverse consequences with computer-launched weapons on hair-trigger is clear Other information warfare programs are designed to infiltrate and collect information on for example the schedule of the movement of nuclear warheads during peacetime Hacking operations of these sorts are increasing exponentially as the militaries of the world increasingly depend on computer and communications networks The number of attempts by outside hostile actors to break into Defense Department networks has surged by tenfold in the past couple of years Hostile intrusion attempts against Pentagon computer systems now run in the neighborhood of 1000 per day (China is especially active) What is worse some of this expanding illicit penetration involves insiders creating a whole new dimension to the ldquoinsiderrdquo threat to nuclear systems If insiders with knowledge of special passwords or other sensitive information related to nuclear weapons activities collude with outsiders the integrity of nuclear command and control systems and safeguards against the unauthorized launch of nuclear weapons on launch-trigger alert may well be compromised The guiding principle of nuclear safeguards during the past 50 yearsmdashthe twoman rulemdashmay be obsolete in the age of information warfare The notion that having a second person present during any sensitive nuclear operation would prevent an accidental or intentional nuclear incident may have been sound during the labor-intensive and analog dominated era of nuclear command and control but in the modern age of information warfare new safeguards may be needed to prevent the electronic compromise of missiles on hair-trigger alert Adding terrorists to this equation gives further reason to believe that the Cold War nuclear postures are counterproductivemdashthey exacerbate rather than alleviate nuclear problems and they are an accident waiting to happen There is a possibility that terrorists could spoof early warning sensors and thereby engender false alarms that precipitate nuclear overreactions The possibility also exists that terrorists possibly with insider help may get inside the command and communications networks controlling nuclear forces They might gain information useful to interdicting and capturing weapons or unauthorized actors might discover ways to inject messages into the circuits 17 Again the wisdom of keeping nuclear forces ready to fly instantaneously upon receipt of a short stream of computer signals is dubious

26

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT FS Remains - Russia

Without EMP hundreds of strategic weapons would have to be armed- Russia would notice and disperse

Yarynich amp Starr 7 Valery- Professor of the Academy for Military Sciences and Steven- Engineers and Scientists Against Proliferation ldquoNuclear Primacy is a Fallacyrdquo Global Research March 4 2007

Third in order to conduct a first strike it is necessary to implement a number of organizational and technical procedures within the strategic nuclear forces This is because in peacetime there are numerous procedural and technological blocks in place which are designed to protect nuclear weapons against human error accidents and sabotage In order to remove such barriers as a preliminary step towards launching a nuclear first strike it would require the participation of a significant number of crews on duty working at different operational levels The implementation of all the above mentioned circumstances as preparations for a ldquosurpriserdquo first strike would be technically impossible to hide Therefore the opposite side would have a certain amount of time to raise the combat readiness of its strategic nuclear forces If Russia did that then as Lieber and Press recognize themselves nuclear retaliation is inevitable

Mobile missiles make first strike impossible without EMPs

Podvig 6 Pavel- Research Associate at the Center for International Security and Cooperation at Stanford University ldquoNuclear Exchange Does Washington Really Have (or Want) Nuclear Primacyrdquo Foreign Affairs SeptemberOctober 2006

Lieber and Press are right to state that Russia may end up having as few as 150 land-based missiles by the end of the decade But about half of those ICBMs would probably be road-mobile Topols and Topol-Ms which if operated properly would have a good chance of surviving a first strike Lieber and Press dismiss Russias mobile missiles by saying that they rarely patrol In reality very little is known about Russias mobile-missile patrol rates and although it is quite plausible that they are low it is a stretch to assume that they are zero

EMP first strike capability is uniquely dangerous because it requires only a few warheads making the threshold for responding to false warnings much lower

Non EMP first strike requires thousands of warheads which will show up on EWS

Yarynich amp Starr 7 Valery- Professor of the Academy for Military Sciences and Steven- Engineers and Scientists Against Proliferation ldquoNuclear Primacy is a Fallacyrdquo Global Research March 4 2007

Lieber and Press also assume that the Russian Early Warning System will be completely unable to reveal a massed American attack capable of destroying all Russian nuclear forces ldquoA critical issue for the outcome of a US attack [they say] is the ability of Russia to launch on warning (ie quickly launch a retaliatory strike before its forces are destroyed) It is unlikely that Russia could do thisrdquo We believe this important conclusion demands more serious calculations than the mere statement that ldquoit is unlikelyrdquo Its necessary to prove that the Russian EWS will be completely incapable of revealing such massed American attack which is capable of destroying all Russian nuclear forces

27

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT FS Remains - China

Lack of perfect Intel makes a first strike on China impossible post plan

Aby 7 The Liberal 7142007 non-profit internationalist site committed to the dissipiation of information pertaining toworld politics social issues cultures travel tips local customs et el ldquoChinarsquos MAD Nuclear Deterrence Against USArdquo lthttpwwwabytheliberalcomworld-politicschinas-mad-nuclear-deterrance-usagt

Chinarsquos nuclear force is based on a lsquoNo First Uselsquo policy formulated by its erstwhile President Mao Zedong This makes sense as China could not launch a first strike against US without facing obliteration in a strike-back by US The small quantity of nuclear warheads and strategic missiles that China possesses would make a Chinese attack on US nuclear facilities futile as China has neither the accuracy of missiles nor the number of warheads required to destroy the all the US facilities On the other hand United States with its improvised and highly accurate strategic missiles (Trident and Minuteman) could strike and destroy over 75 of Chinarsquos nuclear facilities with just about 2-4 of its nuclear and missile arsenal spent But even in the event of a war a successful destruction of 75-80 of Chinarsquos nuclear facilities leaves at least 20-25 surviving which can be used as a retaliatory attack against the United States A 100 destruction of Chinarsquos nuclear facilities would be highly unlikely considering the logistical impossibility of targeting and destroying all of Chinarsquos mobile and SILO launched nuclear ICBMs Since China canrsquot destroy US nuclear facilities as a retaliatory resort it would strike what hurts USA most - its people This is primarily the reason why US cities have been targets of Chinese ICBMs for the last few decades A DF 5A (Dong Feng) missile launched from hardened or mobile SILOs in Chinarsquos Hunan province will have most of West and Central US in its reach A 12000 km DF 5 Mod 2 goes even further including east coast cities like New York and Atlanta in its range if a polar trajectory is followed A DF 5A ICBM can carry a 35 MT (Megaton) thermonuclear warhead The 35 MT warhead detonated at a height of 2500 meters would have a blast radius of 7 km exposing 154 km2 of the ground surface to a blast overpressure of 10 psi or higher In addition to the immediate energy shockwaves of the blast such a high yield H-Bomb would also cause widespread radiation fallouts and heated firestorms due to the rapid changes in the atmospheric pressure which follow such an explosion If a single such warhead is detonated over a busy megapolis like New York Chicago or Los Angeles at least 15 million people would be eliminated immediately during the explosion and a further million within another 72 hours due to radiation burns sickness and firestorms If only 5 of the DF 5As are launched against 5 US cities and 4 of them successfully strike the US mainland more than 10 million people would face extermination According to US DoD Reports to the Congress in 2006 a DF5A Mod2 can be MIRVed with 6 warheads of 250 KT each In such a case if each warhead detonates 1500 metres above the ground the total blast radius (10 psi) of all the six warheads would exceed 21 kms bringing over 1386 km2 under coverage The fatalities from a single such strike on a city like New York or Chicago would exceed 5 million at the bare minimum In such a scenario if 4 of these missiles with 24 warheads strike 4-10 US cities with an accuracy of 83 at least 14 million people would be annihilated in these cities This still leaves out the DF 31A ICBMs and JL-1 SLBMs which could strike US targets and further the damage From both the cases it can be understood than even a retaliatory second strike by China can inflict severe devastation on the continental US These are just bare conservative estimates reality could be much more deadly and devastating with 40-100 million casualties Chinese military strategists can easily do this calculation themselves and as such it becomes apparent why China is so sure that its relatively small number of ICBMs act as an adequate deterrent against the United States or even India and Russia for that matter The threat of even a few surviving nuclear missiles hitting the United States serves as a robust deterrent for the United States China would not consider a first strike either as it would face total annihilation due to the massive US nuclear and missile stockpile Thus the MAD balance is maintained between these two countries one wary of the other despite their significant disparity in nuclear weapons stockpile and delivery systems

28

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT FS Remains - Subs

China has subs

Stephen Herzog British American Security Information Council August 2008 ldquoThe Dilemma between Deterrence and Disarmament Moving beyond the Perception of China as a Nuclear Threatrdquo Basic Papers lthttpwwwbasicintorgpubsPapersBP57pdfgt

The Jin-class is Beijingrsquos replacement for the defunct Type 092-class (NATO designation Xiaclass) SSBN The Xia-class was Chinarsquos first nuclear-powered ballistic missile-capable submarine and was a resounding failure The PRC only produced two of these SSBNs and they did not conduct patrols outside of Chinese territorial waters27 The Jin-class is silentmdashdue to its nuclear power sourcemdashand is virtually invulnerable to a potential first-strike it ensures that the PRC has a sea-based deterrent to complement its land-based strategic nuclear forces Since China finds itself in a position of significant numerical warhead inferiority to the United Statesmdash possibly facing a first-strike in the event of a confrontationmdashthe Jin-class SSBN could give the Sino leadership confidence in their second-strike capability If this is the case rather than being viewed as a threat Chinese deployment of SSBNs could be seen as a confidence-building stabilizing factor in Chinarsquos relationship with the West While the PRC is known to have three commissioned Jin-class SSBNs the United States United Kingdom and France have a total of 22 SSBNs many of which are armed with MIRV-equipped SLBMs28

Russia has them too

NTI 9ldquoRussia Restores Nuclear-Armed Submarine Patrolsrdquo Global Security Wednesday Feb 18 2009Russia might be maintaining continuous nuclear-armed submarine patrols for the first time in 10 years the Federation of American Scientists announced yesterday (see GSN Feb 13) The number of patrols by ballistic missile submarines declined steadily after reaching a high of more than 100 in 1984 and dropped more steeply after the collapse of the Soviet Union In 2002 there were zero Russian missile submarine patrols Russia last year however conducted 10 patrols the most since 1998 That raises the possibility that Russia is always keeping at least one boat at sea for nuclear deterrence said FAS nuclear expert Hans Kristensen

EMPs threaten sub survivability

Graham 4 Dr William R- Deputy Administrator of NASA The report of the Commission to Assess the Threat to the United States From Electromagnetic Pulse Attackrdquo July 22 2004

Mr Langevin Have you assessed the threat of EMP to our surface fleet and submarines Do submarines have a greater likelihood of retaining operational capabilities if they are underwater during an EMP strike Dr Graham The EMP Commission did consider the threat of EMP to surface vessels and submarines Ballistic Missile Submarines are designed and built to survive an EMP attack Care is taken when the ship is modified or equipment added or upgraded to insure that survivability is maintained Particular attention is paid to the potential vulnerability introduced when the ship is at periscope depth or trailing a wire antenna Submarines do have a greater likelihood of retaining operational capabilities if they are underwater during an EMP attack and not trailing an antenna which can couple energy into the submerged vessel However if land-based communications are impacted the ship may survive but not be capable of receiving orders and therefore accomplishing its mission because the sender cant send The survivability of the surface fleet is uncertain without testing and a submarine in port is a surface ship

29

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Rogue- Seeking

Rogue states are seeking EMP capability

McNeill amp Weitz 8 Jena Baker- homeland security policy analyst at The Heritage Foundation and Richard- Senior Fellow and Director of the Center for Political-Military Analysis at Hudson Institute ldquoElectromagnetic Pulse (EMP) Attack A Preventable Homeland Security Catastropherdquo Heritage Foundation Backgrounder 2199 httpwwwheritageorgresearchhomelandsecuritybg2199cfm_ftn19

The range of actors that might attempt an EMP attack against the United States is obviouslymdashand distressinglymdashlarge and includes conventional military regimes rogue states with limited conventional military capabilities and terrorist groups that seek to inflict catastrophic damage on America Both Russia and China have dabbled in EMP technology for decades There is evidence that suggests that certain Russian nuclear weapons have already been optimized to generate enhanced EMP effects[16] Just this year Russian scientists claimed to have developed a compact apparatus that can fit on a dining table The electromagnetic pulse associated with this device could amount to billions of watts of power in a single platform[17] Analysts have also identified Chinese military writings that discuss using EMP weapons in international conflicts[18] For countries less dependent on modern technologies and electronics including both rogue states like Iran and North Korea as well as stateless terrorist groups EMP provides a potential way to attack the United States through asymmetric means EMPs could be used to circumvent Americas superior conventional military power while reducing vulnerability to retaliation in kind It would certainly not be impossible for a terrorist organization especially if state-sponsored to acquire or construct an unsophisticated ballistic missile (non-working Scuds are reportedly available on the open market for $100000) and use it in an EMP attack against America[19] Such a missile could be launched from a freighter in international waters and detonated in the atmosphere over the United States without warning

30

Cornell HKHANE Aff

China Solves NoKo

China can solve North Korea ndash the alternative is US Strikes which escalate to War ndash US action to influence China is key

Doug Bandow 2009 is a senior fellow at the Cato Institute A former special assistant to President Reagan he is the author of Tripwire Korea and US Foreign Policy in a Changed World (Cato Institute) and co-author of The Korean Conundrum Americas Troubled Relations with North and South Korea (PalgraveMacmillan) July 2 2009 (Real Clear World Time to Play China Card on North Korea)

North Korea appears to have moved from intermittent to constant provocation The only nation with real influence in Pyongyang is China South Koreas President Lee Myung-bak visited Washington two weeks ago but a solution is no closer American diplomacy should focus on encouraging Beijing to do its utmost to solve the problem of the Norths criminal regime The challenge posed by the so-called Democratic Peoples Republic of Korea (DPRK) is obvious to all Probably the most murderous government on earth Kim Jong-ils regime has presided over the death by famine of at least a half million people His regimes brutality is both tragic and legendary While impoverishing his people he has maintained an oversize military including an active nuclear-weapons program And he has created a unique marriage of communism and monarchy apparently designating his youngest son now called the brilliant comrade to be his successor just as he succeeded his father Kim Il-sung Although evil he is not suicidal Kim Jong-il enjoys his virgins in this life rather than desiring them in the next one Nevertheless eliminating his regime would be an obvious humanitarian and security plus Bottom of Form Unfortunately no easy solution presents itself Kims latest confrontational tactics do not prevent a negotiated settlement-US special envoy Stephen Bosworth has emphasized the administrations desire to engage Pyongyang-but the likelihood of diplomacy resulting in a demilitarized peninsula grows ever smaller Even if the DPRK proves willing to halt any new nuclear activities it is very unlikely to turn over existing nuclear materials And while Washington should continue to pursue both bilateral and multilateral negotiations the process may yield little other than frustration Tighter sanctions also offer but a forlorn hope Amid reports that the North is planning a new nuclear test the UN Security Council voted to tighten sanctions Americas UN ambassador Susan Rice said the measure provided a strong very credible very appropriate response But it in fact offered little in the way of increased enforcement North Korea already is the worlds most isolated state Moreover the regime has never let the suffering of its people affect its policies A government which allowed a half million people to starve is not likely to be moved by increased hardship for those who remain alive So is a North Korean nuclear arsenal inevitable Maybe not Only Beijing has the clout necessary to influence the DPRK The former provides the bulk of the Norths food fuel and consumer goods trade between the two nations has been rising Severing that lifeline could bring the North Korean economy to a standstill However so far the Peoples Republic of China (PRC) has demurred Indeed before passage of the latest Security Council resolution the PRC called for an appropriate and balanced measure and emphasized calmness and restraint Even now Chinas government appears to fear a North Korean collapse more than a North Korean nuclear weapon The last option is war-either a limited strike on Pyongyangs atomic bases or a more general attack Washington obviously could destroy nuclear facilities above ground and perhaps underground Whether doing so would permanently block the Norths nuclear efforts and eliminate its existing atomic capabilities are less clear Moreover an attack probably would result in war The Kim regime likely would see a strike as the first step in an attempt at coercive regime change Moreover to do nothing would wreck its credibility at home and stature abroad While it is not likely to foolishly start a losing war the DPRK government isnt likely to passively accept a conflict begun by the United States Although the North would lose any conflict it could cause massive damage to the South whose capital Seoul lies close to the Demilitarized Zone and thus within range of both artillery and Scud missiles Other possible consequences include the dispersion of nuclear debris and creation of mass refugee flows So is a North Korean nuclear arsenal inevitable Maybe not The China card has yet to be played Cynicism about Beijings role in the North Korean crisis abounds Some analysts believe that the PRC can do little to move Pyongyang which has steered an independent course for decades Others accuse China of consciously orchestrating the Norths destabilizing course And the mainstream view is that the PRC is unwilling to risk its relationship with Pyongyang or accept the costs of the regimes potential collapse Indeed Beijing has treated North Korean refugees who face prison and even death when repatriated with unconscionable brutality However Washington might be able to change Chinas calculus Its certainly worth attempting to do so The PRC could cut off aid and commerce Beijing also might be able to undertake covert action to transform the North Korean system

31

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Rogue Satelites

Rogue EMP collapses satellite communications

Haimes 9 Yacov Y- Lawrence Quarles Professor of Engineering and Applied Science Director of the Center for Risk Management of Engineering Systems University of Virginia ldquoRisk Modeling Assessment and Managementrdquo Edition 3 - 2009 p780

The vulnerability of satellites to a high-altitude nuclear detonation and the resulting electromagnetic pulse has been widely documented For example a report by the Defense Threat Reduction Agency [DTRA 2001] states LEO [low earth orbit] satellites will be of growing importance to government commercial and military users in coming years Proliferation of nuclear weapons and longer-range ballistic missile capabilities is likely to continue One low-yield (1 th-12 kt) high-altitude (125-300 km) nuclear explosion could disablemdashin weeks to monthsmdashall LEO satellites not specifically hardened to withstand radiation generated by that explosion The report states that a deliberate effort to cause economic damage with a lower likelihood of nuclear radiation fallout can he initiated by a rogue state facing economic strangulation or imminent military threat and pose economic threat to the industrial world without causing human casualties or visible damage to economic infrastructure An article in Scientific American by Dupont [2004] further highlights the risks to the global satellite system from nuclear explosions in orbit Dupont asserts that ldquoThe launch and detonation of a nuclear-tipped missile in low orbit could disrupt the critical system of commercial and civil satellites for years potentially paralyzing the global high-tech economy More nations (and maybe non-state entities) will gain this capability as nuclear-weapon and ballistic-missile technology spread around the world The possibility of an attack is relatively remote but the consequences are too severe to be ignoredrdquo A study conducted for the Commission to Assess the Threat to the United States from High-Altitude Electromagnetic Pulse Attack [Haimes et al 2005] highlights the risks to interdependent infrastructures and to the US economy due to such attacks and reiterates that the benefits of automation have brought an increased vulnerability Finally according to Dupont [2004] ldquoThe Pentagon has been working for decades to safeguard its orbital assets against the effects of nuclear explosionsHardening satellites is costly however Greater protection means more expense and more massive protective materials And heavier satellites cost significantly more to launchDespite the risks to civil orbiters however the Defense Department has failed to persuade US satellite builders to harden their spacecraft voluntarilyrdquo

32

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Rogue- AT No Tech

Tech is attainable

Schnurr 9 Avi- Executive Director of Israels Missile Defense Association reviewed US technology policy for the the Department of Defense the White House Homeland Security Council Congress and the National Academy of Sciences ldquoThe EMP Threat A Strategic Review of Geopolitical Risk Scenariosrdquo 27th July 2009 httpwwwhenryjacksonsocietyorgstoriesaspid=1227

One misunderstanding is the belief that those willing to use an EMP are not going to have the technology to create an EMP weapon However any small nuclear fission bomb would have this effect In fact without going into details there are ways to enhance the effect that would use a very small bomb Certainly a Hiroshima-sized bomb would be adequate a thermonuclear bomb a fusion bomb would not make it any larger That means the capability to do this is in the hands of anyone who can find a boat for example ndash were they to use a short-range missile ndash so it doesnrsquot have to be an ICBM Hezbollah has 300km missiles that carry half-ton warheads which would be more than adequate and al Qaeda is also well-situated in this regard And launching from a ship minimizes the fingerprints

33

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Rogue- AT No Long Range Missiles

Even if they cannot reach the middle of the US the consequences would be enormous

Birdnow 6 Timothy ldquoEMP and the Unfought Victoryrdquo American Thinker July 01 2006Even if an EMP strike should only hit the West Coast the disaster would be catastrophic the United States electric grid is divided into three segments and this strike will more than likely take the entire western power grid completely out Its going to be very hard to maintain order with no running water in the arid western United States Farmers will lose their crops the sick and elderly will die without air conditioning and other electricitymdashdependent services Of course Silicon Valley will be toast as well as such important places as Lawrence Livermore Labs our days as the highmdashtech leader could be numbered What will this do to our economy supposing the country makes it through in decent shape

Even if rogue states cannot build a big EMP they could use a small one on the battlefield

Wilson 8 Clay- Specialist in Technology and National Security Foreign Affairs Defense and Trade Division ldquoHigh Altitude Electromagnetic Pulse (HEMP) and High Power Microwave (HPM) Devices Threat Assessmentsrdquo Congressional Research Service March 26 2008

A HEMP attack directed against the Unites States continent might involve a one-megaton nuclear warhead or a smaller one that is specially-designed using a burst several hundred miles above the mid-western states to affect computers on both coasts20 However creating a HEMP effect over an area 250 miles in diameter an example size for a battlefield might only require a rocket with a modest altitude and payload capability that could loft a relatively small nuclear device If a medium or higher range missile with a nuclear payload were launched from the deck of a freighter at sea the resulting HEMP could reportedly disable computers over a wide area of the coastal United States

34

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Rogue- AT Uncertain Effects

Extend Schneider that rogues prefer EMP strikes to ground bursts because they are easier to produce Ground bursts require too much precision and rogue states will only engage in asymmetric warfare with a lower chance of retaliation

EMPs are well suited for rogue regimesrsquo goals

Timmerman 2 Kenneth R- director of the Foundation for Democracy in Iran 2006 Nobel Peace Prize Nominee ldquoUS Threatened With EMP Attackrdquo Feb 1 2002

The more backward the country the more attractive EMP becomes as a weapon against the United States Bartlett explains ldquoIf North Korea were to launch a missile straight up and explode a nuclear weapon 500 kilometers over their own territory it wouldnrsquot do them a lot of damage because they have very little dependence on electronic systems But it would have a devastating impact on South Korea as well as on our 37000 troops stationed there With North Korearsquos million soldiers they could just walk all over us with impunityrdquo

35

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Rogue- AT Attribution

Easy to get around attribution

Timmerman 8 Kenneth R- director of the Foundation for Democracy in Iran 2006 Nobel Peace Prize Nominee ldquoUS Intel Iran Plans Nuclear Strike on USrdquo News Max 29 Jul 2008

In his recent congressional testimony Graham revealed that Iranian military journals translated by the CIA at his commissionrsquos request ldquoexplicitly discuss a nuclear EMP attack that would gravely harm the United Statesrdquo Furthermore if Iran launched its attack from a cargo ship plying the commercial sea lanes off the East coast mdash a scenario that appears to have been tested during the Caspian Sea tests mdash US investigators might never determine who was behind the attack Because of the limits of nuclear forensic technology it could take months And to disguise their traces the Iranians could simply decide to sink the ship that had been used to launch it Graham said

Rogues do not fear retaliation

Wilson 8 Clay- Specialist in Technology and National Security Foreign Affairs Defense and Trade Division ldquoHigh Altitude Electromagnetic Pulse (HEMP) and High Power Microwave (HPM) Devices Threat Assessmentsrdquo Congressional Research Service March 26 2008

The threat of an EMP attack against the United States is hard to assess but some observers indicate that it is growing along with worldwide access to newer technologies and the proliferation of nuclear weapons In the past the threat of mutually assured destruction provided a lasting deterrent against the exchange of multiple high-yield nuclear warheads However now even a single specially designed low-yield nuclear explosion high above the United States or over a battlefield can produce a large-scale EMP effect that could result in a widespread loss of electronics but no direct fatalities and may not necessarily evoke a large nuclear retaliatory strike by the US military This coupled with the possible vulnerability of US commercial electronics and US military battlefield equipment to the effects of EMP may create a new incentive for other countries to develop or acquire a nuclear capability

Rogues can use terrorists

Schneider 7 [Dr Mark National Institute for Public Policy ldquoThe Emerging EMP Threat to the United Statesrdquo A Publication of the United States Nuclear Strategy Forum November httpwwwnipporgNational20Institute20PressCurrent20PublicationsPDFEMP20Paper20Final20November07pdf]

The possibility of a terrorist group obtaining a nuclear weapon particularly from a rogue state and launching an EMP attack with a crude ballistic missile such as a Scud missile is certainly within the realm of possibility Cooperation with terrorists may be attractive to nuclear-armed rogue states because of the lesser risk of attribution Indeed in March 2001 an Iranian journal stated that ldquoterrorist information warfare [includes] using the technology of directed energy weapons (DEW) or electromagnetic pulse (EMP)rdquo65

36

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Iran Ev

Iran military writings prove reliance on EMP strikes

Pry 5 Dr Peter Vincent- EMP Commission Staff ldquoForeign Views Of Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP) Attackrdquo Before The United States Senate Subcommittee On Terrorism Technology And Homeland Security March 8 2005 httpwwwendtimesreportcomEMP_attackhtml

Iran though not yet a nuclear weapon state has produced some analysis weighing the use of nuclear weapons to destroy cities as ldquoagainst Japan in World War IIrdquo compared to ldquoinformation warfarerdquo that includes ldquoelectromagnetic pulse for the destruction of unprotected circuitsrdquo An Iranian analyst describes ldquoterrorist information warfarerdquo as involving not just computer viruses but attacks using ldquoelectromagnetic pulse (EMP)rdquo (Tehran Siyasat-e Defa-I 1 March 2001) An Iranian political-military journal in an article entitled ldquoElectronics To Determine Fate Of Future Warsrdquo suggests that the key to defeating the United States is EMP attack ldquoAdvanced information technology equipment exists which has a very high degree of efficiency in warfare Among these we can refer to communication and information gathering satellites pilotless planes and the digital system Once you confuse the enemy communication network you can also disrupt the work of the enemy command and decision-making center Even worse today when you disable a countryrsquos military high command through disruption of communications you will in effect disrupt all the affairs of that country If the worldrsquos industrial countries fail to devise effective ways to defend themselves against dangerous electronic assaults then they will disintegrate within a few years American soldiers would not be able to find food to eat nor would they be able to fire a single shotrdquo (Tehran Nashriyeh-e Siasi Nezami December 1998 -January 1999)Iranian flight-tests of their Shahab-3 medium-range missile that can reach Israel and U S forces in the Persian Gulf have in recent years involved several explosions at high altitude reportedly triggered by a self-destruct mechanism on the missile The Western press has described these flight-tests as failures because the missiles did not complete their ballistic trajectories Iran has officially described all of these same tests as successful The flight-tests would be successful if Iran were practicing the execution of an EMP attack Iran as noted earlier has also successfully tested firing a missile from a vessel in the Caspian Sea A nuclear missile concealed in the hold of a freighter would give Iran or terrorists the capability to perform an EMP attack against the United States homeland without developing an ICBM and with some prospect of remaining anonymous Iranrsquos Shahab-3 medium-range missile mentioned earlier is a mobile missile and small enough to be transported in the hold of a freighter We cannot rule out that Iran the worldrsquos leading sponsor of international terrorism might provide terrorists with the means to execute an EMP attack against the United States

Iran is on the brink of gaining EMP capability

Timmerman 8 Kenneth R- director of the Foundation for Democracy in Iran 2006 Nobel Peace Prize Nominee ldquoUS Intel Iran Plans Nuclear Strike on USrdquo News Max 29 Jul 2008

In May 2007 then Undersecretary of State John Rood told Congress that the US intelligence community estimates that Iran could develop an ICBM capable of hitting the continental United States by 2015 But Iran could put a Scud missile on board a cargo ship and launch from the commercial sea lanes off Americarsquos coasts well before then The only thing Iran is lacking for an effective EMP attack is a nuclear warhead and no one knows with any certainty when that will occur The latest US intelligence estimate states that Iran could acquire the fissile material for a nuclear weapon as early as 2009 or as late as 2015 or possibly later Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld first detailed the ldquoScud-in-a-bucketrdquo threat during a briefing in Huntsville Ala on Aug 18 2004 While not explicitly naming Iran Rumsfeld revealed that ldquoone of the nations in the Middle East had launched a ballistic missile from a cargo vessel They had taken a short-range probably Scud missile put it on a transporter-erector launcher lowered it in taken the vessel out into the water peeled back the top erected it fired it lowered it and covered it up And the ship that they used was using a radar and electronic equipment that was no different than 50 60 100 other ships operating in the immediate areardquo Iranrsquos first test of a ship-launched Scud missile occurred in spring 1998 and was mentioned several months later in veiled terms by the Commission to Assess the Ballistic Missile Threat to the United States a blue-ribbon panel also known as the Rumsfeld Commission I was the first reporter to mention the Iran sea-launched missile test in an article appearing in the Washington Times in May 1999 Intelligence reports on the launch were ldquowell known to the White House but have not been disseminated to the appropriate congressional committeesrdquo I wrote Such a missile ldquocould be used in a devastating stealth attack against the United States or Israel for which the United States has no known or planned defenserdquo Few experts believe that Iran can be deterred from launching such an attack by the threat of massive retaliation against Iran They point to a December 2001 statement by former Iranian President Ali Akbar Hashemi-Rafsanjani who mulled the possibility of Israeli retaliation after an Iranian nuclear strike ldquoThe use of an atomic bomb against Israel would destroy Israel completely while [the same] against the Islamic only would cause damages Such a scenario is not inconceivablerdquo Rafsanjani said at the time

37

Cornell HKHANE Aff

NoKo Ev

North Korea is seeking and would use an EMP

Pry 5 Dr Peter Vincent- EMP Commission Staff ldquoForeign Views Of Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP) Attackrdquo Before The United States Senate Subcommittee On Terrorism Technology And Homeland Security March 8 2005 httpwwwendtimesreportcomEMP_attackhtml

In closing a few observations about the potential EMP threat from North Korea North Korean academic writings subscribe to the view voiced in Chinese Russian and Iranian writings that computers and advanced communications have inaugurated an ldquoinformation agerdquo during which the greatest strength and greatest vulnerability of societies will be their electronic infrastructures According to North Korean press Chairman Kim Chong-il is himself supposedly an avid proponent of this view (M A Kim Sang-hak ldquodevelopment of Information Industry and Construction of Powerful Socialist Staterdquo Pyongyang Kyongje Yongu 20 May 2002)The highest ranking official ever to defect from North Korea Hwang Chang-yop claimed in 1998 that North Korea has nuclear weapons and explained his defection as an attempt to prevent nuclear war According to Hwang in the event of war North Korea would use nuclear weapons ldquoto devastate Japan to prevent the United States from participating Would it still participate even after Japan is devastated That is how they thinkrdquo Although Hwang did not mention EMP it is interesting that he described North Korean thinking about nuclear weapons employment as having strategic purposesndash nuclear use against Japanndashand not tactical purposesndashnuclear employment on the battlefield in South Korea It is also interesting that according to Hwang North Korea thinks it can somehow ldquodevastaterdquo Japan with its tiny nuclear inventory although how precisely this is to be accomplished with one or two nuclear weapons is unknownPerhaps most importantly note that the alleged purpose of a North Korean nuclear strike on Japan would be to deter the United States At the time of Hwangrsquos defection in 1998 North Korearsquos longest-range missile then operational the No Dong limited North Korearsquos strategic reach to a strike on Japan Today North Korea is reportedly on the verge of achieving an ICBM capability with its Taepo Dong-2 missile estimated to be capable of delivering a nuclear weapon to the United States In 2004 the EMP Commission met with very senior Russian military officers who are experts on EMP weapons They warned that Russian scientists had been recruited by Pyongyang to work on the North Korean nuclear weapons program They further warned that the knowledge and technology to develop ldquoSuper-EMPrdquo weapons had been transferred to North Korea and that North Korea could probably develop these weapons in the near future within a few years The Russian officers said that the threat to global security that would be posed by a North Korea armed with ldquoSuper-EMPrdquo weapons is unacceptable The senior Russian military officers who claimed to be expressing their personal views to the EMP Commission said that while the Kremlin could not publicly endorse U S preemptive action Moscow would privately understand the strategic necessity of a preemptive strike by the United States against North Korearsquos nuclear complex

38

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Terrorism Adv

Plan is necessary to prevent multiple scenarios of terrorism

Lewallen 2 John- Political Science at Whitman University organizer of the Nuclear Peace Action Group Fulbright Scholarship recipient Public Ocean Access Network ldquoHigh-Altitude Nuclear Warrdquo Nuclear Press p31

Nuclear Weapons in the War of Terror A Modest Prediction on November 8 2001 Terrorist attacks against the United States will not end until the nuclear strategic balance the ldquobalance of terrorrdquo is restored among Russia China and the United StatesToday geopolitics moves at cyberspeed The War of Terror is spreading and deepening throughout the world Clear analysis of the many dimensions of the War of Terror may lead the world toward widespread peace and prosperity rather than toward the global war and depression which is being created today Rational strategic analysis of terrorism begins with the fact that international governmental cooperation is required to defeat terrorists The complete global defeat of terrorism implies international enforcement a world governmentThe nuclear confrontation of terror among Russia China and the United States is a major source of the feeling of terror sweeping the United States and much of the rest of the world With the nuclear strategic balance now disrupted and a United States having declared war on any nation it chooses with any weapons at hand actual nuclear war in the nuclear triangle is an increasingly imminent possibilityThe Russian and Chinese people are intensely and viscerally terrorized by US nuclear aggression as expressed by the US drive to achieve unilateral domination over them with national missile defense and weapons in spaceWithout the complete and wholehearted cooperation of the Chinese and Russian governments the United States will never defeat terrorismIf United States nuclear aggression continues and escalates we must expect terrorist attacks against the American homeland also to continue and escalateSeeking to avoid nuclear war with the United States Russia and China keep leading international efforts to ban weapons in space uphold the arms control treaty structure and move toward nuclear disarmament However the hands of George W Bush have torn up the treaties and loosed a US push for complete nuclear domination over Russia and ChinaThe Chinese and Russians have good reasons to publicly support the US war against international terrorism while secretly encouraging concealing or even sponsoring terrorism against the United States So much the better if the terrorists chased by the United States are also big problems to China and Russia It seems quite within either Russian or Chinese capability to sponsor acts of terrorism against the United States and to set evidence leading gullible US investigators to any terrorist networkAs I write this the Bush administration is pushing full-bore for national missile defense space weapons and intensified nuclear confrontation with Russia and ChinaThis means that terrorist attacks against the United States will continue and probably increase until the United States joins the world community of peace law and order

39

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Terrorism Adv

Future terrorist attacks threaten to collapse world order

Alexander 3 Yonah Director of Inter-University for Terrorism Studies Washington Times August 28Last weeks 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 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 [eg 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 strategy can be developed [eg 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 [eg 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 Israels 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 US military operation in Iraq eliminated Saddam Husseins 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 terror victory however long and hard the road may be For without victory there is no survival

40

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Terrorism Ext

Terrorists arenrsquot interested in non nuclear HPVs

Wilson 8 Clay- Specialist in Technology and National Security Foreign Affairs Defense and Trade Division ldquoHigh Altitude Electromagnetic Pulse (HEMP) and High Power Microwave (HPM) Devices Threat Assessmentsrdquo Congressional Research Service March 26 2008

It is difficult to assess the threat of a terrorist organization possibly using a smaller-scale HPM weapon against the United States critical infrastructure It could be argued that an HPM bomb by itself may not be attractive to terrorists because its smaller explosion would not be violent enough and the visible effect would not be as dramatic as a larger conventional bomb

41

Cornell HKHANE Aff

China- AT Attribution

China can smuggle the EMP nuke

Buff 6 Joe ldquoChina Myth Gets Dangerousrdquo Today in the Military December 04 2006Launching an ICBM and detonating its warhead in outer space as a ldquonon-lethalrdquo EMP generator above the Pacific would be awfully risky because the launch signature could be mistaken for a first strike against the US homeland inviting massive nuclear retaliation More shrewd would be to smuggle a nuclear weapon into space disguised as one of the PRCrsquos frequent launches of satellites (that this violates international treaties doesnrsquot mean Beijing wouldnrsquot do it) The nuke could then be set off at the appropriate place and time as part of the dreaded ldquoPearl Harbor in spacerdquo that could open outright conflict for hegemony It would be problematic for the US to launch any sort of retaliatory nuclear strike against China after such a surprise info-warfare attack -- discussion board fans of the macho ldquoglassing Chinardquo approach left aside With neither Beijing nor Washington being run by madmen or so we hope a conventional war could be fought beneath an unused umbrella of thermonuclear mutually assured destruction And us having to fight a big war is already a form of defeat We got dragged into World War II because our conventional deterrence failed and that victory cost 400000+ American lives

42

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Space Militarization Adv 1

The world in on the brink of massive space weaponization US space weaponization has contributed to states seeking latent space weapons capability

Hitchens 9 Theresa- Director UN Institute for Disarmament Research ldquoSaving Space Threat Proliferation and Mitigationrdquo International Commission on Nuclear Non-proliferation and Disarmament May 19 2009

During the Cold War the United States and the Soviet Union were the only real space powers The situation today is dramatically different Currently some 47 nations own andor operate satellites with nearly 900 working satellites in orbitmdashmostly for civilcommercial purposes The bulk of todayrsquos satellites are in Geostationary orbit (GEO 36000 kilometers in altitude) for civil and military communications purposes telephony internet services and broadcast television However an increasing number of satellites are being built in Low Earth Orbit (LEO up to 2000 kilometers) for Earth imaging with ever greater resolutions that can provide traditional data such as crop and ocean monitoring as well as data for tracking (and perhaps targeting) of military infrastructure There are approximately 389 working satellites in LEO including Earth observation (both civil and militaryintelligence gathering) weather and mobile communications satellites Of that number about 130 are Earth observation sats owned andor operated by 33 countries plus the European Space Agency Vietnam was the most recent nation to orbit an Earth observation satellite launching it in April 2008 In the military arena India most recently (in April 2009) launched a high-resolution (down to 1 meter) all-weather radar imaging satellite with the explicit purpose of monitoring military activities and terrorist movements primarily in rival Pakistan Indeed some ldquoreal estaterdquo in space is getting crowded particularly the GEO belt and the area over the poles where many satellites cross over each otherrsquos path This fact has created emerging concerns about simple ldquohighway safetyrdquo in space and the need to avoid accidental interference or collisions (see below)Further many other nations have recently been putting more emphasis on obtaining military advantages from spacemdashalthough China is the only other nation that has tested an ASAT and just two other nations India and Israel are currently suspected of pursuing such capabilities China France Germany Italy Israel Spain and the United Kingdom all have dedicated military space assets for communications andor imaging A number of other nations have or are building dual-use satellites that can provide both civil and military functions including India and Japan Iran and North Korea are pursuing space launch and satellite capabilities that also would be assumed to have dual-use functions The increasing interest in military uses of space has been fostered by two major factors The first is the easier access to space capabilities over the past 20 years and improvements in capabilities provided by the information revolution of the 1990s The second is the 1990s ldquorevolution in military affairsrdquo led by the United States which has resulted in the shift of national security space applications from strategic missions such as spying and early warning of missile launches to tactical applications which include perhaps most importantly weapons targeting using global navigation and positioning satellites The United States and Russia have long maintained navigation and positioning satellites for multiple purposes (besides targeting these satellites are important for logistics management and own-force tracking) their respective Global Positioning System (GPS) network and the GLONASS constellation Meanwhile the European Union hopes to deploy its Galileo system by 2013 and China intends to deploy a similar world-wide navigation satellite network dubbed COMPASS by 2015mdashalthough both systems are claimed to have primarily civilian functions The new emphasis on tactical applications of space power while greatly increasing military effectiveness on the ground also has spurred military thinking in many nations about how to negate enemy space assetsmdashthus the renewed interest in ASAT capabilities

43

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Space Militarization Adv 2

EMP war plans fuel space militarization

Danchev 6 Dancho- Bulgarian Association for Security ISECA ldquoWho needs nuclear weapons anymorerdquo Security Knowledge February 09 2006

In 2004 the EMP Commission met with very senior Russian officers and we showed that on the sign They warned that the knowledge and technology to develop what they called super EMP weapons had been transferred to North Korea and that North Korea could probably develop these weapons in the near future within a few years The Russian officers said that the threat that would be posed to global security by a North Korean armed with super EMP weapons was in their view and I am sure Mr Speaker in your view and mine unacceptable Foreign views of Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP) Attack reveals further details on other nations ambitions etc Perhaps one of the most famous commitments towards EMP is the The Trestle Electromagnetic Pulse Simulator that can also be seen at Google Maps still in my opinion its a defensive initiative for an offensive purpose Extending the topic even further The Space Warfare arms race has been an active policy of key worlds leaders for decades and thats not good The US Russia and China as the main players are fuelling the growth in one way or other due to believing in perhaps- that the other sides are actively developing such capabilities and they are because they think the opposite =gt arms race- growing trend towards asymmetric warfare

The US is the last obstacle to banning space weapons

Lewallen 2 John- Political Science at Whitman University organizer of the Nuclear Peace Action Group Fulbright Scholarship recipient Public Ocean Access Network ldquoHigh-Altitude Nuclear Warrdquo Nuclear Press p25

Russian and China are urgently asking the worldrsquos nations to begin talks to ban the militarization of space Chinarsquos ambassador to the United Nations Conference on Disarmament in January 2000 called for international talks to ban testing deployment and use of weapons in outer space 23 In March 2000 Russiarsquos ambassador to the UN Conference on Disarmament echoed this urgent plea for UN negotiations for an international treaty to ban testing stationing and use of weapons systems in outer space Of the 66 member nations of the UN negotiations to ban weapons in space the United States24 To avoid the rapidly approaching nuclear conflict with Russia andor China the United States must abandon its efforts to make a national missile defense system and join international talks to ban weapons in space If cornered the Russians and Chinese will fight the United States and both nations are prepared with high-altitude nuclear EMP weapons to attack US electronic civilization

44

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Space Militarization Adv 3

Space militarization leads to extinction

Mitchell Ayotte amp Helwich 1 Associate Professor of Communication and Director of Debate at the University of Pittsburgh Teaching Fellows in the Department of Communication at the University of Pittsburgh Missile Defence Trans-Atlantic Diplomacy at a Crossroads ISIS Briefing on Ballistic Missile Defence No 6 July

A buildup of space weapons might begin with noble intentions of lsquopeace through strength deterrence but this rationale glosses over the tendency that I the presence of space weapons will result in the increased likelihood of their use33 This drift toward usage is strengthened by a strategic fact elucidated by Frank Barnabv when it comes to arming the heavens anti-ballistic missiles and anti-satellite warfare technologies go hand-in- hand134 The interlocking nature of offense and defense in military space technology stems from the inherent dual capability of space borne weapon components As Marc Vidricaire Delegation of Canada to the UN Conference on Disarmament explains If you want to intercept something in space you could use the same capability to target something on land 35 To the extent that ballistic missile interceptors based in space can knock out enemy missiles in mid-flight such interceptors can also be used as orbiting Death Stars capable of sending munitions hurtling through the Earths atmosphere The dizzying speed of space warfare would introduce intense use or losersquo pressure into strategic calculations with the specter of split-second attacks creating incentives to rig orbiting Death Stars with automated hair trigger devices In theory automation would enhance survivability of vulnerable space weapon platforms However by taking the decision to commit violence out of human hands and endowing computers with authority to make war military planners could sow insidious seeds of accidental conflict Yale sociologist Charles Perrow has analyzed complexly interactive tightly coupled industrial systems such as space weapons which have many sophisticated components that all depend on each others flawless performance According to Perrow this interlocking complexity makes it impossible to foresee all the different ways such systems could fail As Perrow explains [the odd term normal accident is meant to signal that given the system characteristics multiple and unexpected interactions of failures are inevitable36 Deployment of space weapons with we-delegated authority to fire death rays or unleash killer projectiles would likely make war itself inevitable given the susceptibility of such systems to normal accidents according to retired Lt Col Robert M Bowman even a tiny projectile reentering from space strikes the earth with such high velocity that it can do enormous damage - even more than would be done by a nuclear weapon of the same size 37 In the same Star Wars technology touted as a quintessential tool of peace defense analyst David Langford sees one of the most - destabilizing offensive weapons ever conceived One imagines dead cities of microwave-grilled people138 Given this unique potential for destruction it is not hard to imagine that any nation subjected to space weapon attack would retaliate with maximum force including use of nuclear biological andor chemical weapons An accidental war sparked by a computer glitch in space could plunge the world into the most destructive military conflict ever seen

45

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Space Ext

Lewallen 2 John- Political Science at Whitman University organizer of the Nuclear Peace Action Group Fulbright Scholarship recipient Public Ocean Access Network ldquoHigh-Altitude Nuclear Warrdquo Nuclear Press Pg37Every nation in the world wants to join Russia and China in their urgent insistence that space weaponry should be legally prohibited every nation except one the United StatesIronically the United States is the most vulnerable nation on Earth to high-altitude nuclear electromagnetic pulse war One or a few nuclear detonations high above the United States could catastrophically devastate information civilization wiping out computer chips nationwide and also destroying satellites without harming people directlyThe most basic military strategic logic dictates that the United States should avoid war in space at all costs Space is simply a disastrously unfavorable field of battle for the United States The Russians and Chinese would prefer to avoid World War Three but should they deem it inevitable they have prepared the greatest ambush in military history a nuclear electromagnetic pulse surprise attack against the United States

Space AdvLewallen 2 John- Political Science at Whitman University organizer of the Nuclear Peace Action Group Fulbright Scholarship recipient Public Ocean Access Network ldquoHigh-Altitude Nuclear Warrdquo Nuclear Press Pg36The United States military is stumbling blindly into the greatest ambush in history Determined to dominate space the United States has tens of billions of dollars of space weaponry with many more space weapons systems in research and development

Space Sat EMPLewallen 2 John- Political Science at Whitman University organizer of the Nuclear Peace Action Group Fulbright Scholarship recipient Public Ocean Access Network ldquoHigh-Altitude Nuclear Warrdquo Nuclear Press Pg34Any rational person must accept the possibility that all three nations in the Nuclear Triangle have EMP bombs in Earth-orbiting satellites today ready to wipe out an adversaryrsquos electronics on very short notice Everyone knows that classified or secret weapons systems exist It is plain crazy to believe that China Russia and the United States are not prepared with high-altitude EMP and low-altitude nuclear weapons in satellites either ready to launch or in orbit alreadyA strategic feedback loop would seem to make it at least ldquostrongly possiblerdquo that the United States China and Russia have high-powered EMP bombs in Earth orbit today The ability to wipe out an adversaryrsquos electronics continent-wide pretty much any time with a maneuverable EMP satellite bomb would confer major if not overwhelming advantage to the aggressor So if the other guy probably has EMP satellite bombs we need them too

Lewallen 2 John- Political Science at Whitman University organizer of the Nuclear Peace Action Group Fulbright Scholarship recipient Public Ocean Access Network ldquoHigh-Altitude Nuclear Warrdquo Nuclear Press Pg25

Russia and China are urgently asking the worldrsquos nations to begin talks to ban the militarization of space Chinarsquos ambassador to the United Nations Converence on Disarmament in January 2000 called for international talks to ban testing deployment and use of weapons in outer space23 In March 2000 Russiarsquos ambassador to the UN Congerence on Disarmament echoid this ugent plea for UN negations for an international treaty to ban testing stationing and use of weapons systems in outer space CONT

46

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Data Sharing Adv

Potential exists for EMP intelligence sharing with Russia which is key to combat rogue or terrorist EMP attacks

Wood 4 Lowell L- member of the Technical Advisory Group US Senate Select Committee on Intelligence a member of the Undersea Warfare Experts Group US House of Representatives Committee on Armed Services a visiting fellow at the Hoover Institution and Stanford University The report of the Commission to Assess the Threat to the United States From Electromagnetic Pulse Attackrdquo July 22 2004

This is particularly strong in the circumstance of the Soviet Union where they detonated most of their high-altitude explosions over their own territory and thus had an opportunity to make extensive measurements That large body of physical data has come forth in a somewhat fragmentary fashion idiosyncratic fashion really over the years But since the end of the Cold War in particular in the context of cooperation against large-scale terrorism Russian workers and indeed the Russian government has indicated a willingness to collaborate with the United States against the common threat that EMP poses to both the Russian Federation and the United States in the hands of both state-substate-scale actors to Russian and American civilizations So there is the prospect for substantially improved understanding in the United States as far as what was actually observed but the large program that the government supported from the early 1960s up into the early 1990s to understand nuclear weaponry effects has run a very consistent thread through the limited body of experimental data that exists to the end of atmospheric testing

However Russia fears US nuclear EMP strikes

Pry 5 Dr Peter Vincent- EMP Commission Staff ldquoForeign Views Of Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP) Attackrdquo Before The United States Senate Subcommittee On Terrorism Technology And Homeland Security March 8 2005 httpwwwendtimesreportcomEMP_attackhtml

Many foreign analystsndashparticularly in Iran North Korea China and Russiandashview the United States as a potential aggressor that would be willing to use its entire panoply of weapons including nuclear weapons in a first strike They perceive the United States as having contingency plans to make a nuclear EMP attack and as being willing to execute those plans under a broad range of circumstances

Russiarsquos scientific community is especially aware of this EMP threat

Zak 6 Anatoly ldquoTHE K PROJECT Soviet Nuclear Tests In Spacerdquo The Nonproliferation Review Volume 13 Issue 1 March 2006

At the same time scientists realized that along with their higher efficiency nuclear-tipped ABMs would generate highly dangerous blast effects and electromagnetic pulse radiation (EMP) in the surrounding atmosphere and on the very territory they were designed to protect Among the affected infrastructure could be radar installations strategic communications networks and other command-and-control assets To further complicate the situation the Soviet military planners envisioned a scenario in which a nuclear attack on the USSR would likely be preceded by a US high-altitude nuclear explosion designed to ldquoblindrdquo the Soviet ABM tracking network1

47

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Data Sharing Adv

Russiarsquos fears prevent them pursuing cooperative programs and intelligence sharing

Robichaud 7 Carl- Program Officer at The Century Foundation and co-editor of Breaking the Nuclear Impasse New Prospects for Security against Weapons Threats ldquoThe Perils of Primacyrdquo The Century Foundation 9-5-2007 httpwwwtcforgprintasptype=NCamppubid=1673

Moreover primacy has costs The first is reduced conflict stability which heightens risks even for the dominant nation If Russia knows that it is at risk of being disarmed by a bolt from the blue it is likely to disperse its weapons shorten launch times and devolve control to sub-commanders Such a posture would exacerbate the risk of accidental or unauthorized launch in the context of a crisis Depending on how Russia responded to American primacy these risks could well outweigh whatever modest bargaining benefits it offered Already Russia is taking some provocative steps to mitigate its vulnerabilitymdashincluding the announcement last month that its nuclear bombers will for the first time since 1992 resume long-range patrols ldquoon a permanent basisrdquo Second the search for primacy directly undermines the Nunn-Lugar Cooperative Threat Reduction Program which remains our best defense against nuclear terrorism One of the reasons that progress on these programs has slowed to a crawl is Russiarsquos suspicion that the initiative is a cover for espionage into its nuclear installations

Russiarsquos important- they have the leading physicists

Wilson 8 Clay- Specialist in Technology and National Security Foreign Affairs Defense and Trade Division ldquoHigh Altitude Electromagnetic Pulse (HEMP) and High Power Microwave (HPM) Devices Threat Assessmentsrdquo Congressional Research Service March 26 2008

Vladimir Lukin the former Soviet Ambassador to the United States and former Chairman of the International Affairs Committee for the Russian Parliament reportedly has stated that Russia currently has a capability to create a HEMP effect over the United States37 During 1962 the then Soviet Union conducted a series of atmospheric nuclear tests and observed HEMP effects that included surge protector burnouts power supply breakdowns and damage to overhead and underground buried cables at distances of 600 kilometers Since then Russia has reportedly made extensive preparations to protect their infrastructure against HEMP by hardening both civilian and military electronic equipment and by providing continuous training for personnel operating these protected systems38 Other sources have reportedly stated that Russia may also have some of the leading physicists in the world currently doing research on electronic warfare weapons and electromagnetic pulse effects39

The US needs Russiarsquos data- we lack the capability

Riddle 4 Lieutenant Colonel Thomas C- United States Army ldquoNuclear High Altitude Electromagnetic Pulse ndash Implications For Homeland Security And Homeland Defenserdquo US Army War College 03 May 2004

Another area of concern is that many of the remaining nuclear physicist personnel specifically those associated with EMP are retiring without a next generation to follow their lead76 Similarly the physical plant to conduct EMP testing and simulation has atrophied almost to the point of non-existence77 Building upon a suggestion originally proposed by Doctor Wood Congress should mandate and oversee the creation of an interagency DoD-DHS led organization to champion the revitalization of both of these resources78

48

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Data Sharing Adv

Increased EMP knowledge is key to effectively hardening our infrastructure

McNeill amp Weitz 8 Jena Baker- homeland security policy analyst at The Heritage Foundation and Richard- Senior Fellow and Director of the Center for Political-Military Analysis at Hudson Institute ldquoElectromagnetic Pulse (EMP) Attack A Preventable Homeland Security Catastropherdquo Heritage Foundation Backgrounder 2199 httpwwwheritageorgresearchhomelandsecuritybg2199cfm_ftn19

The US cannot continue to ignore the EMP threat While some progress has been made in hardening potential US targets against attack including critical military and government systems the vast majority of electrical systems are unshielded and unprotected especially in the civilian sector If properly shielded electrical devices and systems can generally survive even the strongest EMPs[20] Congress and the new Administration must 1 Perform More Research on the Threat Further research is needed in order to ensure that America can respond to the EMP threat appropriately without wasting government resources on flimsy or useless security measures Although there are numerous methods to harness EMPs capable of affecting electronic systems there is still a theoretical limit to what damage they can produce in terms of both geographic size and intensity Some EMP weapons release just enough energy to disable small electrical devices while others can destroy all the electronic devices and systems within a city block Altitude plays a major role in whether an EMP attack will be successful lower heights typically expose a smaller surface area to EMP damage Some systems are simply more vulnerable to EMP attack than others such as devices plugged into power grids and commercial computer equipment The US government must gain knowledge of the attributes and capabilities of EMP and understand the amount of money time and effort that will be required for meaningful prevention EMP research should also include actions by Congress to simulate the effects of an EMP attack on Washington and other high-value targets and re-examine the Graham Report recommendations

Protections drastically reduce the dangers of EMP strikes

Chisholm 5 Patrick ldquoProtect our electronics against EMP attackrdquo Christian Science Monitor December 19 2005

Fortunately protecting electronics and critical infrastructure against an EMP is doable It involves enclosing every electronic component with a metallic cage that blocks out electromagnetic waves Sound impossible Actually electronic components already enjoy some form of shielding against electromagnetic interference Federal Communications Commission standards require it Such shielding is designed to prevent everyday electromagnetic radiation from entering andor exiting the device Your computer contains this shielding from metal housings down to the little metal coverings soldered to your motherboard There even are housings the size of rooms or buildings that protect sensitive equipment inside Without electromagnetic shielding many electronic devices would not work properly However most existing shielding may not be enough to protect against an EMP While US military standards often require electronic components to be protected against an EMP commercial standards do not And while our power grid is shielded against things such as lightning strikes it is not tested for protection against an EMP Upgrading to shield against an EMP would entail using more robust shielding materials especially for the cords cables andor wires that connect devices to external entities such as power supplies or networks Cables and wires act as antennas through which an EMP travels directly into a device

49

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Data Sharing- Uniqueness

Potential exists for collaboration between Russia and the US to reduce EMP dangers

Weldon 4 Curt- vice-chair of the Armed Services Committee and the House Homeland Security Committee The report of the Commission to Assess the Threat to the United States From Electromagnetic Pulse Attack Committee on Armed Services House of Representatives One Hundred Eighth Congress second session hearing held July 22 2004

Let me get into the area of the joint US -Russian initiative that Dr Wood mentioned It just so happens that last year in our defense bill we created the establishment of the Teller-Kurchatov Alliance for Peace Edward Teller and Igor Kurchatov were the two fathers of the nuclear weapons in both the US and Russia Now the head of Kurchatov Institute Dr Evgeny Velikhov is very eager to establish a more proactive relationship for the peaceful purposes of dealing with nuclear energy Is that Dr Wood potentially a forum since Livermore is involved with that effort to begin a formal process of engaging the Russians They just changed their chief of military operations this past week General Baluevskii has now been put in the head position I had a chance to meet with him one month ago in Moscow He has now taken General Kvashnins place as the top military general and I think he has a different outlook on perhaps US American relations and the military So Dr Wood would that be perhaps a vehicle that we could begin to move aggressively into what you alluded to Dr Wood Yes Mr Weldon I believe that that is indeed the case The recent events in the Russian military to which you referred of course appear at least on the surface to be somewhat hopeful in respect to the progress of more collegial relationships between the American and Russian military establishments the potential collaboration with leaders civilian leaders then Soviet now Russian military technologists such as academicians Evgeny Velikhov the head of the Kurchatov Institute personifies I believe at least has prospects So I very much applaud the committees initiatives along these lines both with respect to the Teller-Kurchatov fellowships and the nuclear strategy forum initiative These are directions in which US policy and practice surely should go

50

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Data Sharing- Data Needed

Past US tests failed to record the necessary data

Emanuelson 9 Jerry ldquoNotes about nuclear EMPrdquo Futurescience LLC Jan 26 2009There have only been a few high altitude nuclear explosions There have been none since November 1962 At that time scientists were just beginning to understand the phenomenon well enough to even know what to try to measure This means that there is a very limited amount of data available and only a part of that data is unclassified The largest nuclear EMPs probably occurred with the Hardtack-Teak and Hardtack-Orange tests over Johnston Island in August 1958 however very little information is openly available about the EMP from these tests and it is likely that not much data was obtained due to equipment malfunctions relevant to EMP measurement and a lack of accurate understanding of the EMP phenomenon Although scientists were aware of nuclear EMP in 1958 in many critical respects it was misunderstood Those early errors in the understanding of EMP made good data acquisition very difficult Both of these August 1958 tests used the 38 megaton W39 thermonuclear warhead There have been unconfirmed reports that one or both of these 1958 tests caused power outages in Hawaii

Computer simulations are indecisive

Emanuelson 9 Jerry ldquoNotes about nuclear EMPrdquo Futurescience LLC Jan 26 2009Because of the insufficient amount of hard data scientists have tried to do mathematical calculations about the strength and effects of the different components of the EMP There has never been any clear consensus about whose calculations are correct Since more testing cannot be done there is no way to test the accuracy of the calculations made by various scientists since 1962 The United States National Laboratories have a computer code in which they have a high level of confidence since it closely matches the sparse amount of actual data that does exist

Data is key to protect critical infrastructure

Chisholm 5 Patrick ldquoProtect our electronics against EMP attackrdquo Christian Science Monitor December 19 2005

Radasky one of the worlds few experts on protecting electronics against an EMP thinks that most electronics would undergo only a temporary disruption in the event of an EMP You may just have to restart the computer and everything would be fine said Radasky But a temporary shutdown of a control system for a critical infrastructure system he said would be troublesome And if just 1 percent of all electronics failed havoc could ensue Just think about the power outage in August of 03 when a couple of wires hit a tree observed Radasky That was a single failure propagated over a huge area Now imagine at the speed of light every place in the United States some portion of electronics failing Now you have a very widespread problem The only way to know the extent to which an EMP would knock out electronics is to conduct testing with EMP simulators Unfortunately since the end of the cold war most EMP simulators in the United States have been closed according to Radasky And the few that remain open are for military use not civilian use

51

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Russia Data Sharing (Testing)

Understanding EMP effects is key to prevent testing

Farley 9 Robert is an assistant professor at the University of Kentuckyrsquos Patterson School of Diplomacy and International Commerce ldquoNeocons Salivating Over Their Next Great Exaggerated Threat Electromagnetic Pulse Attackrdquo October 22 2009

Along with their Soviet and Chinese counterparts US military planners and scientists studied the potential dangersmdashand opportunitiesmdashpresented by EMP However since only one nation the United States has ever attacked another country with an atomic bomb the precise extent of EMPrsquos power to damage electronic-dependent infrastructures is not fully understood Testing bans have also prevented the established nuclear powers from fully investigating the EMP effect (prompting some EMP awareness activists to argue for a resumption of nuclear testing)

Nuke War

Johnson 2001(Rebecca Executive Dir Acronym Institute for Disarmament Diplomacy The Guardian 7-17Then the international arms control and non-proliferation regimes collapsed Americans werent bothered at first for hadnt the government promised a super-sophisticated force field round the whole nation that no terrorist or missile would ever penetrate So nuclear testing resumed in Nevada for new warheads to improve the kill prospects of missile interceptors and to penetrate deep into enemies bunkers India had been waiting for just such a go-ahead and Pakistan soon followed both raced to test warheads to fit on to missiles upping the tension in Kashmir and along the borders with China Free now to resume its own testing China boosted its programme to modernise and increase the size of its small nuclear arsenal Somewhat reluctantly Russia followed Moscow suspended all further reductions and cooperative security and safety programmes for its still-large nuclear arsenal and facilities Within a few short years the nuclear non-proliferation treaty was just another discarded agreement Many governments with nuclear power programmes developed nuclear weapons as well while others fitted anthrax or sarin on to weapons just in case Most hadnt wanted to but fearful that their neighbours would all felt compelled Regional rivalries grew quickly into major international problems Alliances collapsed amid suspicion and recriminations The burgeoning arms races even spread into outer space threatening military surveillance as well as public communication entertainment and navigation No one knew who had what Deterrence was empty as defence analysts calculated the advantages of the pre-emptive strike In that terrified atmosphere of insecurity and mistrust someone launched first And then it was too late to speak out The Republicans hadnt yet managed to get missile defence to work Such a doomsday scenario is not so fanciful On July 7 the New York Times announced that President Bush wants to ditch the comprehensive test ban treaty A week before the administration asked nuclear laboratories to work out how quickly the US could resume testing after its nine-year moratorium If Bush were to back out of the test ban treaty or break the moratorium on nuclear testing - undertaken with China Russia Britain and France - he would also explicitly breach agreements made last May when 187 countries negotiated measures to strengthen and implement the non-proliferation treaty The test ban is no outdated cold war instrument but a fundamental tool to prevent new destabilising developments in nuclear weapons Over several decades from the Arctic to the Pacific from the capitals of Europe to the deserts of Nevada people have marched petitioned demonstrated and even sailed or hiked into test sites Many have been imprisoned and some even lost their lives trying to stop the nuclear weapons governments from polluting our oceans and earth with radioactivity from nuclear explosions conducted for one purpose only - to make better nuclear bombs It took three arduous years to complete negotiations on the comprehensive test ban treaty It isnt perfect No product of compromise ever is The verification system is very thorough but it also had to be affordable financially and politically The treaty stopped short of closing and dismantling the known test sites or banning laboratory testing which the weapon states said they needed to assure the safety and reliability of weapons in the stockpiles (pending achievement of their other treaty obligations to eliminate the nuclear arsenals completely) But it does ban all nuclear test explosions in all environments India panicked because the treaty would close off its nuclear options It refused to sign and then let off a string of nuclear explosions in May 1998 Pakistan followed to prove it could Even so the treaty held Neither government has felt able to keep testing which means their options for further developments were curbed Bush has embarked on a very slippery slope that could potentially put at risk the future of the citizens of even the most advanced military nation Mumbling and grumbling wont keep us safe It is time to speak out

52

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Russian ARMS control

Lewallen 2 John- Political Science at Whitman University organizer of the Nuclear Peace Action Group Fulbright Scholarship recipient Public Ocean Access Network ldquoHigh-Altitude Nuclear Warrdquo Nuclear Press p22-23Russia today is a collapsing superpower with an arsenal of thousands of nuclear missiles which it cannot afford to maintain Six thousand Russian strategic missiles are ready to launch today with about 2250 on high alert ldquoWhat counts most now is that Russia and United States start moving jointly or along parallel courses toward radically lowered ceilings on nuclear warheads without any holdupsrdquo Russiarsquos President Putin said on November 14 2000 Russian officials said President Putin would like to cut strategic missile arsenals to 1000 each for the US and Russia Still the Russians clearly want to maintain second-strike nuclear threat credibility against the United States

53

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Modeling Advantage 1

United States failure to reject nuclear EMP warfare has eroded the nuclear taboo surrounding high-altitude explosions and has led several states to incorporate nuclear EMP strikes into warplans

Pry 5 Dr Peter Vincent- EMP Commission Staff ldquoForeign Views Of Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP) Attackrdquo Before The United States Senate Subcommittee On Terrorism Technology And Homeland Security March 8 2005 httpwwwendtimesreportcomEMP_attackhtml

Some foreign analysts judging from open source statements and writings appear to regard EMP attack as a legitimate use of nuclear weapons because EMP would inflict no or few prompt civilian casualties EMP attack appears to be a unique exception to the general stigma attached to nuclear employment by most of the international community in public statements Significantly even some analysts in Japan and Germanyndashnations that historically have been most condemnatory of nuclear and other weapons of mass destruction in official and unofficial forumsndashappear to regard EMP attack as morally defensible For example a June 2000 Japanese article in a scholarly journal citing senior political and military officials appears to regard EMP attack as a legitimate use of nuclear weapons ldquoAlthough there is little chance that the Beijing authorities would launch a nuclear attack which would incur the disapproval of the international community and which would result in such enormous destruction that it would impede postwar cleanup and policies a serious assault starting with the use of nuclear weapons which would not harm humans animals or property would be valid If a nuclear warhead was detonated 40 kilometers above Taiwan an electromagnetic wave would be propagated which would harm unprotected computers radar and IC circuits on the ground within a 100 kilometer radius and the weapons and equipment which depend on the communications and electronics technology whose superiority Taiwan takes pride in would be rendered combat ineffective at one stroke If they were detonated in the sky in the vicinity of Ilan the effects would also extend to the waters near Yonakuni [in Okinawa] so it would be necessary for Japan too to take care Those in Taiwan having lost their advanced technology capabilities would end up fighting with tactics and technology going back to the 19th century They would inevitably be at a disadvantage with the PLA and its overwhelming military force superiorityrdquo (Su Tzu-yun Jadi 1 June 2000) An article by a member of Indiarsquos Institute of Defense Studies Analysis openly advocates that India be prepared to make a preemptive EMP attack both for reasons of military necessity and on humanitarian grounds ldquoA study conducted in the U S during the late 1980s reported that a high-yield device exploded about 500 kilometers above the ground can generate an electromagnetic pulse (EMP) of the order of 50000 volts over a radius of 2500 kilometers around the point of burst which would be collected by any exposed conductor Such an attack will not cause any blast or thermal effects on the ground below but it can produce a massive breakdown in the communications system It is certain that most of the land communication networks and military command control links will be affected and it will undermine our capability to retaliate This in fact is the most powerful incentive for a preemptive attack And a high-altitude exo-atmospheric explosion may not even kill a bird on the groundrdquo Although India Pakistan and Israel are not rogue states they all presently have missiles and nuclear weapons giving them the capability to make EMP attacks against their regional adversaries An EMP attack by any of these statesndasheven if targeted at a regional adversary and not the United Statesndashcould collaterally damage U S forces in the region and would pose an especially grave threat to U S satellites Many foreign analystsndashparticularly in Iran North Korea China and Russiandashview the United States as a potential aggressor that would be willing to use its entire panoply of weapons including nuclear weapons in a first strike They perceive the United States as having contingency plans to make a nuclear EMP attack and as being willing to execute those plans under a broad range of circumstances

54

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Modeling Advantage- Israel

The exclusion of EMP from the nuclear taboo means Israel will EMP strike Iran leading to the closure of the Strait of Hormuz and international terrorist attacks

Nagle 210 Chet- Pentagons International Security Affairs department Intel Research Corporation author of Iran Covenant ldquoItrsquos time to play the war cardrdquo The Daily Caller 021010

The world knows the US military can destroy any target in the world without using nuclear weapons But what about Israel That country with a population less than that of New York City has developed a ldquotriadrdquomdashthe capability to launch a nuclear strike from aircraft missile silos and submarines Besides Israel only the US Russia and China have that deterrent power But would Israel use nuclear weapons in a pre-emptive strike on Iran I suggest that is unlikely because as we will see below it is unnecessary in the usual sense As for a non-nuclear pre-emptive strike Israel cannot successfully attack Iran with conventional weapons or aircraft The distance is great the defenses formidable and the casualties would be very high Instead I believe Israel will use an electromagnetic pulse (EMP) weapon Whatrsquos that In 1962 the US conducted an atmospheric test called Starfish Prime In it a 14 megaton weapon was detonated 400 kilometers above Johnson Island in the Pacific The EMP from that test knocked out street lights in Hawaii 900 miles away The Soviets held similar tests and discovered EMP effects can penetrate far underground If Israel used one of its Jericho III missiles to detonate 400 kilometers above north central Iran there would be no blast or radiation effects on the ground In fact if the strike was at noon on a sunny day the people below would not know it happened except their lights would go out cars stop fridges die power line transformers short out refineries shut down and yes those uranium enrichment centrifuges in caverns stop spinning This bloodless annihilation coupled with a selective cyber attack would freeze Iran for decades What could be Iranrsquos response to such an attack If they can find a working radio they can announce they have mined the Strait of Hormuz Because of depth width and its hydrographic features the Strait cannot be mined but if Iran says it is mined it would have the same effect Lloyds will cancel insurance for any tanker transiting the Strait Then we revisit ldquoTanker Warrdquo tactics of 1985 and the US Navy would escort any ship anxious to cash in on the crisis If shore missile batteries were somehow still operational a battle group in the area together with bombers from Diego Garcia would reduce them to rubble along with associated infrastructure like military harbors A rain of missiles from Hezbollah in Syria would have to be endured by Israel unless another EMP weapon was used Terror attacks would be made on Israelis and Americans but those can be dealt with by law enforcement and military forces especially if they are forewarned Of course the price of oil and gold would spike for a while On the positive side Iranian ldquoGreenrdquo opposition forces would have an opportunity to take to the darkened streets of Tehran and rid themselves of the corrupt clerical regime So it seems the ldquowar cardrdquo is in the hands of Israel and the card has ldquoEMPrdquo on it

55

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Modeling Advantage- Israel

This shuts off the worldrsquos oil supply

Klare 2 Michael- Five Colleges professor of Peace and World Security Studies boards of directors of Human Rights Watch and the Arms Control Association ldquoResource Wars The New Landscape of Global Conflictrdquo p 72-73

Iran does not pose a direct threat to audi Arabia and the southern Gulf kingdomsmdashat least not for the time being However by building up its navy and deploying antiship missiles along its coasts Iran may imperil oil shipping in the Persian Gulf and the all-important Strait of Hormuz the Gulfs narrow opening to the Arabian Sea and the larger world beyond Although lacking major warships Iran has acquired three submarines twenty missile-armed patrol boats numerous shore-based missile batteries and a large inventory of antishipping mines This is enough General Zinni testified in 1999 to jeopardize open access to Gulf shipping lanes Only six miles wide at its narrowest point the Strait of Hormuz is described by the US Department of Energy as the worlds most important oil chokepoint because of the sheer volume of oilmdashover 15 million barrels per daymdashthat passes through it With missile batteries deployed at both entrances to the strait and a large inventory of anti-shipping mines Iran is in an ideal position to impede shipping through this vital channel Pentagon strategists suggest moreover that Iran will seek to do so in the event of a future clash with the United States Iran also seeks to extend its control over Abu Musa and both Greater and Lesser Tunb a small group of islands that guard the western approaches to the strait Iran seized the Tunbs from Ras al-Khaimah (part of the United Arab Emirates) in 1971 and has occupied them since It shared Abu Musa with Sharjah (another UAE component) until 1994 when it took control of the entire island When pressed by the UAE to submit the dispute over the islands to international mediation Tehran declared that they were an inseparable part of Iran46 Since then the Iranians have deployed antiship missiles on Abu Musa and fortified their positions on the Tunbs47

Collapses the global economy

Roberts 4 Paul- regular contributor to Harpers and NYT Magazine ldquoThe End of Oil On the Edge of a Perilous New Worldrdquo p 93-4

The obsessive focus on oil is hardly surprising given the stakes In the fast moving world of energy politics oil is not simply a source of world power but a medium for that power as well a substance whose huge importance encompasses entire nations in a global web that is sensitive to the smallest of variations A single oil event -- a pipeline explosion in Iraq political unrest in Venezuela a bellicose exchange between Russia and Saudi Arabia -- sends shockwaves through the world energy order pushes prices up or down and sets off tectonic shifts in global wealth and power In the volatile would of oil the tide could turn quickly As anxieties over the uncertainties in Iraq drove oil prices up to $40 the oil tide abruptly changed direction transferring tens of billions of dollars from the G-8 countries to the oil exporting countries and threatening the global economic recovery So embedded has oil became in todays political and economic spheres that the major Western governments now watch the oil markets as closely as they once watched the spread of communism This is because six of the last seven global recessions have been preceded by an oil price rise and fear is growing among economists and policy makers that in todays growth-dependent and energy-intensive global economy oil price volatility itself may eventually pose more risks to prosperity and stability and mere survival than terrorism or even war

56

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Modeling Advantage- China

China would love to drop a HEMP on Taiwan- lack of norm

Schneider 9 Mark- National Institute for Public Policy The Nuclear Doctrine and Forces of the Peoples Republic of China Comparative Strategy Volume 28 Issue 3 July 2009

There is also concern about Chinese preparations for a nuclear electromagnetic pulse attack on Taiwan the United States and Japan as part of its strategy to facilitate the conquest of Taiwan The Congressional Commission on the Threat to the United States from Electromagnetic Pulse reported that ldquoChina and Russia have considered limited nuclear attack options that unlike Cold War plans employ EMP as the primary or sole means of attackrdquo121 The 2005 Pentagon report on Chinese military power observed that ldquoSome PLA theorists are aware of the electromagnetic effect of using a high-altitude electromagnetic pulse (HEMP) and might consider using HEMP in an unconventional attack believing that the United States and other nations would not consider it as a use of force and a crossing of the nuclear thresholdrdquo122 A Congressional Research Service report by Ronald ORourke concluded that a US naval force coming to the aid of Taiwan against a Chinese attack would have to be prepared for use of nuclear weapons and EMP because ldquoChina could also use a nuclear-armed ballistic missile to detonate a nuclear warhead in the atmosphere to create a high-altitude electromagnetic pulse (EMP) intended to temporarily or permanently disable the electronic circuits of US or other civilian and military electronic systemsrdquo123 China expert Dr Michael Pillsbury has linked nuclear EMP attack to the Chinese ldquoassassins macerdquo concept of defeating the superior with the inferior Pillsbury has elsewhere noted that the March 2000 issue of Chinas Military Digest featured an article by Xian Fengli Lu Young and Ming Xiang which argued that ldquoEMP warheads will make it much easier to cross the nuclear thresholdrdquo124 The designers of the Chinese DF-11 SRBM ldquohave demonstrated the most interest in HEMP [high altitude nuclear EMP] weaponsrdquo125 According to the Wall Street Journal ldquoChina and Russia have the capability to launch EMP weaponsmdashand have let us know it China recently published an article on EMP in a Chinese-language technical journal To make sure the US got the message the article appeared in Englishrdquo126

This would collapse civilization

Straits Times 2k (Singapore) ldquoNo one gains in war over Taiwanrdquo June 25 lexisThe high-intensity scenario postulates a cross-strait war escalating into a full-scale war between the US and China If Washington were to conclude that splitting China would better serve its national interests then a full-scale war becomes unavoidable Conflict on such a scale would embroil other countries far and near and -horror of horrors -raise the possibility of a nuclear war Beijing has already told the US and Japan privately that it considers any country providing bases and logistics support to any US forces attacking China as belligerent parties open to its retaliation In the region this means South Korea Japan the Philippines and to a lesser extent Singapore If China were to retaliate east Asia will be set on fire And the conflagration may not end there as opportunistic powers elsewhere may try to overturn the existing world order With the US distracted Russia may seek to redefine Europes political landscape The balance of power in the Middle East may be similarly upset by the likes of Iraq In south Asia hostilities between India and Pakistan each armed with its own nuclear arsenal could enter a new and dangerous phase Will a full-scale Sino-US war lead to a nuclear war According to General Matthew Ridgeway commander of the US Eighth Army which fought against the Chinese in the Korean War the US had at the time thought of using nuclear weapons against China to save the US from military defeat In his book The Korean War a personal account of the military and political aspects of the conflict and its implications on future US foreign policy Gen Ridgeway said that US was confronted with two choices in Korea -truce or a broadened war which could have led to the use of nuclear weapons If the US had to resort to nuclear weaponry to defeat China long before the latter acquired a similar capability there is little hope of winning a war against China 50 years later short of using nuclear weapons The US estimates that China possesses about 20 nuclear warheads that can destroy major American cities Beijing also seems prepared to go for the nuclear option A Chinese military officer disclosed recently that Beijing was considering a review of its non first use principle regarding nuclear weapons Major-General Pan Zhangqiang president of the military-funded Institute for Strategic Studies told a gathering at the Woodrow Wilson International Centre for Scholars in Washington that although the government still abided by that principle there were strong pressures from the military to drop it He said military leaders considered the use of nuclear weapons mandatory if the country risked dismemberment as a result of foreign intervention Gen Ridgeway said that should that come to pass we would see the destruction of civilisation There would be no victors in such a war While the prospect of a nuclear Armaggedon over Taiwan might seem inconceivable it cannot be ruled out entirely for China puts sovereignty above everything else

57

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Modeling Advantage- Solvency

Establishing an environment that discourages EMP attacks is critical to prevent them from occurring

EMP Commission 4 Report of the Commission to Assess the Threat to the United States from Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP) Attack Volume 1 Executive Report 2004 Dr John S Foster Jr Mr Earl Gjelde Dr William R Graham (Chairman) Dr Robert J Hermann Mr Henry (Hank) M Kluepfel GEN Richard L Lawson USAF (Ret) Dr Gordon K Soper Dr Lowell L Wood Jr Dr Joan B Woodard

An EMP attack is one way for a terrorist activity to use a small amount of nuclear weaponrymdashpotentially just one weaponmdashin an effort to produce a catastrophic impact on our society but it is not the only way In addition there are potential applications of surface-burst nuclear weaponry biological and chemical warfare agents and cyber attacks that might cause damage that could reach large-scale long-term levels The first order of business is to prevent any of these attacks from occurring The US must establish a global environment that will profoundly discourage such attacks We must persuade nations to forgo obtaining nuclear weapons or to provide acceptable assurance that these weapons will neither threaten the vital interests of the United States nor fall into threatening hands

Plan resurrects the taboo

Bin amp Hongyi 9 Li- director of Arms Control Program at the Institute of International Studies and Nie- officer in the Peoplersquos Liberation Army ldquoAn Investigation of China ndash US Strategic Stabilityrdquo translation of an article published in Chinese in World Economics amp Politics 5-22-09

Damage to the nuclear taboo also comes from some pseudoscientific discussions These discussions completely ignore the effect of the nuclear taboo making casual suppositions about the use of nuclear weapons for example supposing nuclear nations after defeat in a conventional conflict must use nuclear weapons to reverse the war situation During every form of nuclear dialog between China and the United States American academics frequently engage in this type of ldquoacademicrdquo persuasion with the Chinese side The starting point is defending the US refusal to make a no first use pledge but this so-called academic propagandizing objectively weakens the confidence of Chinese scholars in the nuclear taboo During the Cold War the international anti-nuclear movement strengthened the nuclear taboo After the end of the Cold War because the large scale nuclear confrontation between the US and the Soviet Union fundamentally ended the influence of the grass roots of the international anti-nuclear movement has weakened This is not beneficial to the maintenance and strengthening of the nuclear taboo China from the perspective of protecting its own national interest should invest resources in propagandizing the danger of nuclear war oppose the first use of nuclear weapons and the threat to use nuclear weapons strengthening the nuclear taboo

58

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Israeli Strikes Bad

Israeli preemption causes conflagration

Eiland 10 Maj Gen Giora- senior researcher at the Institute for National Security Studies (INSS) in Tel Aviv former head of the Israeli National Security Council ldquoIsraels Military Optionrdquo The Washington Quarterly Volume 33 Issue 1 January 2010 pages 115 - 130

With these risks in mind Israel has made it clear that a military attack is an option The risks however are immense First an attack could fail tactically which would seriously harm Israels deterrent and provide Iran with a good excuse to attack Israel Second Iran could fight back conventionally which is more likely or even with chemical and biological weapons which would be more devastating Third an attack would mobilize Hezbollah increasing the chances of a conflict between Israel and Syria Fourth Israel will certainly lose its already minor international support More importantly Iran will no longer be seen as the bad guy Fifth Iran may choose to retaliate using Persian Gulf oil markets Closing the Strait of Hormuz or attacking the oil fields of the Persian Gulf states will create a serious worldwide crisis Sixth an attack will change the perspective of the Iranian public which currently does not have very strong negative feelings toward Israel And seventh it will increase the anti-Israel sentiment throughout the region An Israeli attack will involve other countries (Israel might need to use their air space with or without permission) This indirect and passive assistance to Israel will push Persian Gulf countries to take anti-Israel or anti-US steps The attack in fact could serve as the straw that breaks the camels back and may even provoke strong reactions from governments throughout the region

59

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Testing Advantage

Mohan 87 C Raja- Henry Alfred Kissinger Scholar in the John W Kluge Center at the Library of Congress ldquoNuclear Test Ban Receding Hopesrdquo Economic and Political Weekly Vol 22 No 7 (Feb 14 1987)The most lucrative among the nuclear weapons on the design board are the so- called third generation nuclear weapons The first generation weapons are those based on nuclear fission-the atomic bombs The second generation weapons are those designed around nuclear fusion-the hydrogen bombs The transition from the first generation to the second saw enormous increases in explosive power and tremendous design efficiency-in terms of yield-to-weight ratio that is larger explosive power for lesser overall weight of the weapons facilitating the development of a variety of nuclear weapons for different delivery systems The third generation weapons involve the development of a number of sophisticated designs which would channel a part of the nuclear explosive energy to a form more precisely tailored to the need than just blast and heat the most well known effects of nuclear weapons in the past4 The neutron bomb built in the 1970s was a precursor to the third generation nuclear weapons Among the major third generation concepts under investigation are the X-ray laser the gamma-ray laser the microwave bomb and the electomagnetic pulse (EMP) bomb The first two designs seek to convert nuclear explosive power into high energy radiation either in the X- or gamma-region of the electromagnetic spectrum It is hoped that such powerful laser weapons driven by nuclear weapons could play a central role in the proposed defence against a missile attack (star wars) Although the SDI has been advertised as a non-nuclear defence against nuclear weapons nuclear-driven exotic weapons have emerged as serious components of the programme In a microwave weapon the nuclear explosive energy is converted into microwaves Having lesser energy than the gamma- or X-ray laser the microwave beam weapons are not designed to destroy Soviet missiles in flight but would be used to debilitate the electronics of the missile and its warhead The EMP bomb is based on the observation that a nuclear explosion in the upper atmosphere would generate an intense pulse of high voltage electric charge which could put out all electric installations over a large area on the ground5 The EMP bomb would maximise the generation of this electromagnetic pulse The American nuclear weapons laboratories thus see the continuation of nuclear testing as essential for the investigation of these new concepts in the design of nuclear weapons Not only would they need to test but do a lot of it Because of the complexity of the third generation nuclear weapon design much more testing than before is required to develop these weapons According to American weapons designers the perfection of any one of the third generation designs could require 100 to 200 test explosions6 In the past only about six underground number tests on the average were required to develop a new nuclear weapon The requirements of the US nuclear strategy in coming years thus clearly demands more intensive testing of nuclear weapons A Comprehensive Test Ban which would block the new round of qualitative improvement in the design of nuclear weapons is clearly not on the American agenda

Acronym Institute 4 ldquoBallistic Missile Defence and the Weaponisation of Spacerdquo httpwwwacronymorgukspacerejintrohtmAt present any high altitude nuclear detonation would violate the provisions of the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT) Pending this treatys entry into force the ban on nuclear explosions is bolstered by moratoria undertaken by all the nuclear weapon states and by India and Pakistan Few would have the technological capacity to undertake such an explosion and it would be extremely difficult if not impossible for a perpetrator to evade detection As with a hostile missile launch the origin of a nuclear detonation can be quickly identified and would invite unified international diplomatic action or failing that overwhelming retaliation Though the technology to prevent a high altitude nuclear explosion is not available the perpetrator would incur high political costs for crossing the nuclear threshold and damaging space assets beneficial to millions around the world For a number of technological and political reasons therefore a high altitude nuclear detonation is unlikely although it cannot be ruled out altogether

60

Cornell HKHANE Aff

EMPacts Econ

Kills global econ

Riddle 4 Lieutenant Colonel Thomas C- United States Army ldquoNuclear High Altitude Electromagnetic Pulse ndash Implications For Homeland Security And Homeland Defenserdquo US Army War College 03 May 2004

Additionally the worldwide economy has grown increasingly interdependent The economic disruptions that occurred in the wake of the 2001 attacks provided a clear demonstration of this interdependence The disruption of the interdependent critical infrastructure of the United States would likely produce worldwide economic disruption The extended loss of the American consumer markets disruption of domestic manufacturing capability and chaotic financial institutions would contribute to an extended period of worldwide economic disruption

US economic collapse will destroy the global economy

Mead 4 Walter Russell- Senior Fellow at Council on Foreign Relations ldquoAmericas Sticky Powerrdquo Foreign Policy MarApr 2004

Similarly in the last 60 years as foreigners have acquired a greater value in the United States-government and private bonds direct and portfolio private investments-more and more of them have acquired an interest in maintaining the strength of the US-led system A collapse of the US economy and the ruin of the dollar would do more than dent the prosperity of the United States Without their best customer countries including China and Japan would fall into depressions The financial strength of every country would be severely shaken should the United States collapse Under those circumstances debt becomes a strength not a weakness and other countries fear to break with the United States because they need its market and own its securities Of course pressed too far a large national debt can turn from a source of strength to a crippling liability and the United States must continue to justify other countries faith by maintaining its long-term record of meeting its financial obligations But like Samson in the temple of the Philistines a collapsing US economy would inflict enormous unacceptable damage on the rest of the world That is sticky power with a vengeance

Electricity would be out for years

Emanuelson 9 Jerry ldquoNuclear Electromagnetic Pulserdquo Futurescience LLC Jan 26 2009A nuclear EMP attack would knock out most if not all of the electric power grid The extent of the electrical grid damage would depend upon the size of the bomb Full repair of the power grid would take anywhere from two months to three years or more Many components such as large transformers which are normally resistant to large voltage transients would be destroyed by the DC-like current induced by the E3 component of the pulse when they are connected to very long copper wires The design life of the transformers in the United States power grid is 40 years but the average age of these transformers is already more than 42 years If power companies were to keep adequate spare parts on hand the repair time could be kept closer to the two-month time frame Adequate parts are not currently being kept on hand and in most cases there are very long lead times for replacement parts for the electrical grid if the parts are not kept on hand by the electrical utility There is currently no United States manufacturing capability for the large power transformers in its power grid All of these extremely heavy transformers have to be manufactured and imported from other countries The current delivery time for these transformers is 3 years from the time that the order is placed but widespread destruction of these transformers would completely overwhelm the very limited worldwide production capacity

61

Cornell HKHANE Aff

EMPacts Heg

EMP attack kills heg

Riddle 4 Lieutenant Colonel Thomas C- United States Army ldquoNuclear High Altitude Electromagnetic Pulse ndash Implications For Homeland Security And Homeland Defenserdquo US Army War College 03 May 2004

To jump start national recovery efforts would likely require significant portions of the remaining overseas military resources of the United States to focus their efforts on domestic recovery The resulting lack of a viable forward presence coupled with an American government intently focused on internal recovery could result in numerous regional conflicts as nations attempted to gain advantage or to redress old grievances Several of these regional conflicts (India-Pakistan Israel-Syria China-Russia China-India) certainly have the potential to involve further use of WMD

Heg collapse results in wars around the globe

Ferguson 4 Niall Senior Fellow the Hoover Institution Stanford JulyAugust 2004 ldquoA World without Powerrdquo httpwwwforeignpolicycomstorycmsphpstory_id=2579amppage=3 ACC 91604 p online

The worst effects of the new Dark Age would be felt on the edges of the waning great powers The wealthiest ports of the global economymdashfrom New York to Rotterdam to Shanghaimdashwould become the targets of plunderers and pirates With ease terrorists could disrupt the freedom of the seas targeting oil tankers aircraft carriers and cruise liners while Western nations frantically concentrated on making their airports secure Meanwhile limited nuclear wars could devastate numerous regions beginning in the Korean peninsula and Kashmir perhaps ending catastrophically in the Middle East In Latin America wretchedly poor citizens would seek solace in Evangelical Christianity imported by US religious orders In Africa the great plagues of AIDS and malaria would continue their deadly work The few remaining solvent airlines would simply suspend services to many cities in these continents who would wish to leave their privately guarded safe havens to go there For all these reasons the prospect of an apolar world should frighten us today a great deal more than it frightened the heirs of Charlemagne If the United States retreats from global hegemonymdashits fragile self-image dented by minor setbacks on the imperial frontiermdashits critics at home and abroad must not pretend that they are ushering in a new era of multipolar harmony or even a return to the good old balance of power Be careful what you wish for The alternative to unipolarity would not be multipolarity at all It would be apolaritymdasha global vacuum of power And far more dangerous forces than rival great powers would benefit from such a not-so-new world disorder

62

Cornell HKHANE Aff

EMPacts Earthquake

Nuclear EMPs cause earthquakes

Mahler 10 William K- M2 Technologies ldquoHugo Chavez Cites Russian Sourcesrdquo Cape Cod Today January 22 2010

As for the ability to make an Earthquake Electro Magnetic Pulse has been around since the first atomic bomb tests way back during World War II It can be separated from a blast meaning it functions on its own as a tool no nuke explosions necessary (remember Hiroshima and Nagasaki) Over in Europe some years back it was around the Netherlands or a neighboring country where citizens protested a USA weapon involving EMP Why They feared (and rightfully so) that weapon would be used to hurt Russia for example How bad could it hurt Give the weapon a target such as a large building like our Empire State Building in New York once fired there would be hole clean through I suppose as clean as a light saber blade could cut in sci-fi such as Star Wars The EMP can penetrate anything to my knowledge so yes a shock jolt from an EMP could absolutely trigger an Earthquake no doubt about it and probably sans the radiation fallout guaranteed by an atomic (nuclear) blast

63

Cornell HKHANE Aff

EMPacts GPS

The EMP would disable GPS technologies

Scott 9 William B- Rocky Mountain Bureau Chief for Aviation Week amp Space Technology Michael J Coumatos- US Space Command director of wargaming William J Birnes- PhD from New York University ldquoCounterspace The Next Hours of World War IIIrdquo p 18

The high-level cram course on nuclear weapons effects Aster had received when he took over as STRATCOM chief had provided a basic understanding of electromagnetic pulse effects But that was thin knowledge at best The general needed more to assess the full spectrum of impacts nowMajor why would GPS be affected by that nuke All the Navstars are in much higher mid-Earth orbits something like twelve-thousand-plus miles right Thats too high for EMP effects cause theres no air to ionize that far outCorrect sir But that detonation created an extremely high radiation flux and its basically charging up the Van Allen Belt even though its way out there too In turn that causes what we call secondary radiation effects in electronic circuits on GPS birdsmdashthings like electronic gate latch-ups data losses and other effects It also created an ion-charged layer in the upper atmosphere which acts like a shield that blocks the weak signals from GPS and other satellites Most GPS navigation and timing signals are now prevented from reaching Earth especially out in the Pacific Probably going to affect the downlinks from some GEO birds too the major added referring to platforms in geostationary orbit 22500 miles from Earth

64

Cornell HKHANE Aff

EMPacts Satelites

A HANE would wipe out satelites

Kueter 7 Jeff- president of the George C Marshall Institute ldquoChinarsquos Space Ambitions ndash And Oursrdquo The New Atlantis Number 16 Spring 2007 pp 7-22

Another type of threat to space assets is high-altitude nuclear detonation An enemy could arm a missile with a nuclear warhead launch it and explode the warhead in space All satellites within the line of sight of the explosion would be destroyed or rendered ineffective immediately with the effects dissipating with distance from the explosion Whatrsquos more the radiation released by a single low-yield high-altitude nuclear explosion ldquocould disablemdashin weeks to monthsmdashall low-Earth orbit satellites not specifically hardened to withstand the radiation generated by that explosionrdquo according to the Defense Threat Reduction Agency Most US satellitesmdashincluding those commercial satellites that are used extensively for defense communicationsmdashare not hardened to withstand such an attack and they lack the maneuvering capabilities needed to ldquoget out of the wayrdquo of the attacking missile the explosion or the radioactive effects China certainly has the missile and nuclear capabilities required to conduct such an attack (So too do the United States Russia the United Kingdom France and possibly Israel India and Pakistan North Korea apparently lacks the missile competence and Iran probably does not have either the missile or nuclear know-howmdashas of this writing) Needless to say this most extreme measure would likely be attempted only in times of acute international crisis

Bright 2 Melanie ldquoHigh-Altitude Nuclear Explosions Blind Deaf And Dumbrdquo Janes Defence Weekly October 23 2002 httpwwwglobalsecurityorgorgnews2002nuke_explosionhtm

However blowing up targets on the Earths surface is only part of the story According to Dr Dennis Papadopoulos from the Department of Physics University of Maryland If someone were to explode a 10kT nuclear weapon at a high enough altitude over their own territory 90 of the worlds low earth orbit [LEO] satellites would be lost within a month In addition to the electromagnetic pulse (EMP) phenomenon generally understood satellites are vulnerable to the Christofilos Effect When a high-altitude nuclear explosion (HANE) is detonated at about 100km altitude the Earths magnetic field accelerates the large cloud of electrons and protons released by the blast The radiation particles speed up spread out all the while accelerating circling the globe until racing around it at speeds approaching the speed of light This effect is named after Dr Nicholas Christofilos who predicted this phenomenon The detonation produces an artificial radiation belt that within weeks to at most months delivers a lethal dose of radiation to [LEO] satellites said Dr Papadopoulos who worked with Dr Christofilos at what is now the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory The superpowers conducted six scheduled nuclear explosions in space during the Cuban Missile Crisis These HANEs damaged or destroyed all seven satellites then in orbit These tests conducted before the 1963 Atmospheric Test Ban Treaty provided the only experimental data on the vulnerability of satellites to nuclear detonation Today the implications of a HANE are far greater as millions use the 250-plus satellites in LEO

65

Cornell HKHANE Aff

EMPacts Healthcare

Ross 8 LH Jr Mihelic FM ldquoHealthcare vulnerabilities to electromagnetic pulserdquo Am J Disaster Med 2008 Nov-Dec3(6)321-5 Center for Homeland Security Studies Graduate School of Medicine University of Tennessee Knoxville Tennessee USA

The US healthcare system is particularly vulnerable to the effects of electromagnetic pulse (EMP) attack because of the systems technological sophistication but while national defense planners prepare for the considerable threat that EMP poses there has been little or no recognition of this threat within the US healthcare community and neither has there been any significant healthcare planning to deal with such an eventuality Recognition of the risk presented by EMP and advance institution of appropriate strategies to mitigate its effects on the healthcare system could enable the preservation of much of that systems function in the face of EMP-related disruptions and will greatly further all-hazards disaster preparations

66

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Morality Advantage

Wilson 8 Clay- Specialist in Technology and National Security Foreign Affairs Defense and Trade Division ldquoHigh Altitude Electromagnetic Pulse (HEMP) and High Power Microwave (HPM) Devices Threat Assessmentsrdquo Congressional Research Service March 26 2008

HEMP and HPM energy weapons primarily damage electronic systems with little or no direct effect on humans however these effects may be difficult to limit or control As HEMP or HPM energy fields instantly spread outward they may also affect nearby hospital equipment or personal medical devices such as pace-makers or other parts of the surrounding civilian infrastructure For this reason some international human rights organizations may object to the development or testing of HEMP or HPM weapons

67

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT Verifiability

Plan results in verifiable operational change and posture changes still have positive effects

Feiveson 99 Harold- Senior Research Policy Scientist at Princeton co-principal investigator of Princetons research Program on Science and Global Security ldquoChapter 4 Nuclear Strategy and Targeting Doctrinerdquo in ldquoThe Nuclear Turning Pointrdquo The Brookings Institution 1999

It will not be easy to break out of cold war thought patterns regarding the use of nuclear weapons War plans are carefully guarded secrets and changes in them can at best be verified only indirectly and over time through corresponding changes in force posture Nuclear doctrine is important however because it is the basis for force structure and operations and could largely determine how the entire nuclear command system would react in a crisis An evolving dialogue between US and Russian military leaders on this subject would be useful and could help pave the way toward very deep reductions in nuclear forces

Plan leads to removal of specific warheads although we cannot predict the exact change because the information is classified

Bernardin 99 Michael- Provost for Theoretical Institute of Thermonuclear Studies Los Alamos National Laboratory ldquoElectromagnetic Pulse Threats to US Military And Civilian Infrastructurerdquo Hearing Before The Military Research And Development Subcommittee October 7 1999

The Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) and the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) identify current and projected nuclear weapon threats and provide inputs to the Department of Energy nuclear design labs Los Alamos and Livermore National Laboratories who model foreign nuclear weapons The labs each have over 25 years of experience in performing this type of modeling The weapon models serve as a basis for associated EMP threat assessmentsFor the purpose of EMP assessment it is convenient to group the threat weapons into the following five categories One single-stage fission weapons two single-stage boosted weapons three nominal two-stage thermonuclear weapons with yields up to a few megatons four two-stage thermonuclear weapons with yields over a few megatons and five special technology thermonuclear weaponsThe reason for this grouping and the threat weapons themselves will be discussed in closed session The EMP produced by these weapons is also a topic delegated largely to closed session

Specific warhead removal is verifiable

Davis et al 10 ldquoTechnical Steps to Support Nuclear Arsenal Downsizingrdquo American Physical Society Report Commitee Jay Davis Chair John Browne Patricia Lewis Carolyn Pura Allen Sessoms Tom Shea Francis Slakey Benn Tannenbaum Jim Tape John Taylor Peter D Zimmerman Feb 18 2010

As bilateral US-Russian nuclear stockpile reductions result in arsenals that no longer dwarf those of other nuclear-armed states further reductions will require working with scientists and negotiators from a broader range of countries At some point it may be useful to monitor warhead dismantlement in such a way that the specific model (eg W88) can be determined Template methods (matching a particular radiation signature) may be useful in addition to attribute measurements (ensuring that certain measured levels exceed defined limits in order to increase confidence in the contents) and may prove to be very attractive for some applications A distinctive template would be created for each model and individual samples would then be compared to the templates on file to confirm (or reject) a declared item The templates could include for example a combination of passive radiation signatures andor radiation signatures caused by subjecting an item to a stream of neutrons andor gamma rays

68

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT Verifiability

The US has specific missiles designed to lay down an EMP attack

Lewallen 2k John- Public Ocean Access Network ldquoThe Blackout Bombrdquo North Coast Express Spring 2000 httpsonicnet~doretkIssues00-03-SPRtheblackhtml

Any future global war is likely to begin with a few Blackout Bombs China Russia the U nited S tates and other nuclear powers have several nuclear missiles and perhaps weaponized satellites designed to lay down EMP over continent-size areas instantaneously While every nation on Earth is vulnerable to attack from the United States the United States is vulnerable indeed defenseless to a secret class of nuclear weapons which has captured the attention of the major nuclear powers--China Russia Britain France and the United States itself--for the past thirty-eight years

Missile removal is verifiable

Davis et al 10 ldquoTechnical Steps to Support Nuclear Arsenal Downsizingrdquo American Physical Society Report Commitee Jay Davis Chair John Browne Patricia Lewis Carolyn Pura Allen Sessoms Tom Shea Francis Slakey Benn Tannenbaum Jim Tape John Taylor Peter D Zimmerman Feb 18 2010

Recent monitoring and inspection practices affecting the United States and Russia focused on verifying the numbers and locations of launchers and delivery platforms (and hence deducing the maximum number of warheads that could be deployed on strategic delivery systems) Modest reductions in US and Russian stockpile numbers (eg 1500) may rely primarily on these existing practices while more significant reductions in total stockpiles (1000 or fewer) will likely require the use of more intrusive techniques to verify numbers of warheads If and when reductions in all nuclear arsenals are verified by multilateral agreements the techniques employed and the inspectors must guarantee international assurance of compliance

Unilateral willingness to verify is best- formal agreements fail

Bunn 2 Matthew- the Project on Managing the Atom (MTA) Belfer Center Harvard ldquoIntroduction Monitoring Nuclear Stockpiles and Reductionsrdquo NTI October 28 2002 httpwwwntiorge_researchcnwmmonitoringindexasp

Finally it is important to understand that while most formal US-Russian transparency initiatives have been stymied by continuing secrecy concerns and the lack of strong incentives for both governments to agree to them informal measures have created an absolutely unprecedented degree of openness transparency and cooperation between the two nuclear weapons complexes As a result of a broad range of scientific and threat-reduction cooperation US and Russian experts have now visited most of the key facilities in the other nationrsquos nuclear weapons complexes and there has been a huge increase in the level of detailed understanding of what goes on at individual facilities and buildings within these complexes Some threat reduction programs have formalized this transparency with specific agreements regulating access to sensitive sites Both sides (particularly the United States ) have also unilaterally revealed a wealth of information about their nuclear stockpiles and complexes in both published reports and other sources The level of openness that now exists would have been completely unthinkable as recently as early 1994 (when it was still true that Russia was refusing to allow US experts direct access for implementing security upgrades at any facility in Russia where actual HEU or plutonium existed)

69

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Verifiability Extensions

Specific weapons are designed for EMP strikes

Schneider 7 Mark- National Institute for Public Policy The Emerging EMP Threat to the United States United States Nuclear Strategy Forum No 6 November 2007

All nuclear weapons detonated at high altitude produce EMP but some types of nuclear weapons are designed specifically to be efficient at producing EMP In 2004 Clay Wilson of the Congressional Research Service reported that ldquoA HEMP [high altitude electromagnetic pulse] attack directed against the United States might involve a one-megaton nuclear warhead or a smaller warhead that is specially-designed [to produce EMP] using a burst several hundred miles above the mid-western states to affect computers on both coastsrdquo 3

Extension- Missile removal is verifiable

WSLF 2 ldquoBanning Ballistic Missilesrdquo Western States Legal Foundation Feb 1 2002 httpwwwwslfweborgspaceMCRbriefhtm

A ban on missile flight tests would be relatively easy to verify It should include a system of inspections to assure that civilian rocket launches do not conceal efforts to develop weapons delivery systems These inspections could make it more difficult to develop and deploy weapons systems that operate through or from space If the type of inspections appropriate for controlling ballistic missiles worked well it could provide the technical and political basis for more comprehensive agreements aimed at preventing the further militarization of space

Specific warheads and their composition can be verified

Davis et al 10 ldquoTechnical Steps to Support Nuclear Arsenal Downsizingrdquo American Physical Society Report Commitee Jay Davis Chair John Browne Patricia Lewis Carolyn Pura Allen Sessoms Tom Shea Francis Slakey Benn Tannenbaum Jim Tape John Taylor Peter D Zimmerman Feb 18 2010

The techniques that have received the most attention for the purposes of warhead or material verification involve passive gamma and neutron measurements Medium resolution gamma measurements (eg by sodium iodide (NaI) detectors) could be used to indicate the presence or absence of plutonium and to match weapon template signatures High-resolution gamma measurements (eg high-purity Germanium detectors) provide in addition the ability to determine isotopic ratios indicative of weapons grade plutonium and americium content thus revealing whether the plutonium is weapons grade and the time since the last americium separation In general neutron measurement methods ranging from simple neutron counting to more complex coincidence and multiplicity techniques have been used to determine plutonium massesMeasurements of some highly-enriched uranium (HEU) characteristics and material mass using specially-developed gamma measurement techniques have been shown to be possible under some carefully-controlled conditions It is likely that high confidence measurements of HEU characteristics will require the use of active interrogation techniques Experiments and demonstrations using a range of measurement systems ndash sodium iodide highpurity germanium and helium-3 detectors as well as neutron multiplicity counters ndash have been performed to determine the feasibility and applicability of these techniques for potential verification measures

70

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT CMR

The pentagon is no longer cares about EMPs

Timmerman 2 Kenneth R- director of the Foundation for Democracy in Iran 2006 Nobel Peace Prize Nominee ldquoUS Threatened With EMP Attackrdquo Feb 1 2002

Twenty years ago only the Soviet Union had the capability to launch an EMP attack on the United States by exploding a nuclear warhead 500 kilometers (310 miles) in space Pentagon planners spent billions of dollars protecting US military equipment against EMP during the Cold War But during the last decade the military has canceled many of those protection programs alleging an end to the threat of a Soviet nuclear strike And none of our civilian infrastructure is protected because of the high cost

71

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Politics Link Answers

Congress doesnrsquot care about minor operational changes like the plan

Woolf 7 Amy F Specialist in National Defense Congressional Research Service ldquoCongress And US Nuclear Weapons Review and Oversight of Policies and Programsrdquo The Nonproliferation Review (peer-reviewed) Volume 14 Issue 3 November 2007

The US Congress charged with overseeing US nuclear weapons policy and programs usually addresses such policies and programs through the annual authorization and appropriations process focusing mostly on questions of how many and what types of weapons the United States should deploy with little attention paid to questions about nuclear weapons strategy doctrine and policy The oversight process has brought about some significant changes in the plans for US nuclear weapons including the elimination of funding for the Robust Nuclear Earth Penetrator study and the shift of that funding into a study of the Reliable Replacement Warhead But with the focus on authorizations and appropriations along with the divided jurisdiction over nuclear weapons policy and programs in congressional committees Congress has not either recently or during the Cold War and post-Cold War eras conducted a more comprehensive review of US nuclear weapons strategy policy or force structure Changes in committee jurisdictions could affect the oversight process but as long as nuclear weapons policy and programs remain a relatively low priority for most members of Congress and the country at large it is unlikely that Congress will pursue such a comprehensive debate

No link- EMP weapons donrsquot have a constituency

Forstchen 8 William R PhD Author of ldquoOne Second Afterrdquo httpwwwonesecondaftercompbwp_d10e87d9wp_d10e87d9html

EMP has managed to ldquostealthrdquo its way on to the highly dangerous list and few except for a small number of personnel in the Pentagon various research labs and men like Congressman Bartlett (R MD) who heads the Congressional Investigative Committee on EMP are aware of it For one it has a certain ldquosci-firdquo sound to it which makes many dismiss the potential before the discussion has even started Second the only way to truly evaluate the threat and demonstrate it is to detonate a nuclear weapon something we have not done since the full test ban went into effect decades ago It is therefore not ldquovisiblerdquo to us the way another airliner smashing into a skyscraper is now forever imprinted on our national psyche feared and prepared for Next with all the competing issues and threats in the world EMP simply does not have a ldquoconstituencyrdquo of influence Only a few members of Congress our military and scientific community are issuing the warnings There are no Hollywood stars placing themselves in front of cameras with this as their cause the few times it has been used in popular movies it has been portrayed inaccurately often absurdly

72

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Politics Link Answers

Congress doesnrsquot care

Matthews 8 William ldquoLittle Congressional Interest in EMP Threatrdquo Defense News Jul 10 2008Once again a congressional commission is warning that an electromagnetic pulse attack against the United States could wipe out the nations electronics-dependent civilization And again hardly anyone is listening Only a handful of the 60 members of the House Armed Services Committee showed up for a hearing on the EMP threat July 10 and most didnt stick around for the whole two-hour sessionIts obvious that theres not very much interest in it said Rep Roscoe Bartlett R-Md who asked for the hearing There are lots of seats vacant he lamented

Failure to reduce the threat of EMP strikes on the US will kill Obamarsquos capital

Kessler 9 Ronald- chief Washington correspondent of Newsmaxcom ldquoObama Democrats Expose US to EMP Attackrdquo Newsmax 17 Aug 2009

Despite polls showing that Americans overwhelmingly support missile defense President Obamarsquos administration already has cut the Pentagonrsquos missile defense budget by $14 billion or 15 percent If an EMP attack occurs we will have the Democrats to blame But without voting machines or any form of communication Americans who survive will not be able to vote them out of office

Plan prevents capital draining disputes for Obama

Hitchens 9 Theresa- Director UN Institute for Disarmament Research ldquoSaving Space Threat Proliferation and Mitigationrdquo International Commission on Nuclear Non-proliferation and Disarmament May 19 2009

While it remains to be seen what direction the new administration of President Barak Obamamdashwho spoke out against space weapons during the presidential campaign mdashwill take regarding national security in space (as well as regarding overall relations with China) it cannot be denied that the issue of how best to approach protection of space assets remains in mid-2009 a major issue in the domestic US debate over national security

73

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Politics Link Turn

Plan is a win for Obama- bolsters his agenda

New York Times 9 Christopher Drew October 28 2009 lthttpwwwnytimescom20091029business29defensehtml_r=1gt

When the Obama administration proposed canceling a host of expensive weapons systems last spring some of the military industryrsquos allies in Congress assumed as they had in the past that they would have the final say But as the president signed a $680 billion military policy bill on Wednesday it was clear that he had succeeded in paring back nearly all of the programs and setting a tone of greater restraint than the Pentagon had seen in many years Now the question is whether Mr Obama can sustain that push next year when the midterm elections are likely to make Congress more resistant to further cuts and job losses White House officials say Mr Obama took advantage of a rare political moment to break through one of Washingtonrsquos most powerful lobbies and trim more weapons systems than any president had in decades Rahm Emanuel the White House chief of staff said Wednesday that the plan was to threaten a veto over a prominent program mdash in this case the F-22 fighter jet mdash ldquoto show we were willing to expend political capital and could win on something that people thought we could notrdquo Once the Senate voted in July to stop buying F-22s Mr Emanuel said in an interview that success ldquoreverberated downrdquo to help sustain billions of dollars of cuts in Army modernization missile defense and other programs Mr Emanuel said the strategy emerged when the defense secretary Robert M Gates told Mr Obama they needed to ldquoshake up sacred cows and be seen as taking on fightsrdquo Military analysts said Mr Gates a holdover from the Bush administration also aimed at the most bloated programs And Senator John McCain of Arizona the former Republican presidential candidate who has criticized the Pentagonrsquos cost overruns provided Mr Obama with political cover to make the cuts without being seen as soft on the military ldquoThey probably get an lsquoArsquo from the standpoint of their success on their major initiativesrdquo said Fred Downey a former Senate aide who is now vice president for national security at the Aerospace Industries Association ldquoThey probably got all of them but one or maybe two and thatrsquos an extraordinarily high scorerdquo

Winners win

Pascal 9 Marc staff writer for The Moderate Voice 1052009 lthttpthemoderatevoicecom48571obamaE28099s-only-priority-get-re-electedgt

Many political leaders incorrectly confuse political capital with financial capital The first is a perpetually renewable commodity if used correctly and the latter is always finite no matter how much is amassed One cannot hoard political capital for some future battle that may or may not come It grows and shrinks directly as one uses it and it directly mirrors political fights taken and avoided Actually winning on certain core issues and major legislative battles helps increase political capital for future use But not using political capital causes it to dissolve rapidly Talking too much and never getting anything accomplished is a good recipe to dissipate valuable political capital

74

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT Geomagnetic Storms

Geomagnetic storms are predictable- prevention measures exist

PSEPC 2 Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness Canada ldquoGeomagnetic Storms - Reducing the Threat to Critical Infrastructure in Canadardquo 25 April 2002 httpwwwsolarstormsorgCanadaPipelineshtml

Preventative measures have been implemented to avoid events such as the 1989 Quebec blackout System operators in Canada have developed and implemented procedures to respond to these emergencies thereby reducing potential damage due to GICs Since 1989 Hydro-Quebec has spent more than $12 billion installing transmission line series capacitors These capacitors block GIC flow in order to prevent them from causing damage to the system Hydro-Quebec has also installed monitoring equipment that spots voltage fluctuations and immediately notifies operators so that they may redistribute the load to other parts of the network Additional protective measures include disconnecting the links between power grids desensitizing automatic control systems delaying power station maintenance and delaying the replacement of equipment Utilities are also relying on space weather forecasting to help remain operational during geomagnetic storms Operators can implement conservative operating procedures once they have received an advance warning of a storm threat

EMPs are too spontaneous- the protections fail

Survival 9 ldquoElectromagnetic Pulse (EMP) Review of One Second Afterrdquo Survival 2013 September 20 2009EMP is the energy surge that comes off a nuclear explosion If that explosion takes place in space say 300 miles above the surface we will feel only the tingling sensation thatrsquos similar to what we feel when lightning strikes nearby But all the electronics in the country will feel it and will be blown out The pulse travels down anything that serves as an antenna anything that is metal and fries all the equipment thatrsquos running Because the pulse is ldquofront-loadedrdquo therersquos no build-up or warning to allow surge protectors or circuit breakers to function It will stop cars dead in their tracks (unless yoursquore driving one of the 1965 or so models that the government wants to get off the road) and will do even more damage to airplanes (As many as a quarter million people who are flying at any given time would be killed immediately)

Geomagnetic storms pale in comparison to EMP strikes

Foster et al 8 ldquoReport of the Commission to Assess the Threat to the United States from Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP) Attackrdquo April 2008 Dr John S Foster Jr Mr Earl Gjelde Dr William R Graham (Chairman) Dr Robert J Hermann Mr Henry (Hank) M Kluepfel Gen Richard L Lawson USAF (Ret) Dr Gordon K Soper Dr Lowell L Wood Jr Dr Joan B Woodard

Geomagnetic storms represent an approximation to an E3-induced voltage effect The experience to date is of events that may be orders of magnitude smaller in scope and less severe than that expected from an EMP mdash although the Commission has also investigated the impact of a 100-year superstorm The induced geomagnetic superstorm currents in the transmission lines will cause hundreds of high voltage transformers to saturate creating a severe reactive load in the power system leading to voltage collapse in the affected area and damage to elements of the transmission system The nature of this threat did not allow for experimental testing of the E3 effect so this historical record is the best information on the effect

75

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT Geomagnetic Storms

Three times the damage

Foster et al 8 ldquoReport of the Commission to Assess the Threat to the United States from Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP) Attackrdquo April 2008 Dr John S Foster Jr Mr Earl Gjelde Dr William R Graham (Chairman) Dr Robert J Hermann Mr Henry (Hank) M Kluepfel Gen Richard L Lawson USAF (Ret) Dr Gordon K Soper Dr Lowell L Wood Jr Dr Joan B Woodard

The late time EMP or E3 follows E1 and E2 and may last for a minute or more The E3 pulse is similar in a great many respects to geomagnetic effects induced by solar storms Solar storms and their impacts on electrical systems with long lines have been thoroughly evaluated and are known to cause serious damage to major electrical system components at much lower levels than the reasonably possible E3 impact This damage has been incurred in spite of functioning in-place protective systems Given the preceding E1 and E2 pulse damage to the protective systems and other system components damage from E3 to unprotected major system components is virtually assured

EMPs worse- no ozone protection and cascading effects

Forstchen 8 William R PhD Author of ldquoOne Second Afterrdquo httpwwwonesecondaftercompbwp_d10e87d9wp_d10e87d9html

EMP is shorthand for Electro Magnetic Pulse It is a rather unusual and frightening by-product when a nuclear bomb is detonated above the earthrsquos atmosphere We all know that our atmosphere and the magnetic field which surrounds our planet is a thin layer which not only keeps us alive but also protects us from dangerous radiation from the sun On a fairly regular basis there are huge solar storms on the sunrsquos surface which emit powerful jets of deadly radiation If not for the protective layer of our atmosphere and magnetic field those storms would fry us At times though the storm is so power that enough disruptive energy reaches the earthrsquos surface that it drowns out radio waves and even shorts electrical power grids this happened several years back in CanadaView the detonation of a nuclear bomb two hundred miles straight up as the same thing but infinitely more powerful since it is so close by As the bomb explodes it emits a powerful wave of gamma rays As this energy release hits the upper atmosphere it creates a electrical disturbance know as the Compton Effect The intensity is magnified View it as a small pebble rolling down a slope hitting a larger one setting that in motion until finally you have an avalanche

EMP strikes are frontloaded- no protection

Forstchen 8 William R PhD Author of ldquoOne Second Afterrdquo httpwwwonesecondaftercompbwp_d10e87d9wp_d10e87d9html

Wouldnrsquot circuit breakers and surge protectors stop it This is where the effect of EMP starts to get complex All electricity travels of course at the speed of light The circuit breakers that are built into our electrical system or the ones you buy to plug your own computer in to are designed to ldquoreadrsquo the flow of current If it suddenly exceeds a certain level the breaker snaps and takes you off line thus protecting everything beyond it More than a few of us have found out that when you buy a cheap surge protector for ten or twenty bucks sure it will snap off but the surge has already passed through and fried your expensive pla sma television or new computer Unlike a lightning strike or other power surge an EMP surge is ldquofront loadedrdquo Meaning it doesnrsquot do a build up for a couple of mirco-seconds allowing enough time for the circuit breaker to ldquoreadrdquo that trouble is on the way and shut down It comes instead like a wall of energy without any advance wave building up as a warning It therefore slams through nearly all commercial and even military surge protectors already in place and is past the ldquosafety barrierrdquo and into the delicate electronics before the system has time to react

76

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT Blackout Alt Causes

Alt causes to blackout are not as severe

Foster et al 8 Chairman of the Board of GKN Aerospace Transparency Systems ldquoReport of the Commission to Assess the Threat to the United States from Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP) Attackrdquo April 2008 Dr John S Foster Jr Mr Earl Gjelde Dr William R Graham (Chairman) Dr Robert J Hermann Mr Henry (Hank) M Kluepfel Gen Richard L Lawson USAF (Ret) Dr Gordon K Soper Dr Lowell L Wood Jr Dr Joan B Woodard

Distinctions Past electric power blackouts provide a baseline for assessing the impact of an EMP attack on the power grid as discussed previously However there are several important factors that distinguish the EMP collapse scenario from these historical experiences 1048715 In the historical power system outages only one or a few critical elements within an entire system have been debilitated For example a power generation facility may trip because a surge of current is unexpectedly presented through a fault from a particular load Yet a substantial portion of the system may well be rendered out of service as the disruption triggers a series of cascading failures each instigating the next failure (eg first a generator trips then the frequency sags and a load trips off or a transmission line trips out with its associated loads which in turn causes the frequency to overrun and another generator trips out and it continues to oscillate until the interconnected system comes down) In the case of an EMP attack elements within many critical facility components are likely to be damaged or disrupted simultaneously over a relatively broad geographic area thus creating an almost certain cascading collapse of the remaining elements Similarly while lightning might strike a single plant transmission line or large load causing it to trip out lightning has not hit multiple locations spread over a very wide area of the system with sufficient intensity and hitting all simultaneously to the extent that would be representative of an EMP attack 1048715 During historical outages the telecommunications system and associated control systems have continued to function This provides the system operators with eyes and ears to know what was damaged where damage occurred and in some cases the range of damage While the power system may still come down it is more possible to take protective measures to minimize damage and impact in order to effectuate rapid restoration The communications and control systemsrsquo functionality are at high risk of disruption and damage themselves during an EMP attack A minimum communications capability is needed to support immediate responses to isolate parts for continued operation and to implement necessary measures to restore the electrical system 1048715 In the early stages of the EMP attack even before the disruptions could be sensed and trips could occur that would lead to collapse some or many of the protective devices will be damaged that have ensured critical system components are safe to allow fast recovery As a result some and perhaps much of the electrical system would not be able to protect itself from the effects of multiple simultaneous and cascading failures Widespread damage to the generation transmission and distribution infrastructures and equipment are probable Rather than simply restoring power to an intact infrastructure with only a very few damaged components the recovery task would be to replace an extensively damaged system under very difficult and decaying circumstances and then proceeding to restoration 1048715 The control systems would be damaged to some extent as opposed to remaining fully operational as in historical outages The operations and dispatch centers where the vast interconnected system is controlled and managed would probably have damaged and disrupted components the readings from the system would be fragmented and in many cases false or nonexistent and communication by whatever means would be difficult to impractical to impossible Control and knowledge would range from unreliable at best to simply nonexistent Finding what and where damage has occurred and getting it repaired would be very problematic in any reasonable time frame even within the control centers themselves let alone out over the vast network with millions of devices 1048715 Skilled labor for a massive and diverse repair effort is not currently available if allocated over a large geographic area with great numbers of components and devices to check and repair where necessary This scope of damage could cover perhaps 70 percent or possibly more of the continental United States as well as a significant part of Canadarsquos population This is far too large to bring in the limited skilled labor from very distant points outside the affected area in any reasonable time even if one could coordinate them and knew where to send them and they had the means to get there Thus the extensive support from nearby fringe areas used so effectively in historical outages is likely to be unavailable as a practical matter as they themselves would be affected The blackout resulting from Hurricane Katrina an event comparable to a small EMP attack overtaxed the ability of the Nation to quickly restore electric power a failure that contributed to the slow recovery of the afflicted region 1048715 Other infrastructures would be similarly impacted simultaneously with the electrical system such as transportation communication and even water and food to sustain crews The ability to find and get spare parts and components or purchase services would be severely hampered by lack of normal financial systems in addition to communication transportation and other factors The Hurricane Katrina blackout caused precisely such problems 1048715 Fuel supplies for the power generation would be interrupted First the SCADA and DCS systems used in delivery of the fuel would be adversely impacted In addition much of the fuel supply infrastructure is dependent upon the electrical system For example natural gas-fired plants (which make up such a large share of the domestic generation) would be rendered inoperable since their fuel is delivered just in time for use Coal plants have stockpiles that variously might be adequate for a week to a month The few remaining oil-fired plants similarly have a limited storage of fuel Nuclear plants would reasonably be expected to still have fuel but they would have to forego protective regulations to continue to operate Many renewable fueled resources would still have their fuel supply but EMP effects on controls may still render them inoperable

77

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT Alternative EMP forms

Nuclear EMPs affect the whole continental US Other HPMs only travel a mile

Wilson 8 Clay- Specialist in Technology and National Security Foreign Affairs Defense and Trade Division ldquoHigh Altitude Electromagnetic Pulse (HEMP) and High Power Microwave (HPM) Devices Threat Assessmentsrdquo Congressional Research Service March 26 2008

HEMP is produced when a nuclear weapon is detonated high above the Earthrsquos surface creating gamma-radiation that interacts with the atmosphere to create an intense electromagnetic energy field that is harmless to people as it radiates outward but which can overload computer circuitry with effects similar to but causing damage much more swiftly than a lightning strike6 The effects of HEMP became fully known to the United States in 1962 during a high-altitude nuclear test (code named ldquoStarfish Primerdquo) over the Pacific Ocean when radio stations and electronic equipment were disrupted 800 miles away throughout Hawaii The HEMP effect can span thousands of miles depending on the altitude and the design and power of the nuclear burst (a single device detonated at an appropriate altitude over Kansas reportedly could affect all of the continental United States)7 and can be picked up by metallic conductors such as wires or power cables acting as antennas to conduct the energy shockwave into the electronic systems of cars airplanes and communications equipment Description of High-Power Microwave HPM is a non-nuclear radio frequency energy field It can be produced as a weapon when a powerful chemical detonation is instantly transformed by a special coil device called a flux compression generator into a strong electromagnetic field of microwave energy8 Other methods such as powerful batteries can also be used to create a reusable HPM weapon HPM energy can be focused using a speciallyshaped antenna or emitter to produce effects similar to HEMP but only within a very limited range Unlike HEMP however HPM radiation is comprised of shorter wave forms at higher-frequencies which make it highly effective against electronic equipment and more difficult to harden against A mechanically simple suitcasesized device using a chemical explosive and special focusing antenna might theoretically produce a one-time instantaneous HPM shockwave that could disrupt many computers within a 1-mile range9 Also HPM energy at higher power levels (megawatts) and powered for a longer time interval reportedly could cause physical harm to persons near the source emitter or possibly in the path of a narrowly focused energy beam10

HPMs donrsquot effect a large area

Wilson 8 Clay- Specialist in Technology and National Security Foreign Affairs Defense and Trade Division ldquoHigh Altitude Electromagnetic Pulse (HEMP) and High Power Microwave (HPM) Devices Threat Assessmentsrdquo Congressional Research Service March 26 2008

Electromagnetic energy characterized as weapon potentially threatening to national security can be created as a pulse traditionally by two methods overhead nuclear burst and microwave emission High-Altitude Electromagnetic Pulse (HEMP) is an instantaneous electromagnetic energy field produced in the atmosphere by the power and radiation of a nuclear explosion and that is damaging to electronic equipment over a very wide area depending on the design of the nuclear device and altitude of the burst High-Power Microwave (HPM) electromagnetic energy can be produced as an instantaneous pulse created through special electrical equipment that transforms battery power or powerful chemical reaction or explosion into intense microwaves that are very damaging to electronics within a much smaller area

78

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT Protective Measures

The blast zaps through hardened electronics

Wilson 8 Clay- Specialist in Technology and National Security Foreign Affairs Defense and Trade Division ldquoHigh Altitude Electromagnetic Pulse (HEMP) and High Power Microwave (HPM) Devices Threat Assessmentsrdquo Congressional Research Service March 26 2008

Electronic equipment may be hardened by surrounding it with protective metallic shielding which routes damaging electromagnetic fields away from highly sensitive electrical components This method known as Faraday cage protection is traditionally used to protect electronic equipment from a lightning strike However power surges HEMP or HPM weapons could possibly involve peak currents of tens of millions of amps which can pass through a protective Faraday cage Additionally equipment placed within a Faraday cage may also be made vulnerable by any wires running into to the cage which can conduct the electromagnetic shockwave into the equipment Depending on the power level involved points of entry into the shielded cages can sometimes be protected from electromagnetic pulse by using specially designed surge protectors special wire termination procedures screened isolated transformers spark gaps or other types of specially-designed electrical filters Critical systems may also be protected by increasing the number of backup units and by keeping these units dispersed and out of range of the electromagnetic pulse source emitter26

The second stage of the EMP blast eats through protective barriers

Wilson 8 Clay- Specialist in Technology and National Security Foreign Affairs Defense and Trade Division ldquoHigh Altitude Electromagnetic Pulse (HEMP) and High Power Microwave (HPM) Devices Threat Assessmentsrdquo Congressional Research Service March 26 2008

A high altitude nuclear explosion (that creates HEMP) produces three major energy components that arrive in sequence and which have measurably different effects that can be cumulatively damaging to electronic equipment The first energy component is the initial energy shockwave which lasts about one microsecond and is similar to extremely intense static electricity that can overload circuitry for every electronic device that is within line of sight of the burst A secondary energy component then arrives which has characteristics that are similar to a lightning strike By itself this second energy component might not be an issue for some critical infrastructure equipment if anti-lightning protective measures are already in place However the rise time of the first component is so rapid and intense that it can destroy many protective measures allowing the second component to further disrupt the electronic equipment The third energy component is a longer-lasting magnetic signal from about one microsecond to one full second in duration This geomagnetic signal causes an effect that is damaging primarily to long-lines electronic equipment A localized magnetic effect builds up throughout the length of the transmission lines and then quickly collapses producing a magnetohydrodynamic (MHD) ldquoheaverdquo or ldquolate-timerdquo power surge that overloads equipment connected to the power and telecommunications infrastructure This latetime effect adds to the initial HEMP effect and systems connected to long-lines power and communications systems may be further disrupted by the combined effects Smaller isolated systems do not collect so much of this third energy component and are usually disrupted only by the first energy component of HEMP

79

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT Protective Measures

Commercial surge protectors will fail

Wilson 8 Clay- Specialist in Technology and National Security Foreign Affairs Defense and Trade Division ldquoHigh Altitude Electromagnetic Pulse (HEMP) and High Power Microwave (HPM) Devices Threat Assessmentsrdquo Congressional Research Service March 26 2008

Some assert that little has been done by the private sector to protect against the threat from electromagnetic pulse and that commercial electronic systems in the United States could be severely damaged by either HEMP or smaller-scale HPM8 Commercial electronic surge arresters used for lightning strikes reportedly do not clamp fast enough to protect against the instantaneous effects of electromagnetic pulse9 In March 2007 a survey of state Adjutants General who oversee National Guard units throughout the country found that most state-based emergency responders are not actively preparing against an attack on the United States by electromagnetic pulse The survey entitled Missile Defense and the Role of the States was conducted jointly by the Anchorage-based Institute of the North and the Claremont Institute of Claremont California Survey questions were sent to Adjutants General of all 50 states with more than half responding Although 96 of state Adjutants General indicated significant concern over an EMP attack the majority had done little or no analysis of the effects of an overhead EMP attack and little or no training or preparation to harden electronic equipment None of the Adjutants General surveyed indicated that they were actively involved in a formal planning process for response to an EMP attack10

80

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT Low Altitude Nuclear Explosions

Low altitude nuclear explosions do no cause any of the dangerous EMP effects

Johnston 9 Robert Wm- PhD in physics from UT-Dallas ldquoHigh-altitude nuclear explosionsrdquo 28 January 2009

Several effects are relatively unique to high altitude bursts Electromagnetic pulse (EMP) is important only for high altitude bursts For such detonations ionization

of the upper atmosphere can produce a brief intense pulse of radio frequency radiation which can damage or disrupt electronic devices For explosions above most of the atmosphere EMP can affect large areas

Ionization of the atmosphere from explosions in the atmosphere can interfere with radar and radio communications for short periods

Charged particles produced by explosions above the Earths atmosphere can be captured by the Earths magnetic field temporarily creating artificial radiation belts that can damage spacecraft and injure astronautscosmonauts in orbit

Ground attacks do not destroy satellites in LEO

Kueter 7 Jeff- president of the George C Marshall Institute ldquoChinarsquos Space Ambitions ndash And Oursrdquo The New Atlantis Number 16 Spring 2007 pp 7-22

There are numerous ways our space assets could be disabled or destroyed One likely threat to US space assets resides in a very terrestrial environment strikes against ground stations and launch systems Such attacks could constrain the usefulness of our existing satellites or reduce our ability to put new satellites into orbit But such ground attacks would probably at worst only diminish our ability to use our space assets since the data transmitted from orbiting satellites could in most cases be rerouted to other receiving stations on the ground and since our launch systems are (somewhat) redundant Of more concern is the possibility of attacks that directly destroy or damage satellites since they cannot at present be replaced quickly easily or cheaply Without a reorientation of the way it acquires space hardware the United States faces substantial barriers to repairing or replacing damaged satellites

81

Cornell HKHANE Aff

CP Theories

Conditionality is a voter and justifies the aff capturing the perma) Time skew ndash the aff has to invest time in multiple worlds that the neg can just kickb) Strat skew ndash the neg can run multiple contradictory worldviews that prevent us from making our best

argumentsc) in-depth education is impossible when the neg can just kick any position that we really press them on

PICs are a voting issuea) Strat skew- by mooting the 1AC they deprive the aff of a third of speech timeb) Vague plan writing- trading off with more educational negative groundc) Aff contradiction ndash PICs force us to argue against ourselves Our strike plans not verifiable card could

be used against usd) Inifintely regressive- justifying any single pic opens up the floodgates for menial one word pics

International fiat is abusive and a voting issue1 Not Predictable- There are an infinite number of international actors that the aff can never be ready to

debate2 Literature- The negative should have to produce solvency evidence that speaks to the exact mandates

of the plan in context to their international actor so that they can ensure predictability within the literature

3 Bad Advocacy Model- The judge is supposed to be a US policy maker not have international jurisdiction These types of counterplans make world peace CPs and utopia CPs legitimate

4 Infinitely regressive- they can have as many actors as they want as well as the ability to fiat the object of resolution That allows them to literally fiat out our advantages and win on a small risk of disads meaning debate is never fair or predictable

5 International organizations are uniquely abusive- they compromise multiple countries including the US which makes them plan-plus and not competitive because US action is involved

82

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT Hardening CP

Perm do both

CP alone signals a new race and causes escalation

Lewallen 2 John- Political Science at Whitman University organizer of the Nuclear Peace Action Group Fulbright Scholarship recipient Public Ocean Access Network ldquoHigh-Altitude Nuclear Warrdquo Nuclear Press p48

If a US national effort to defend vital systems against nuclear EMP attack is done in the context of moving away from national missile defense and space weapons in general and toward cooperation for disarmament and non-proliferation of nuclear weapons with Russia China and other nations it will be viewed by US adversaries as a prudent defensive move to protect American civilization However if the United States starts to harden civilian electronics against EMP in the current context of a military domination of space and invulnerability to missile attack it will send an aggressive and offensive signal that the US is preparing to fight World War Three This is a war we well all lose

Guidelines will not be implemented

Sirak 4 Michael- JDW Staff Reporter ldquoUS vulnerable to EMP attackrdquo Janersquos Defence Weekly 26 July 2004While the US military has grown increasingly dependent on computers electronics and information systems it has relaxed requirements for EMP-hardened systems since the end of the Cold War and its overall record of adherence to its guidelines for such robust equipment has been spotty they said This trend continues in the wrong direction the panel noted Similarly the US civilian critical infrastructure is not adequately prepared to deal with the effects of an EMP attack according to the panel which is known formally as the Commission to Assess the Threat to the United States from Electromagnetic Pulse Attack Congress created the panel in 2000 out of concern that this issue was not receiving enough attention

Even CP protects military infrastructure the military will be undermined because they rely on commercial electronics

Wilson 8 Clay- Specialist in Technology and National Security Foreign Affairs Defense and Trade Division ldquoHigh Altitude Electromagnetic Pulse (HEMP) and High Power Microwave (HPM) Devices Threat Assessmentsrdquo Congressional Research Service March 26 2008

The US military has adopted a policy where commercial electronic equipment is now used extensively in support of complex US weapons systems For example a large percentage of US military communications during Operation Iraqi Freedom was reportedly carried by commercial satellites and much military administrative information is currently routed through the civilian Internet43 Many commercial communications satellites particularly those in low earth orbit reportedly may degrade or cease to function shortly after a high altitude nuclear explosion44 However some observers believe that possible HEMP and HPM vulnerabilities of military information systems are outweighed by the benefits gained through access to innovative technology and increased communications flexibility that come from using state-of-the-art electronics and from maintaining connections to the civilian Internet and satellite systems

Bright 2 Melanie ldquoHigh-Altitude Nuclear Explosions Blind Deaf And Dumbrdquo Janes Defence Weekly October 23 2002 httpwwwglobalsecurityorgorgnews2002nuke_explosionhtm

The most obvious solution to HANEs is to harden civilian satellites In fact this is not an option with current technology More shielding means more weight

83

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT Hardening CP

Hardening sends threatening signals

Lewallen 99 John- Public Ocean Access Network ldquoThe Blackout Bomb What It Means To Yourdquo httpnonuclearnettheblackoutbombhtm

However I respectfully disagree with Dr Woods recommendation that any civilian hardening to protect us from EMP be done After a flirtation with civil defense and bomb shelters Americans have realized that nuclear attack against the United States is not something they are willing to prepare for because there is no rational way to prepare for it I believe Russia China and the United States form a Nuclear Triangle with constant low-to high-key nuclear weapons confrontation in the air If we start hardening our civilian infrastructure to withstand EMP it will signal to the Russians and Chinese that we are moving toward the brink of nuclear war

CP links to politics

Chisholm 5 Patrick ldquoProtect our electronics against EMP attackrdquo Christian Science Monitor December 19 2005

It is a thorny question as to whether the FCC should revise its standards to require electronics manufacturers to build in EMP protection This could be prohibitively expensive for the manufacture of individual components But businesses and government agencies should install EMP protection at the system level (This also would provide protection against other electromagnetic disturbances such as lightning)

84

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT NMD CP

Lewallen 2 John- Political Science at Whitman University organizer of the Nuclear Peace Action Group Fulbright Scholarship recipient Public Ocean Access Network ldquoHigh-Altitude Nuclear Warrdquo Nuclear Press p9-10

Dr Graham noted that a nuclear missile could have ldquosympatheticrdquo or ldquosalvagerdquo fusing which means it could be detonated when attacked by a missile defense system In other words US national missile defense if effective could cause a high-altitude nuclear EMP burst

Lewallen 2 John- Political Science at Whitman University organizer of the Nuclear Peace Action Group Fulbright Scholarship recipient Public Ocean Access Network ldquoHigh-Altitude Nuclear Warrdquo Nuclear Press Pg45The Chinese weapon to trump the National Missile Defense is a missile satellite or fractional orbiting nuclear bomb either intended for high-altitude nuclear EMP or fused to detonate when attacked by a hit-to-kill National Missile Defense system As noted by William Graham at the Weldon Hearings ldquoone of the ways an offensive nuclear weapon on a missile can be armed is in what is called a sympathetic or a salvage fusing mode so that even if you intercepted above the atmosphere before it reaches its target once it knows it is being attacked once the offensive nuclear warhead knows it is being attacked its fusing system may choose to detonate itself there to get at least the EMP and space radiation effect of the weaponrdquoIn short Clintonrsquos hit-to-kill National Missile Defense if effective could cause high-altitude nuclear explosions Laser missile defense systems in earlier stages of research and development are coming to be focused on shooting down missiles in their boost phase before they achieve high altitude The Russians and Chinese are very unlikely to allow effective boost-phase missile attack systems to be set up by the United StatesAll attempts by the United States or any other nuclear power to develop homeland missile defense systems suffer from three fatal flaws First counter-measures to any system can be developed much more cheaply than the system itself Secondly missile defense systems will take years to deploy at best while the Russians and Chinese have high-altitude and low-altitude nuclear weapons deployed and ready to strike the United States nowThirdly a credibly effective national missile defense of the United States poses much greater threat of nuclear missile attack against the US than do the incredibly ineffective systems now publicly visible The imminent deployment of a missile defense system that would work (or that an adversary believes would work or even believes that the United States commanders believe would work) poses Russia or China with an ugly choice submit to US military domination or launch a preemptive nuclear strike against the US before its defenses are set up

Doesnrsquot solve spaceLewallen 2 John- Political Science at Whitman University organizer of the Nuclear Peace Action Group Fulbright Scholarship recipient Public Ocean Access Network ldquoHigh-Altitude Nuclear Warrdquo Nuclear Press Pg33On Feb 4 2001 Sergei Ivanov Russian President Putinrsquos closest military advisor got up at a Munich meeting of defense ministers from many nations and said that any US national missile defense system would by definition abolish the 1972 Antiballistic Missile Treaty (ABM)ldquoAndrdquo Mr Ivanov added ldquothe destruction of the ABM treaty we are quite confident will result in the annihilation of the whole structure of strategic stability and create prerequisites for a new arms race ndash including one in spacerdquo

85

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT PAROS CP

Perm do both Curbing Chinese space ambitions is a prerequisite for a successful PAROS

Hitchens 9 Theresa- Director UN Institute for Disarmament Research ldquoSaving Space Threat Proliferation and Mitigationrdquo International Commission on Nuclear Non-proliferation and Disarmament May 19 2009

Finally the test also reverberated in the diplomatic arena calling into question the credibility of Chinarsquos longstanding efforts to push forward a treaty on the Prevention of an Arms Race in Outer Space (PAROS) and threatening to further weaken already shaky chances for negotiations on such a treaty to commence at the Conference on Disarmament (CD) in Geneva Disagreement on starting PAROS negotiations had been at the center of the CDrsquos 12-year standstill blocking the acceptance of a formal program of work and most specifically preventing negotiations on a Fissile Material Cutoff Treaty (FMCT)mdashdue to the standoff between the US and China on whether one set of talks should go forward without the other Although Russia and China dropped the demand for simultaneous negotiations in 2003 (instead calling for ldquodiscussionsrdquo of PAROS) at the time the Bush administration was not interested in a deal on either FMCT or PAROS With the May 29 agreement by the CD on a new program of work that includes both FMCT negotiations and PAROS discussions progress toward nuclear disarmament and nonproliferation looking more achievable than it has in many years Certainly this momentous shift is largely due to the dramatic change in US policy emerging from the Obama administration Nonetheless there remain major obstacles to a PAROS treaty (elaborated below)

86

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT Asteroids PIC

Quantitatively even if we only win 11000 probability for the solvency deficit it outweighs the risk of an asteroid hitting Earth even assuming the nuclear weapon works

Anissimov 9 [Michael Media Director for the Singularity Institute and Fundraising Director North America for the Lifeboat Foundation consultant for a variety of future-oriented non-profit organizations and for-profit companies including the Methuselah Foundation Center for Responsible Nanotechnology and Kurzweil Technologies ldquoEurekalert How to deflect asteroids and save the Earthrdquo Thursday Apr 16 httpwwwacceleratingfuturecommichaelblog200904eurekalert-how-to-deflect-asteroids-and-save-the-earth]

The asteroid risk is a great one to get people acquainted with the concept of catastrophic risk in general because it is statistically pinned down very well However according to some calculations the risk of a civilization-ending asteroid hitting Earth in the next 100 years is only 15000 leading to a 1500000 annual probability Say we give a 1500 annual probability estimate of the end of civilization due to nuclear war (Seems like quite the underestimate) According to standard cost-benefit analysis we should assign roughly 1000 times more importance to the task of minimizing the chance of catastrophic nuclear war than to deflecting asteroids We may see some common miscalculations on this score as asteroids are new and exciting and nuclear war is the same boring old risk that has been around for over half a century

PICs are a voting issuee) Strat skew- by mooting the 1AC they deprive the aff of a third of speech timef) Vague plan writing- trading off with more educational negative groundg) Aff contradiction ndash PICs force us to argue against ourselves Our strike plans not verifiable card could

be used against ush) Inifintely regressive- justifying any single pic opens up the floodgates for menial one word pics

Conditionality is a voter and justifies the aff capturing the permd) Time skew ndash the aff has to invest time in multiple worlds that the neg can just kicke) Strat skew ndash the neg can run multiple contradictory worldviews that prevent us from making our best

argumentsf) in-depth education is impossible when the neg can just kick any position that we really press them on

87

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT Japan Rearm

Japan likes the plan ndash they think US EMP attacks would damage Japan

Birdnow 6 Timothy contributor to American Daily Review writer for The American Thinker ldquoEMP and the Unfought Victoryrdquo July 1 httpwwwamericanthinkercom200607emp_and_the_unfought_victoryhtml

Couple an EMP attack on the West Coast with a terrorist strike and you have a recipe for chaos Here is one simple scenario send men into the CaliforniaArizonaNevada scrubland and light fires Without aircraft or water those fires could engulf the entire west This would be an easy lowmdashtech way to maximize damage while keeping operational costs to a minimum Of course the usual terrorist methods mdash bombs sniper attacks etc would also work well You could light natural gas wells oil wells and other combustible facilities on fire and watch the black smoke pour into the sky You could take steps to poison water sources so that people would die from drinking tainted water The point is nobody will be able to stop sleeper cells from acting after such an attack and the terrorists would know the best ways to strike to maximize their damage The real question is how would the United States respond to such an attack Will we launch a nuclear strike against North Korea killing millions and poisoning the entire region (including our friends in Japan and South Korea) An EMP attack against the DPRK would be the equivalent of embargoing gasoline on Sitting Bull they have so few high tech gadgets it would be pointless

88

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT Consult Japan

Japan says no ndash they fear an EMP attack

a) China

Pry 5 Dr Peter Vincent- EMP Commission Staff ldquoForeign Views Of Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP) Attackrdquo Before The United States Senate Subcommittee On Terrorism Technology And Homeland Security March 8 2005 httpwwwendtimesreportcomEMP_attackhtml

Some foreign analysts judging from open source statements and writings appear to regard EMP attack as a legitimate use of nuclear weapons because EMP would inflict no or few prompt civilian casualties EMP attack appears to be a unique exception to the general stigma attached to nuclear employment by most of the international community in public statements Significantly even some analysts in Japan and Germanyndashnations that historically have been most condemnatory of nuclear and other weapons of mass destruction in official and unofficial forumsndashappear to regard EMP attack as morally defensible For example a June 2000 Japanese article in a scholarly journal citing senior political and military officials appears to regard EMP attack as a legitimate use of nuclear weapons ldquoAlthough there is little chance that the Beijing authorities would launch a nuclear attack which would incur the disapproval of the international community and which would result in such enormous destruction that it would impede postwar cleanup and policies a serious assault starting with the use of nuclear weapons which would not harm humans animals or property would be valid If a nuclear warhead was detonated 40 kilometers above Taiwan an electromagnetic wave would be propagated which would harm unprotected computers radar and IC circuits on the ground within a 100 kilometer radius and the weapons and equipment which depend on the communications and electronics technology whose superiority Taiwan takes pride in would be rendered combat ineffective at one stroke If they were detonated in the sky in the vicinity of Ilan the effects would also extend to the waters near Yonakuni [in Okinawa] so it would be necessary for Japan too to take care Those in Taiwan having lost their advanced technology capabilities would end up fighting with tactics and technology going back to the 19th century They would inevitably be at a disadvantage with the PLA and its overwhelming military force superiorityrdquo (Su Tzu-yun Jadi 1 June 2000)

b) North Korea

Weldon 99 Curt Weldon A Representative From Pennsylvania Chairman Military Research And Development Subcommittee Electromagnetic Pulse Threats To US Military And Civilian Infrastructure House of Representatives Committee on Armed Services Military Research and Development Subcommittee Washington DC Thursday October 7 1999 httpcommdocshousegovcommitteessecurityhas280010000has280010_0HTM

The EMP threat may have acquired new and urgent relevance as the proliferation of nuclear weapons and missile technology accelerates North Korea for example is assessed as already having developed one or two atomic weapons and is on the verge of testing an Inter-Continental Ballistic Missiles (ICBM) capable of delivering a nuclear warhead to the United States North Korea already has missiles capable of delivering a nuclear warhead against US regional allies and US forces based in Japan and South Korea

89

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT Primacy DA

Primacy collapse is inevitable in the status quo- rogue states will achieve EMP capability that can decimate the US Their primacy good cards assume that the US will be the only country capable of a first strike And This is impossible because Primacy leads other nations to seek asymmetric warfighting tactics like EMP

Calleo 3 David P- Currently director of the European Studies Program and Professor of The Johns Hopkins University Taught at Brown Yale and Columbia ldquoEurope and America Different Geopolitical Wavelengthsrdquo Annual Foreign Policy Conference Heinrich Boumlll Stiftung - November 13th 2003

Military superiority is frequently vulnerable to what might be called the ldquoLaw of Asymmetrical Deterrencerdquo In the Cold War for example despite the huge nuclear arsenals of the superpowers anyone else with a ldquosecond-strikerdquo capability could have a reasonable deterrent with only a few hundred missiles Nothing has changed in that realm since the Soviet collapse ndash except that there are a few more nuclear powers Nuclear deterrence still seems a cheap way for the weak to counter the strong This seems true of weapons of mass destruction in general Not only are they relatively cheap equalizers but the presence of a superpower actively exercising its military superiority is a great inducement for others to acquire these equalizing weapons

EMP warfare shatters US primacy since the consequences are so huge and the US is the most vulnerable

Lewallen 2 John- Political Science at Whitman University organizer of the Nuclear Peace Action Group Fulbright Scholarship recipient Public Ocean Access Network ldquoHigh-Altitude Nuclear Warrdquo Nuclear Press Pg38

The United States has overwhelming military superiority and a gargantuan vulnerability to high-altitude nuclear EMP attack Russia and China have had several decades to fill their weapons bag with specialized nuclear EMP weapons and to prepare to sling them over the American homeland by missile by satellite or in a fractional orbiting bomb flung into orbit with a Scud or other short-range missile David knew that Goliath had a soft spot in his forehead just as the Russians and Chinese are perfectly aware that the United States in the words of Representative Weldon is the ldquomost vulnerable nation on Earth to electronic warfarerdquo

Primacy via EMP weapons makes nuclear apocalypse inevitable

Lewallen 2 John- Political Science at Whitman University organizer of the Nuclear Peace Action Group Fulbright Scholarship recipient Public Ocean Access Network ldquoHigh-Altitude Nuclear Warrdquo Nuclear Press Pg43

If it comes the next global war almost certainly will begin with high-altitude nuclear EMP Anything done or refrained from to reduce international conflict and promote international cooperation will help humanity avoid the awesome setback of global war The nation-state system itself is perhaps the most dangerous factor auguring high-altitude nuclear war It is perhaps amazing that we humans have gone the past fifty-five years without anyone blowing up a nuclear bomb How much longer can we tickle the dragonrsquos tail before the fundamental flaw of competing armies with nuclear weapons finishes us off The United States fond of calling itself the worldrsquos only superpower has the same tendency as past military empires (although not a self-acknowledged empire) a strong and perhaps inevitable drive to move from world preeminence to world domination The US military-industrial complex is set up to endlessly conceive design produce and deploy new strategic weaponry

90

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT Primacy DA

Extend our CDI and Schorr evidence that EMP primacy causes dangerous crisis escalation and accidental nuclear war

Nuclear primacy causes uncontrollable crisis dynamics

Schwarz 6 Benjamin- literary editor and the national editor of The Atlantic foreign policy analyst at the RAND Corporation ldquoThe Perils of Primacyrdquo The Atlantic JanuaryFebruary httpwwwtheatlanticcomdoc200601primacy

Lieber and Press emphasize that their analysis doesnt prove that a US first strike would succeed but it highlights a development that is grave if only because its one that prudent planners in Russia and China who conduct similar analyses are no doubt already surmising that their countries can no longer be confident of having a viable deterrent Surely adding to their alarm is the realization that the nuclear imbalance troubling enough already will only grow in the coming years Washingtons withdrawal from the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty and its concomitant pursuit of a national missile-defense system will greatly enhance its offensive nuclear capabilities because although critics of missile defense correctly argue that it could never shield America from a massive full-scale nuclear attack it could quite plausibly deal with the very few missiles an adversary might have left to deploy after a US first strike Whats more the United States is actively pursuing a series of initiativesmdashincluding further advances in anti-submarine and anti-satellite warfare in missile accuracy and potency and in wide-area remote sensing aimed at finding relocatable targets such as mobile ICBMsmdashthat will render Russias and Chinas nuclear forces all the more vulnerable To be sure Americas emerging nuclear hegemony could bring benefits including potential leverage vis-agrave-vis our superpower counterparts in such areas of competition as the Balkans and Taiwan It will also force China to divert defense resources from its power-projection efforts in East Asia (This however would be both a blessing and a curse We should expect a new prolonged and intense nuclear arms race Lieber and Press conclude) But whether or not America has deliberately pursued the ability to win a nuclear conflict that capability will increase the risk of great-power war US-Chinese relations are bound to be edgy or worse for the foreseeable future and although relations between Washington and Moscow are nowhere near their Cold War nadir actual and potential strains remain formidable Each country has nuclear-armed missiles that can be delivered against the other within minutesmdashand in Americas nuclear-war plans the overwhelming number of targets remain inside Russia Most important any shift in the nuclear balance itself will engender a volatility that could cause seemingly small conflicts between countries to quickly spiral Confronted with the growing nuclear imbalance Russia and China will be forced to try to redress it but given Americas advantages that effort as Lieber and Press note could take well over a decade Until a nuclear stalemate is restoredmdashif it ever ismdashMoscow and Beijing will surely buy deterrence by spreading out their nuclear forces decentralizing their command-and-control systems and implementing launch on warning policies If more than half a century of analyzing nuclear dangers and crisis stability has taught us anything it is that all these steps can cause crises to escalate uncontrollably They could trigger the unauthorized or accidental use of nuclear weapons this could lead to inadvertent nuclear war American military preponderance now embraces the entire spectrum of conflict as Pentagon planners put it That is to say were miles ahead of everyone in every type of warfare But if that preponderance is leading to a world in which Russian and Chinese launch commanders are fingering nuclear hair triggers the game may not be worth the candle Without any public scrutiny or debate the United States has emerged as the nuclear hegemon in possession of a destabilizing first-strike capability It does not matter whether this has come about by accident or design or whether Americas motives are worthy or malign the condition itself is the problem The ramifications of this state of affairs are of the gravest significance to Americas securitymdashand the worlds Its time for scrutiny and debate to begin

91

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT Damage Limitation

The ability to engage in various levels of nuclear war is key to damage limitation

Gray amp Payne 80 Colin S and Keith ldquoVictory is Possiblerdquo Foreign Policy Summer 1980 pp 14-27Nuclear war is unlikely to be an essentially meaningless terminal event Instead it is likely to be waged to coerce the Soviet Union to give up some recent gain Thus a president must have the ability not merely to end a war but to end it favorably The United States would need to be able to persuade desperate and determined Soviet leaders that it has the capability and the determination to wage nuclear war at even higher levels of violence until an acceptable outcome is achieved For deterrence to function during a war each side would have to calculate whether an improved outcome is possible through further escalation An adequate US deterrent posture is one that denies the Soviet Union any plausible hope of success at any level of strategic conflict offers a likely prospect of Soviet defeat and offers a reasonable chance of limiting damage to the United States Such a deterrence posture is often criticized as contributing to the arms race and causing strategic instability because it would stimulate new Soviet deployments However during the 1970s the Soviet Union showed that its weapon development and deployment decisions are not dictated by American actions Western understanding of what determines Soviet defense procurement is less than perfect but it is now obvious that Soviet weapon decisions cannot be explained with reference to any simple action-reaction model of arms-race dynamics In addition highly survivable US strategic forces should insure strategic stability by denying the Soviets an attractive first-strike target set

EMP warfare undermines our ability to perform limited nuclear war

Burnham 83 David- co-director of the Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse (TRAC) ldquoUS Fears One Bomb Could Cripple The Nationrdquo The New York Times

Another reason for the recent concern in the Government is the adoption by both the Carter and Reagan Administrations of a nuclear strategy that includes the possibility that this country might have to wage a prolonged limited nuclear war For a nation to conduct such a war military analysts stress much would depend on its ability to organize an effective civil defense that would enable a large part of the population to continue to house and feed itself CONTINUES The potential chaos that may be created by high altitude EMP has national security implications the Energy Department said in a statement explaining why it had started the new research program During a period of national crisis electrical power will be required to operate military installations civil defense facilities and critical industries In addition if EMP caused a disruption of the financial manufacturing retail transportation and communication industries as well as basic utilities serious economic and social consequences would result Disruption of the nations electrical power supply has grave implications In an article in Spectrum the authoritative magazine of the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers Eric J Lemer a contributing editor expressed similar concerns Power Grids Vulnerability The potential impact on the national power grid of a small number of high altitude EMP bursts would be comparable to that produced by large lightning bolts hitting every power line segment in the country he said When it is considered that two ordinary lightning bolts were the proximate cause of the 1977 New York City blackout it is easy to see why many analysts believe that a complete shutdown of the national power grid could be achieved by a handful of EMP detonations

92

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT Damage Limitation

Non Nuclear Pulse devices allow for damage limitation without undermining the escalation ladder

Wilson 8 Clay- Specialist in Technology and National Security Foreign Affairs Defense and Trade Division ldquoHigh Altitude Electromagnetic Pulse (HEMP) and High Power Microwave (HPM) Devices Threat Assessmentsrdquo Congressional Research Service March 26 2008

DOD research on pulsed-power HPM electromagnetic weapons is currently being done at Kirtland Air Force Base in Albuquerque New Mexico Weapons now being developed by the US military for electronic warfare can disrupt the trajectory of missiles while in flight and can overpower or degrade enemy communications telemetry and circuitry Other HPM weapons being tested by the military are portable and re-usable through battery-power and many are effective when fired miles away from a target These weapons can also be focused like a laser beam and tuned to an appropriate frequency in order to penetrate electronics that are heavily shielded against a nuclear attack The deepest bunkers with the thickest concrete walls reportedly are not safe from such a beam if they have even a single unprotected wire reaching the surface29 During Operation Iraqi Freedom many Iraqi command bunkers and suspected chemical-biological weapons bunkers were deeply buried underground and thought to be difficult to disable using conventional explosives New HPM weapons were reportedly considered for possible use in attacks against these targets because the numerous communications and power lines leading into the underground bunkers offered pathways for conducting powerful surges of electromagnetic energy that could destroy the computer equipment inside30 Because instantaneous HPM energy can reflect off the ground and possibly affect piloted aircraft above much testing currently involves HPM devices on Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs) and on the Air Force Conventional Air Launched Cruise Missile system By 2010 DOD reportedly will field several airlaunched UAVs using disposable and reusable HPM weapons designed to disrupt enemy computers31

93

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT Damage Limitation

A HEMP destroys US military capability and damage limitation

Graham 4 Dr William R- Deputy Administrator of NASA The report of the Commission to Assess the Threat to the United States From Electromagnetic Pulse Attackrdquo July 22 2004

Mr Langevin In the event that an EMP event threatened or damaged the GPS system what would happen to battlefield information and communications systems such as FBCB2 (Force XXI Battle Command Brigade-and-Below) Blue Force Tracker (BFT) and Movement Tracking System (MTS) Are there backup systems available if our situational awareness provided by GPS input is taken away Dr Graham Army battlefield information and communication systems such as FBCB2 (Force XXI Battle Command Brigade-and-Below) Blue Force Tracker (BFT) and Movement Tracking System (MTS) provide position location communication capability and force tracking-situational awareness These information and communication systems use the Global Positioning System (GPS) as a component Loss of a GPS signal would negate MTSs and BFTs ability to identify position location and to conduct force tracking While high Altitude EMP (HEMP) is not likely to directly damage the satellites that broadcast GPS signals because of the height of their orbits the ground-based systems that receive and make use of GPS information would be at risk unless protected against HEMP effects MTS and BFT transmit data via a communications satellite that would not be affected by loss of a GPS signal Certain ground platforms which use FBCB2 and BFT such as the Bradley Paladin and Ml have an inertial navigation unit (INU) which is a redundant capability for deternining position lacation Having to resort to using the INU would result in a degradation of performance and possible delay of missions due to reinitializing position data every 20-26 kilometers depending on the platform and the INU system used INUs do not rely on GPS signals The location data from the INU is transmitted via FBCB2 communications which again is not affected by loss of GPS signal The location data can then be used by FBCB2 for force tracking Situational awareness of any system on the battlefield which relies soley on GPS will no longer appear in the FBCB2 situational awareness display HEMP survivability is a requirement for the GPS receivers in MTS BFT and FBCB2 FBCB2 has been tested in many vehicles such as the HMMWV M1A2 SEP Tank STRYKER and LOSAT over the last four years There are no known HEMP survivability issues or concerns resulting from these tests BFT was tested on a HMMWV in April 04 and passed MTS evaluation on the Family of Medium Tactical Vehicles (FMTV) has been delayed due to asset availability However MTS relies on many of the same components as BFT so no major problems are anticipated It should also be noted that nuclear weapon effects other than HEMP could damage GPS or interfere with the transmission of GPS signals through the atmosphere bull In a high-altitude nuclear event loss of a GPS signal will degrade the ability of ground systems such as FBCB2 BFT and MTS to self-locate and track forces

94

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT Deterrence DA

1) Nuclear deterrent in trouble now

Kyl amp Perle 9 Jon Richard June 30 2009 ldquoOur Decaying Nuclear Deterrentrdquo Mr Kyl is a Republican senator from Arizona Mr Perle a fellow at the American Enterprise Institute was assistant secretary of defense in the Reagan administration lthttponlinewsjcomarticleSB124623202363966157htmlgt

Thus in his Prague speech Mr Obama announced that the US would immediately and aggressively pursue ratification of the comprehensive ban on the testing of nuclear weapons The administration believes without evidence that ratification of the test-ban treaty will discourage other countries from developing nuclear weapons Which countries does it have in mind Iran North Korea Syria Countries alarmed by the nuclear ambitions of their enemies Allies who may one day lose confidence in our nuclear umbrella There are good reasons why the test-ban treaty has not been ratified The attempt to do so in 1999 failed in the Senate mostly out of concerns about verification -- it simply is not verifiable It also failed because of an understandable reluctance on the part of the US Senate to forgo forever a test program that could in the future be of critical importance for our defense and the defense of our allies Robert Gates who is now Mr Obamas own secretary of defense warned in a speech last October that in the absence of a nuclear modernization program even the most modest of which

Congress has repeatedly declined to fund [a]t a certain point it will become impossible to keep extending the life of our arsenal especially in light of our testing moratorium Suppose future problems in our nuclear arsenal emerge that cannot be solved without testing Would our predicament

discourage nuclear proliferation -- or stimulate it For the foreseeable future the US and many of our allies rely on our nuclear deterrent And as long as the US possesses nuclear weapons they must be -- as Mr Obama recognized in Prague -- safe secure and effective Yet his proposed 2010 budget fails to take the necessary steps to do that Those steps have been studied extensively by the Perry-Schlesinger Commission (named for co-chairmen William Perry secretary of defense under President Bill Clinton and James R Schlesinger secretary of defense under Presidents Richard Nixon and Gerald Ford) Its consensus report released in May makes numerous recommendations to increase the funding for and improve the effectiveness of the deteriorating nuclear weapons laboratory complex (eg the Los Alamos facility in New Mexico the Pantex plant in Texas and the dangerously neglected Y-12 plant in Tennessee) that has become the soft underbelly of our deterrent force The commission also assessed the nuclear weapons infrastructure that is essential to a safe secure and effective deterrent and declared it in serious need of transformation It looked at our laboratory-based scientific and technical expertise and concluded that the intellectual

infrastructure is in serious trouble A major cause is woefully inadequate funding The commission rightly argued that we must exercise the full range of laboratory skills including nuclear weapon design skills Skills that are not exercised will atrophy The president and the Congress must heed these recommendations There are some who believe that failing to invest

adequately in our nuclear deterrent will move us closer to a nuclear free world In fact blocking crucial modernization means unilateral disarmament by unilateral obsolescence This unilateral disarmament will only encourage nuclear proliferation since our allies will see the danger and our adversaries the opportunity By neglecting -- and in some cases even opposing -- essential modernization programs arms-control proponents are actually undermining the prospect for further reductions of the US nuclear arsenal As our nuclear weapons stockpile ages and concern about its reliability increases we will have to compensate by retaining more nuclear weapons than would otherwise be the case This reality will necessarily influence future arms-control negotiations beginning with the upcoming Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty follow-on For these negotiations the Russians are insisting on a false linkage between nuclear weapons and missile defenses They are

demanding that we abandon defenses against North Korean or Iranian missiles as a condition for mutual reductions in American and Russian strategic forces As the president cuts the budget for missile defense and cedes ground to the Russians on our planned defense sites in Poland and the Czech Republic we may end up abandoning a needed defense of the US and our European allies from the looming Iranian threat There is a fashionable notion that if only we and the Russians reduced our nuclear forces other nations would reduce their existing arsenals or abandon plans to acquire nuclear weapons altogether This idea an article of faith of the soft power approach to halting nuclear proliferation assumes that the nuclear ambitions of Kim Jong Il or Mahmoud Ahmadinejad would be curtailed or abandoned in response to reductions in the American and Russian deterrent forces -- or that India Pakistan or China would respond with reductions of their own

Non Nuclear Pulse devices solve

Wilson 8 Clay- Specialist in Technology and National Security Foreign Affairs Defense and Trade Division ldquoHigh Altitude Electromagnetic Pulse (HEMP) and High Power Microwave (HPM) Devices Threat Assessmentsrdquo Congressional Research Service March 26 2008

DOD research on pulsed-power HPM electromagnetic weapons is currently being done at Kirtland Air Force Base in Albuquerque New Mexico Weapons now being developed by the US military for electronic warfare can disrupt the trajectory of missiles while in flight and can overpower or degrade enemy communications telemetry and circuitry Other HPM weapons being tested by the military are portable and re-usable through battery-power and many are effective when fired miles away from a target These weapons can also be focused like a laser beam and tuned to an appropriate frequency in order to penetrate electronics that are heavily shielded against a nuclear attack The deepest bunkers with the thickest concrete walls reportedly are not safe from such a beam if they have even a single unprotected wire reaching the surface29 During Operation Iraqi Freedom many Iraqi command bunkers and suspected chemical-biological weapons bunkers were deeply buried underground and thought to be difficult to disable using conventional explosives New HPM weapons were reportedly considered for possible use in attacks against these targets because the numerous communications and power lines leading into the underground bunkers offered pathways for conducting powerful surges of electromagnetic energy that could destroy the computer equipment inside30 Because instantaneous HPM energy can reflect off the ground and possibly affect piloted aircraft above much testing currently involves HPM devices on Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs) and on the Air Force Conventional Air Launched Cruise Missile system By 2010 DOD reportedly will field several airlaunched UAVs using disposable and reusable HPM weapons designed to disrupt enemy computers31

95

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT Deterrence DA

US EMP strikes are not used to deter EMPs

Riddle 4 Lieutenant Colonel Thomas C- United States Army ldquoNuclear High Altitude Electromagnetic Pulse ndash Implications For Homeland Security And Homeland Defenserdquo US Army War College 03 May 2004

Similarly the decision to implement an earlier deployment of an initial ground-based interceptor and improved ballistic missile tracking capabilities will support the improved passive and active defenses called for in the NSS 50 Also the convincing demonstration of the continuing efficiency and effectiveness of Americarsquos global precision strike capabilities during Operation IRAQI FREEDOM is a clear indication that multi-dimensional counterforce capabilities remain a viable element of Americarsquos counter-proliferation capabilities that may be used if required to prevent a HEMP attack on the United States Finally the United Statesrsquo demonstrated willingness to conduct preemptive strikes to neutralize WMD under the concept of imminent defense adds an unmistakable dimension to the concept of deterrence for those seeking to acquire weapons of mass destruction51

EMPs have no deterrent effect against the majority of countries because they are less reliant on electronic systems

Timmerman 2 Kenneth R- director of the Foundation for Democracy in Iran 2006 Nobel Peace Prize Nominee ldquoUS Threatened With EMP Attackrdquo Feb 1 2002

The more backward the country the more attractive EMP becomes as a weapon against the United States Bartlett explains ldquoIf North Korea were to launch a missile straight up and explode a nuclear weapon 500 kilometers over their own territory it wouldnrsquot do them a lot of damage because they have very little dependence on electronic systems But it would have a devastating impact on South Korea as well as on our 37000 troops stationed there With North Korearsquos million soldiers they could just walk all over us with impunityrdquo

Deterrence against EMP strikes fails now- lack of clear response

Spencer 4 Jack- Senior Policy Analyst for Defense and National Security in the Kathryn and Shelby Cullom Davis Institute for International Studies at The Heritage Foundation ldquoThe Electromagnetic Pulse Commission Warns of an Old Threat with a New Facerdquo Heritage Foundation Backgrounder 1784 August 3 2004

The difficulty of developing a clear response to EMP is due primarily to the unique nature of the threat It is unclear for example what would constitute a proportional response to an explosion that takes place in space without being seen or heard yet instantaneously devastates society or a military force while resulting in no initial loss of life or physical destruction Furthermore there is a dearth of academic or legal analysis by which to guide such policies because until very recently few took the threat seriously This is especially so in the context of rogue states or transnational groups

96

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT Deterrence DA

EMP attacks cannot be deterred

Wilson 8 Clay- Specialist in Technology and National Security Foreign Affairs Defense and Trade Division ldquoHigh Altitude Electromagnetic Pulse (HEMP) and High Power Microwave (HPM) Devices Threat Assessmentsrdquo Congressional Research Service March 26 2008

The threat of an EMP attack against the United States is hard to assess but some observers indicate that it is growing along with worldwide access to newer technologies and the proliferation of nuclear weapons In the past the threat of mutually assured destruction provided a lasting deterrent against the exchange of multiple high-yield nuclear warheads However now even a single specially designed low-yield nuclear explosion high above the United States or over a battlefield can produce a large-scale EMP effect that could result in a widespread loss of electronics but no direct fatalities and may not necessarily evoke a large nuclear retaliatory strike by the US military This coupled with the possible vulnerability of US commercial electronics and US military battlefield equipment to the effects of EMP may create a new incentive for other countries to develop or acquire a nuclear capability

Canrsquot deter EMP threats

EMP Commission 4 Report of the Commission to Assess the Threat to the United States from Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP) Attack Volume 1 Executive Report 2004 Dr John S Foster Jr Mr Earl Gjelde Dr William R Graham (Chairman) Dr Robert J Hermann Mr Henry (Hank) M Kluepfel GEN Richard L Lawson USAF (Ret) Dr Gordon K Soper Dr Lowell L Wood Jr Dr Joan B Woodard]

EMP effects from nuclear bursts are not new threats to our nation The Soviet Union in the past and Russia and other nations today are potentially capable of creating these effects Historically this application of nuclear weaponry was mixed with a much larger population of nuclear devices that were the primary source of destruction and thus EMP as a weapons effect was not the primary focus Throughout the Cold War the United States did not try to protect its civilian infrastructure against either the physical or EMP impact of nuclear weapons and instead depended on deterrence for its safety What is different now is that some potential sources of EMP threats are difficult to determdashthey can be terrorist groups that have no state identity have only one or a few weapons and are motivated to attack the US without regard for their own safety Rogue states such as North Korea and Iran may also be developing the capability to pose an EMP threat to the United States and may also be unpredictable and difficult to deter Certain types of relatively low-yield nuclear weapons can be employed to generate potentially catastrophic EMP effects over wide geographic areas and designs for variants of such weapons may have been illicitly trafficked for a quarter-century China and Russia have considered limited nuclear attack options that unlike their Cold War plans employ EMP as the primary or sole means of attack Indeed as recently as May 1999 during the NATO bombing of the former Yugoslavia high-ranking members of the Russian Duma meeting with a US congressional delegation to discuss the Balkans conflict raised the specter of a Russian EMP attack that would paralyze the United States

97

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT Deterrence DA

EMP Strikes will be used for catalytic wars

Lewallen 2 John- Political Science at Whitman University organizer of the Nuclear Peace Action Group Fulbright Scholarship recipient Public Ocean Access Network ldquoHigh-Altitude Nuclear Warrdquo Nuclear Press Pg36

The Soviet Union no longer exists Now many nations and even several corporations potentially have nuclear bombs in satellites In 1984 the US President knew right away where the nuclear attack was coming from Today any nuclear attack against the American homeland is almost sure to be anonymous How does one deter an adversary who can strike without attribution perhaps choosing a moment of crisis between its two nuclear adversaries to make it look like the other guy did it

98

Cornell HKHANE Aff

No US Second Strike

An EMP attack would decimate our sub deterrent- they would be unable to receive orders

Graham 4 Dr William R- Deputy Administrator of NASA The report of the Commission to Assess the Threat to the United States From Electromagnetic Pulse Attackrdquo July 22 2004

Mr Langevin Have you assessed the threat of EMP to our surface fleet and submarines Do submarines have a greater likelihood of retaining operational capabilities if they are underwater during an EMP strike Dr Graham The EMP Commission did consider the threat of EMP to surface vessels and submarines Ballistic Missile Submarines are designed and built to survive an EMP attack Care is taken when the ship is modified or equipment added or upgraded to insure that survivability is maintained Particular attention is paid to the potential vulnerability introduced when the ship is at periscope depth or trailing a wire antenna Submarines do have a greater likelihood of retaining operational capabilities if they are underwater during an EMP attack and not trailing an antenna which can couple energy into the submerged vessel However if land-based communications are impacted the ship may survive but not be capable of receiving orders and therefore accomplishing its mission because the sender cant send The survivability of the surface fleet is uncertain without testing and a submarine in port is a surface ship

An EMP strike would destroy communications

Wilson 8 Clay- Specialist in Technology and National Security Foreign Affairs Defense and Trade Division ldquoHigh Altitude Electromagnetic Pulse (HEMP) and High Power Microwave (HPM) Devices Threat Assessmentsrdquo Congressional Research Service March 26 2008

During the Cold War the US Military designed an innovative communications system to relay emergency messages between strategic military areas in the continental United States using signals that travel by means of low frequency ground waves mdash electromagnetic fields that hug the ground mdash rather than by radiating into the atmosphere The Ground Wave Emergency Network or GWEN system was intended to allow continuous communications despite EMP disruptions However the hardware was reportedly transistor based leaving the system with some level of vulnerability to EMP In addition the fixed locations of GWEN sites were known to adversaries and thus vulnerable to direct attack40

Even if military infrastructure is protected critical civilian infrastructure is not

Wilson 8 Clay- Specialist in Technology and National Security Foreign Affairs Defense and Trade Division ldquoHigh Altitude Electromagnetic Pulse (HEMP) and High Power Microwave (HPM) Devices Threat Assessmentsrdquo Congressional Research Service March 26 2008

The US military has adopted a policy where commercial electronic equipment is now used extensively in support of complex US weapons systems For example a large percentage of US military communications during Operation Iraqi Freedom was reportedly carried by commercial satellites and much military administrative information is currently routed through the civilian Internet43 Many commercial communications satellites particularly those in low earth orbit reportedly may degrade or cease to function shortly after a high altitude nuclear explosion44 However some observers believe that possible HEMP and HPM vulnerabilities of military information systems are outweighed by the benefits gained through access to innovative technology and increased communications flexibility that come from using state-of-the-art electronics and from maintaining connections to the civilian Internet and satellite systems

99

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Yes US Second Strike

EMPs cannot endanger our ability to retaliate

Critchlow 6 Robert D- National Defense Fellow Foreign Affairs Defense and Trade Division ldquoNuclear Command and Control Current Programs and Issuesrdquo CRS Report for Congress May 3 2006

Nuclear Command and Control Platforms The lead elements of the NCCS form the National Military Command System (NMCS) The NMCS is ldquothe priority component of the Global Command and Control System designed to support the Secretary of Defense and Joint Chiefs of Staff in the exercise of their responsibilitiesrdquo5 It provides the National Command Authorities (NCA)6 and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff (CJCS) with command and control of the armed forces both nuclear and conventional7 The NMCS includes the following command nodes and supporting components

National Military Command Center (NMCC) The NMCC is the primary location for national command and control on a day to day basis This center is staffed around-the-clock and each ldquowatch teamrdquo is led by a General or Admiral known as the ldquoDeputy Director for Operationsrdquo Located in a shielded room in the Pentagon the NMCC is responsible for monitoring nuclear forces and ongoing conventional military operations and can be augmented by additional response cells in the event of a crisis

National Airborne Operations Center (NAOC) If ground based command centers are destroyed the NAOC can serve as a survivable airborne backup to the NMCCrsquos command and control capabilities A NAOC aircraft is always on alert and the mobility of this airborne platform contributes to its survivability The NAOCs are a fleet of modified Boeing 747-200B aircraft each of which can include a crew of up to 114 people and are based at Offutt AFB in Nebraska Its communications which include both Extremely High Frequency (EHF) and Very Low Frequency-Low Frequency (VLFLF) links are hardened against Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP) Although the Joint Staff tasks the aircraft US Strategic Command (USSTRATCOM)9 provides personnel and day-to-day administration while the Air Forcersquos Air Combat Command serves as the programrsquos resource manager

Site-R Located at Fort Ritchie Maryland Site-R can be activated from a ldquocoldrdquo status to serve as an alternate NMCC location11

USSTRATCOM Global Operations Center (GOC) Located underneath the USSTRATCOM Headquarters at Offutt AFB Nebraska the GOC can serve as a back up element to the NMCS for essential emergency actions This center also serves as the command center for the USSTRATCOM Commander one of the four- star-general Unified Combatant Commanders for the day-to-day management of his forces and for providing situational awareness The facility is protected against EMP and has its own emergency power supply to enable extended operations This facility is staffed 24 hours a day 365 days a year with each team led by a Senior Controller who is always a full Colonel (Air Force Army or Marine Corps) or Captain (Navy)12

USSTRATCOM Airborne Command Post (ABNCP) Should the USSTRATCOM GOC be unable to fulfill its role the E-6B ABNCP can serve as a survivable airborne backup The ABNCPs are a fleet of modified Boeing 707 aircraft each of which carries a crew of 22 which includes aircrew communications operators and battlestaff personnel Historically each battle staff has been led by a General or Admiral known as the Airborne Emergency Action Officer (AEAO) This aircraft fulfills two additional key missions As the Airborne Launch Control System (ALCS) the aircraft has the ability to communicate launch codes directly to ICBM launch facilities to command launch in the event that their launch control centers are unable to perform that function Also the E-6B can serve as the Take Charge And Move Out (TACAMO) relay for Navy ballistic missile submarines The airplane can deploy a 2frac12-mile-long trailing wire antenna and communicate directives to the submarines over its VLFLF system In addition to the VLFLF the ABNCP can communicate using Ultra-High Frequency (UHF) or EHF satellite systems While USSTRATCOM provides the battlestaff personnel the aircraft aircrew and communications operators are from the Navyrsquos Strategic Communications (STRATCOMM) Wing One based at Tinker AFB Oklahoma13 USSTRATCOM Mobile Consolidated Command Center (MCCC) The MCCC is a convoy of trucks that can deploy during a crisis to serve as a survivable road-mobile backup to the USSTRATCOM GOC or ABNCP

100

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Yes US Second Strike

Strat nukes remain operable

Riddle 4 Lieutenant Colonel Thomas C- United States Army ldquoNuclear High Altitude Electromagnetic Pulse ndash Implications For Homeland Security And Homeland Defenserdquo US Army War College 03 May 2004

Additionally the military forces of the United States have been increasingly based in the continental United States (CONUS) and would also be affected Although the strategic nuclear forces (and portions of their supporting infrastructure) were designed to resist the effects of EMP the general purpose forces have not received the same focus After a successful HEMP attack the posts camps bases and stations throughout the country might not be able to provide the services necessary to function as power projection platforms Although some military programs have incorporated EMP resistance as part of the design and acquisition process increasingly the military forces have turned to commercial-off-the-shelf equipment that has little or no EMP protection

Military communication would survive

Wilson 4 Clay- Specialist in Technology and National Security Foreign Affairs Defense and Trade Division ldquoHigh Altitude Electromagnetic Pulse (HEMP) and High Power Microwave (HPM) Devices Threat Assessmentsrdquo Congressional Research Service August 20 2004

As the Cold War ended the US military took steps to reduce its nuclear arsenal and associated infrastructure32 After 1998 the USAF decommissioned GWEN assets and replaced the entire system with the Single Channel Anti-Jam Man-Portable (SCAMP) Terminal SCAMP uses extremely high frequency (EHF) technology is resistant to EMP and offers more flexibility than GWEN because the equipment is lightweight transportable and interoperable with DOD satellite networks33

101

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT Security Kritik

Russia data sharing solves the impact

Farley 9 Robert is an assistant professor at the University of Kentuckyrsquos Patterson School of Diplomacy and International Commerce ldquoNeocons Salivating Over Their Next Great Exaggerated Threat Electromagnetic Pulse Attackrdquo October 22 2009

The fact that EMP is poorly researched and not well understood works in its favor as a scare tactic Since evidence of EMPrsquos allegedly lasting impact is purely theoretical EMP awareness advocates can make outlandish claims regarding the threat that even the smallest nuclear arsenal poses They can also point to allegations made by the official EMP Commission ignoring the fact that many outside experts dispute its findings The Niagara conferencersquos emphasis on strategic and policy considerations shows that alarmist predictions about EMP attacks serve as fodder for promotion of a larger nuclear weapons stockpile for missile defense and for preventive attacks

Ignoring the threat results in disaster

Dunn 6 JR- editor of the International Military Encyclopedia ldquoThe EMP Threat ElectroMagnetic Pulse Warfarerdquo American Thinker April 21 2006

Above all we cant allow the problem to slip past without being addressed always a danger in a confusing and urgent time Threats have a way of sneaking up on democracies Back in the 70s an American president on the promise of the Soviet premier that no aerial attack would be carried out on the US decided to shut down the Aerospace Defense Command and its US Army equivalent responsible for air defense of the country The bases were closed the assets either scrapped or turned over to the National Guard Two decades later on a fine morning in September there were no alert squadrons longmdashrange interceptors or surfacemdashtomdashair missiles to defend New York and Washington The presidents name was Jimmy Carter We can do better

102

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT Kritiks

Informing the public is key to challenging the industrial military complex

Lewallen 2 John- Political Science at Whitman University organizer of the Nuclear Peace Action Group Fulbright Scholarship recipient Public Ocean Access Network ldquoHigh-Altitude Nuclear Warrdquo Nuclear Press p9-10

Certainly we are courting disaster by leaving all thought about high-altitude nuclear war to a tiny group of military-industrial-complex insiders Everyone testifying at the Congressional EMP hearings has an axe to grind weapons systems to promote a reputation to make a job to do a grim reality to deny

Engaging in the debate over high altitude nuclear weapons is crucial to curbing nuclear madness

Lewallen 2 John- Political Science at Whitman University organizer of the Nuclear Peace Action Group Fulbright Scholarship recipient Public Ocean Access Network ldquoHigh-Altitude Nuclear Warrdquo Nuclear Press p9-10

I humbly offer the following commentary as my initial thoughts on the strategic implications of high-altitude nuclear electromagnetic pulse weapons I invite peer review Today we are all peers beneath the sword of looming nuclear catastrophe I believe the global human network of love empathy and respect is ultimately superior to the forces pushing toward global nuclear war But we cannot afford to ignore nuclear weapons In the psychological darkness of reality denial they grow and grow Help cast the light which will dissipate nuclear madness

103

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT Religion K

Lewallen 2 John- Political Science at Whitman University organizer of the Nuclear Peace Action Group Fulbright Scholarship recipient Public Ocean Access Network ldquoHigh-Altitude Nuclear Warrdquo Nuclear Press Pg38

ldquoAnd David proceeded to take his staff in his hand and to choose for himself the five smoothest stones from the torrent valley and to place them in his shepherdsrsquo bag that served him as a receptacle and in his hand was his sling And he began approaching the PhilistineldquoAnd the Philistine began to come coming nearer and nearer to David and the man carrying the large shield was ahead of himhellipldquoThen David thrust his hand into his bag and took a stone from there and slung it so that he struck the Philistine in his forehead and the stone sank into his forehead and he went falling upon his face to the earth So David with a sling and a stone proved stronger than the Philistine and struck the Philistine down and put him to death and there was no sword in Davidrsquos handrdquo

- The Old Testament I Samuel 1740-50As Russia and China face the onslaught of the United States advancing militarily toward them behind a missile shield still in research and development their military position is similar to that of the young shepherd David confronting the giant and mighty Philistine warrior GoliathThe United States has overwhelming military superiority and a gargantuan vulnerability to high-altitude nuclear EMP attack Russia and China have had several decades to fill their weapons bag with specialized nuclear EMP weapons and to prepare to sling them over the American homeland by missile by satellite or in a fractional orbiting bomb flung into orbit with a Scud or other short-range missileDavid knew that Goliath had a soft spot in his forehead just as the Russians and Chinese are perfectly aware that the United States in the words of Representative Weldon is the ldquomost vulnerable nation on Earth to electronic warfarerdquo

104

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT Psychoanalysis

An EMP attack would cause serious psychological trauma

Foster et al 8 ldquoReport of the Commission to Assess the Threat to the United States from Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP) Attackrdquo April 2008 Dr John S Foster Jr Mr Earl Gjelde Dr William R Graham (Chairman) Dr Robert J Hermann Mr Henry (Hank) M Kluepfel Gen Richard L Lawson USAF (Ret) Dr Gordon K Soper Dr Lowell L Wood Jr Dr Joan B Woodard

The human consequences of such a scenario include the social and psychological reactions to a sudden loss of stability in the modern infrastructure over a large area of the country Loss of connectivity between the government and its populace would only exacerbate the consequences of such a scenario This analysis is based largely on selected case studies including major blackouts natural disasters and terrorist incidents in recent US history These incidents served as approximate analogs in order to best predict the sociological and psychological effects of an EMP attack Impact of an EMP AttackWhile no single event serves as a model for an EMP scenario with incidence of long lasting widespread power outage communications failure and other effects the combined analysis of the following case studies provides useful insight in determining human reactions following an EMP attackBlackouts

1048715 Northeast (1965)1048715 New York (1977)1048715 Hydro Quebec (1989)1048715 Western states (1996)1048715 Auckland New Zealand (1998)1048715 Northeast (2003)Natural Disasters1048715 Hurricane Hugo (1989)1048715 Hurricane Andrew (1992)1048715 Midwest floods (1993)Terrorist Incidents1048715 World Trade Center attack (2001)1048715 Anthrax attacks (2001)

BlackoutsIn 1965 a blackout occurred over the northeastern United States and parts of Canada New Hampshire Vermont Massachusetts Connecticut Rhode Island New York including metropolitan New York City and a small part of Pennsylvania were in the dark after operators at Consolidated Edison were forced to shut down its generators to avoid damage Street traffic was chaotic and some people were trapped in elevators but there were few instances of antisocial behavior while the lights were out5 It was a ldquolong night in the darkrdquo but the recovery proceeded without incident and citizens experienced relative civility TIME Magazine described New Yorkrsquos next blackout in 1977 as a ldquoNight of Terrorrdquo 6 Widespread chaos reigned in the city until power was restored mdash entire blocks were looted and set ablaze people flipped over cars and vans on the streets the city was in pandemonium That night 3776 arrests were made and certainly not all looters thieves and arsonists were apprehended or arrested7 While this is a dramatic example of antisocial behavior following a blackout sociologists point to extraordinary demographic and historical issues that contributed to the looting For instance extreme poverty and socioeconomic inequality plagued New York neighborhoods and many of the looters originated from the poorer sections of the city engaging in ldquovigilante redistributionrdquo by looting consumer goods and luxuries Racial tensions were high and a serial killer known as Son of Sam had recently terrorized New Yorkers

105

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Negative

106

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Not Topical

US doesnrsquot do EMP targeting

Citizendium 9 ldquoSingle Integrated Operational Planrdquo httpencitizendiumorgwikiSingle_Integrated_Operational_Plan

It is known that nuclear explosions produce varying intensities of electromagnetic pulse (EMP) which has the potential to damage electronic equipment Effective power coverage and frequencies of the electromagnetic pulse are dependent at a minimum on the yield of the nuclear weapon and the altitude of the burst[7] While general US planning and engineering documents specify means of EMP protection [8] no unclassified references suggest that any weapons targeted under SIOP are intended principally to produce EMP

EMP nukes have already been removed

Berry 8 Ken Research Coordinator ICNND ldquoNew Weapons Technologyrdquo International Commission on Nuclear Non-proliferation and Disarmament

Generally speaking the shorter pulse wave forms such as microwaves are far more effective against electronic equipment and more difficult to devise hardened protection against45 For maximum effect the electromagnetic burst must be in the upper atmosphere Thus such a weapon stationed in space could in theory knock out electrical systems including computers and communications across continent-wide distances With this in mind the Soviet Union developed nuclear weapons designed for detonations in the upper atmosphere The United States and the United Kingdom also carried out similar research It is believed that most of the nuclear EMP weapons were disarmed following the ReaganGorbachev arms talks in the 1980s

Kristensen 98 Hans M- Director of the Nuclear Information Project at the Federation of American Scientists ldquoNuclear Futures Proliferation of Weapons of Mass Destruction and US Nuclear Strategy British American Security Information Council Basic Research Report 982

It is still too early to predict whether these exotic designs will mature into actual nuclear weapons modifications But these and a wide range of other nuclear projects are clear indicators that US nuclear weapons are here to stay113 And the expansion of US nuclear doctrine is an increasingly prominent justification for new weapons

107

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Tix Links

Partisan issue

Weinberger 2-17 Sharon- CarnegieNewhouse School Legal Reporting Fellow International Reporting Project fellow at the Johns Hopkins University School of Advanced International Studies ldquoThe Boogeyman Bomb How afraid should we be of electromagnetic pulse weaponsrdquo Foreign Policy February 17 2010

But unlike some of the other national security threats on the horizon the e-bomb has emerged as a partisan issue with a core group of conservative supporters Gingrich has been among the most outspoken On Capitol Hill Rep Roscoe Bartlett (R-Md) has been one of the most ardent supporters of those pushing for an EMP defense establishing the investigatory commission and warning of a catastrophe on a scale far greater than Hurricane Katrina Despite EMPACTs claims of nonpartisanship liberals have largely dismissed the idea as conservative fear-mongering EMPs were even derisively labeled the Newt Bomb by New Republic senior editor Michael Crowley The real debate is not so much over whether EMP is a real phenomenon -- even critics of the commissions findings agree it exists -- but how much of a threat it poses to the nations infrastructure how likely it is that a group or country might build and use such a weapon and what should be done about it

Weinberger 2-17 Sharon- CarnegieNewhouse School Legal Reporting Fellow International Reporting Project fellow at the Johns Hopkins University School of Advanced International Studies ldquoThe Boogeyman Bomb How afraid should we be of electromagnetic pulse weaponsrdquo Foreign Policy February 17 2010

In the end advocates for EMP preparation could end up being their own worst enemy The unlikely scenarios they peddle lend themselves to caricature And though there are certainly some intellectual heavyweights among those who have warned about the effects of EMP -- like Johnny Foster the former head of Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory -- critics have derided EMP defense supporters for relying on the likes of science fiction writer William R Forstchen to help bolster their case By talking about time machines and turning the EMP bomb into something that goes bump in the night those advocating for better defenses risk pushing the issue further into the margins of science fiction

108

Cornell HKHANE Aff

GOP Link

GOP would support any measure to reduce EMP dangers

Smith 9 George ldquoNot Soiling Yourself Over an EMP Attack You mustrsquove voted for Obamardquo 62909The electromagnetic pulse attack lobby is now exclusively the property of the GOP Itrsquos a dumping ground for a rich a variety of Republican crazies a constituency which DD mapped for many years Like those who believe global warming to be a hoax the Republican right has electromagnetic pulse fear all locked up If one thinks about this paradox it has a neatly confounding internal anti-logic If something is backed up by hard science and poses a real danger for everyone on the planet the Republican party denies its existence If however the threat is something rather abstract to almost all Americans rests almost entirely on theoretical prediction is something not likely to ever occur at all and then only in the context of what would promise to be an all out nuclear war the GOP believes in it very strongly To paraphrase Paul Krugman characterizing GOP attitudes towards global warming You could call this crazy conspiracy theory but doing so would actually be unfair to crazy conspiracy theorists ldquoThe nightmare scenario of [EMP attack] is this A rogue nation like North Korea or a stateless terrorist like Bin Laden gets hold of a nuclear weapon and decides not to drive it into a large city but rather to launch it on a Scud-type missile straight into the atmosphere from a barge off the East Coastrdquo wrote one brilliant theoretician at Slate a couple years ago ldquoIn fact [a congressionally chartered commission] discovered that knowledge about EMP is widespread in such places as China Cuba Egypt India Iran Saddam Husseinrsquos Iraq North Korea Pakistan and Russiardquo wrote defense hawk and EMP crazy Frank Gaffney for the Washington Times also a couple of years ago

109

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT Terrorist EMP

Terrorists using EMPs is impossible

Butt 10 Yousaf M- Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics ldquoThe EMP threat fact fiction and response (part 2)rdquo The Space Review February 1 2010 httpwwwthespacereviewcomarticle15531

Thus it is not at all a simple matter even for countries with considerable resources and focused decades-long effort to build such weapons let alone pair them to reliable delivery systems As carefully argued by John Mueller in his new book Atomic Obsession it is virtually impossible for a terrorist cell to obtain the raw materials needed for a nuclear device and assemble it correctly themselves [Ref 22 p 172ndash198] Even a ldquocruderdquo U-type device is not all that ldquocruderdquo and requires the concerted effort of skilled scientists and engineers Any weapon produced by a terrorist cell would likely be a one of a kind and would have to remain untested For a terrorist group to then mate this weapon to a ballistic missile and successfully carry out an EMP strike beggars belief As John Pike director of GlobalSecurityorg has said ldquoIt is just very difficult to imagine how terrorists are going to be able to lay hands on a nuclear-tipped missile and launch it and reprogram it in such a way that it would be a high-altitude burst like thatrdquo Dr Philip Coyle former Pentagon director of operational test and evaluation has stated that the EMP commissionrsquos report appeared to ldquoextrapolate calculations of extreme weapons effects as if they were a proven fact and further to puff up rogue nations and terrorists with the capabilities of giantsrdquo The 2009 Strategic Posture Commission puts it more delicately by saying that ldquothe Commission is divided over how imminent a threat this ishelliprdquo If a terrorist cell miraculously built such a weapon they are likely to explode their ldquocrown jewelrdquo in a simple spectacular ground-burst that will destroy a large part of a city and not risk the complicationsmdashand likely failuremdashof a lofted EMP strike that will if all goes according to their plan cause casualties via unpredictable secondary effects upon a limited part of some of the nationrsquos infrastructure The risk versus reward calculation for both terrorists cells and so-called ldquoroguerdquo states would almost certainly force their hand to a spectacular and direct ground burst in preference to a unreliable and uncertain EMP strike A weapon of mass destruction is preferable to a weapon of mass disruption

Terrorists will use HPMs instead

Wilson 4 Clay- Specialist in Technology and National Security Foreign Affairs Defense and Trade Division ldquoHigh Altitude Electromagnetic Pulse (HEMP) and High Power Microwave (HPM) Devices Threat Assessmentsrdquo Congressional Research Service August 20 2004

In addition while HEMP weapons are large in scale and require a nuclear capability along with technology to launch high altitude missiles HPM weapons are smaller in scale involve a much lower level of technology and may be within the capability of many non-state organizations HPM can cause damage to computers similar to HEMP although the effects are limited to a much smaller area The technical accessibility lower cost and the apparent vulnerability of US civilian electronic equipment could make small-scale HPM weapons attractive for terrorist groups in the future

110

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT State EMP

States wouldnrsquot use EMPs

Butt 10 Yousaf M- Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics ldquoThe EMP threat fact fiction and response (part 2)rdquo The Space Review February 1 2010 httpwwwthespacereviewcomarticle15531

A state would be highly unlikely to launch an EMP strike from their own territory because the rocket could be traced to the country of origin and would probably result in nuclear or massive conventional retaliation by the US The EMP commission also considers adversarial nations carrying out a shipborne EMP attack that would be less traceable However even so there would some small risk of trace-back that would give the leadership in such nations pause While nuclear forensics are not well enough developed to assuredly ascribe the origin of a nuclear explosion even their current state of development would in some measure dissuade the leaders of a nation from seriously contemplating such an attack Furthermore the US certainly has data via its DSP satellites on the infrared (IR) signatures of the rocket exhausts from the missiles of various countries Though these signatures are probably virtually identical for the ScudShahabNo-dong family of missiles the nations which may entertain such attacks do not necessarily know whether eg the DSP data can discriminate between a NK Nodong versus an Iranian Shahabs perhaps due to differences in fuel andor subtle design idiosyncrasies This is data only the US has and it has an inherent deterrent value to nations thinking about launching an EMP strike via a ship-launched ballistic missile This is almost certainly the case if say Iran were to use its solid rocket motor technology to launch such a strikemdashif and when Iran obtains nuclear weapons of course In such a case the burn time-profile and solid-motor IR signatures could probably be used to tie the missile to a nation Furthermore the leaders of a nation contemplating such an attack would have to carefully consider what would happen in case the warhead was not delivered properly If it fell short andor did not explode it may be possible for US engineers and scientists to ascribe a national origin given the forensic material For the leadership of any nation to chance such an attack they must be almost suicidally optimistic they would have to presume that everything would go perfectly Even so it may still be possible to identify the country of origin which would invite massive US retribution

States wouldnrsquot give terrorists EMPs

Butt 10 Yousaf M- Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics ldquoThe EMP threat fact fiction and response (part 2)rdquo The Space Review February 1 2010 httpwwwthespacereviewcomarticle15531

What about an adversarial nation ldquosub-contractingrdquo its dirty work to a terrorist cell Again there would be substantial doubt in the nationrsquos leadership as to whether or not forensic evidence (whether the device exploded or not) could tie them to the weapon In any case as argued by Mueller [Ref 22 p 163] it is highly unlikely that a nation would give one of its crown jewels to an unpredictable terrorist cell At least in the case of Iran this view is supported by in-depth research done by authors at the National Defense University who conclude ldquo[W]e judge and nearly all experts consulted agree that Iran would not as a matter of state policy give up its control of such weapons to terrorist organizations and risk direct US or Israeli retributionrdquo

111

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT RussiaChina EMP

China and Russia would never EMP attack the US

Butt 10 Yousaf M- Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics ldquoThe EMP threat fact fiction and response (part 2)rdquo The Space Review February 1 2010 httpwwwthespacereviewcomarticle15531

Though they possess the technological know-how to fabricate a powerful EMP device the possibility of China or Russia carrying out such an attack is virtually nil Not only for the regular military deterrent reasons but also post-Cold War our economies are intimately linked which amounts to an inherent economic deterrent The latter is likely the more relevant deterrent [Ref 22 p 65] We owe China tremendous sums of money they need us as a market and both the US and China require Russian oil via intertwined world markets Although the EMP commissioners have offered a Chinese-language PowerPoint presentation outlining the effects of EMP devices as evidence that China has an interest in such weapons this presentation is actually of Taiwanese origin [ldquoElectromagnetic Pulse Attack and Defenserdquo by Dr Chien Chung] and it is not pertinent to any official Chinese military doctrine

112

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT Proliferators EMP

New nuclear states will not carry out EMP attacks

Butt 10 Yousaf M- Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics ldquoThe EMP threat fact fiction and response (part 2)rdquo The Space Review February 1 2010 httpwwwthespacereviewcomarticle15531

More importantly the DoD itself has weighed in on the issue in its ldquoMilitarily Critical Technologies Listrdquo This is a detailed compendium of the technologies the DoD assesses as critical to maintaining superior United States military capabilities Part II ldquoWeapons of Mass Destruction Technologiesrdquo addresses those technologies required for development integration or employment of biological chemical or nuclear weapons and their means of delivery against the US This document states that ldquoHEMP can pose a serious threat to US military systems when even a single high-altitude nuclear explosion occurs In principle even a new nuclear proliferator could execute such a strike In practice however it seems unlikely that such a state would use one of its scarce warheads to inflict damage which must be considered secondary to the primary effects of blast shock and thermal pulse Furthermore a HEMP attack must use a relatively large warhead to be effective (perhaps on the order of one megaton) and new proliferators are unlikely to be able to construct such a device much less make it small enough to be lofted to high altitude by a ballistic missile or space launcherrdquo Lastly General Robert T Marsh former Chairman of the Presidentrsquos Commission on Critical Infrastructure Protection concluded (in 1997) that he did not ldquosee any evidence that suggests capabilities seriously threatening our critical infrastructurehellip There are many easier less costly and more dramatic ways for terrorists to use nuclear weapons than delivery to a high altitude Such an event is so unlikely and difficult to achieve that I do not believe it warrants serious concern at this timerdquo

Attacks will be deterred now

Riddle 4 Lieutenant Colonel Thomas C- United States Army ldquoNuclear High Altitude Electromagnetic Pulse ndash Implications For Homeland Security And Homeland Defenserdquo US Army War College 03 May 2004

Similarly the decision to implement an earlier deployment of an initial ground-based interceptor and improved ballistic missile tracking capabilities will support the improved passive and active defenses called for in the NSS 50 Also the convincing demonstration of the continuing efficiency and effectiveness of Americarsquos global precision strike capabilities during Operation IRAQI FREEDOM is a clear indication that multi-dimensional counterforce capabilities remain a viable element of Americarsquos counter-proliferation capabilities that may be used if required to prevent a HEMP attack on the United States Finally the United Statesrsquo demonstrated willingness to conduct preemptive strikes to neutralize WMD under the concept of imminent defense adds an unmistakable dimension to the concept of deterrence for those seeking to acquire weapons of mass destruction51

113

Cornell HKHANE Aff

EMPacts False

Impacts of high altitude nuclear explosions are overstated

Ruppe 4 David ldquoPlausibility of EMP Threat Classified Expert Saysrdquo Global Security Newswire September 24 2004

Philip Coyle who was the assistant secretary of defense and Pentagon director of operational test and evaluation during the Clinton administration however questioned the certainty of the reportrsquos conclusion that smaller kiloton-scale nuclear weapons could be developed to produce the catastrophic consequences described by the report ldquoThe US military does not know how to do this today and has no way of demonstrating the capability in the future without returning to nuclear testingrdquo he said by e-mail ldquoThe fact is that a rogue nation or terrorists that tried this would be very unsure of the results and would risk massive retaliation from the United States for having achieved nothingrdquo he wrote Coyle who also worked at the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory for more than 30 years also said it is uncertain that even a massive nuclear weapon would cause the scale of destruction the commission predicted

Transportation would survive

Chisholm 5 Patrick ldquoProtect our electronics against EMP attackrdquo Christian Science Monitor December 19 2005

Unlike what was depicted in the 1983 movie The Day After automobiles may keep functioning after an EMP attack The electronics within automobiles enjoy robust shielding because of the harsh electromagnetic environment on existing roadways Aircraft have even stronger electromagnetic shielding so they are unlikely to fall out of the sky Some of the [aircrafts] equipment may not work but the propulsion and control system usually is pretty robust said Dr William A Radasky president of Metatech Corp a consulting firm specializing in electromagnetic environment analysis

114

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT Strait of Hormuz

The US would restore oil within days

Klare 2 Michael- Five Colleges professor of Peace and World Security Studies boards of directors of Human Rights Watch and the Arms Control Association ldquoResource Wars The New Landscape of Global Conflictrdquo p 73

Just as it would resist any new Iraqi assault on Kuwait the United States would greet any Iranian move to impede Persian Gulf shipping with an immediate and crushing military response Tomahawk cruise missiles and radar-guided bombs would most likely be used to demolish Iranian ships missile batteries airfields and communications facilities Ships and aircraft already deployed in the region would carry out most of the attacks backed up by additional units sent in from the United States and Europe And while the Iranians might succeed in damaging a number of tankers their ability to imperil the oil flow would quickly be eliminated by superior American firepower4s

115

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Alt Cause- Geomagnetic Storms

Geomagnetic storms make the impact inevitable

Butt 10 Yousaf M- Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics ldquoThe EMP threat fact fiction and response (part 2)rdquo The Space Review February 1 2010 httpwwwthespacereviewcomarticle15531

For the reasons outlined above it is highly unlikely that any adversary would choose tomdashor in the case of a terrorist cell even be remotely capable ofmdashcarrying out a nuclear EMP strike against the US However it is virtually guaranteed that a powerful geomagnetic storm capable of knocking out a significant section of the US electrical grid will occur within the next few decades In fact this may well happen even within next few years as we approach the next period of elevated solar activity known as ldquosolar maximumrdquo which is forecast to peak in 2013 Geomagnetic storms are E3-like low-intensity but long-lasting and low-frequency coupling to long-lines The first recorded evidence of space weather effects on technology was in 1847 when currents were registered in electric telegraph wires Later in 1859 a major failure of telegraph systems in New England and Europe coincided with a large solar flare called the ldquoCarrington Eventrdquo after astronomer Richard Carrington who witnessed the instigating flare However the real modern-era wakeup call to geomagnetic susceptibility of our infrastructure was the (moderate intensity) geomagnetic storm that shut down the entire Hydro Quebec grid in March 1989 There were also reports of computer failures in August of that year in Toronto Canada (which possibly indicate that the associated geomagnetic activity had considerably faster components than just E3) Geomagnetically induced currents (GICs) in long-line power delivery systems are caused by the rate-of-change of the geomagnetic field just as in an E3 pulse Thus the severity of such geomagnetic field disturbances is measured in nanotesla per minute (nTmin) Experience with modern-day infrastructure indicates failures can result even at relatively low-threat intensities For example the instigating activity associated with the Hydro Quebec collapse mentioned above only reached an intensity of ~480 nTmin Solar storms on other occasions have been known to produce geomagnetic disturbances of ~2000 nTmin and a solar storm on May 14ndash15 in 1921 may have produced a disturbance of 4800 nTmin [23] As Mr Kappenman states [23] ldquoanalysis indicates that storms withexcursions of ~2800 nTmin have been observed at geomagnetic latitudes of concern for modern day infrastructures Further anecdotal evidence suggests that ~5000 nTmin may have occurred during the Great Geomagnetic Storm of May 1921rdquo To understand the effects of such GIC on the electric grid we may examine the August 2003 Northeast Blackout which was not geomagnetically induced (It reportedly originated when high-voltage power lines came in contact with ldquoovergrown treesrdquo) This outage affected the Northeast US and parts of Canada and more than 200 power plants including several nuclear plants were shut down as a result of the electricity cutoff Other effects included loss of water pressure possible sewage contamination gridlock various other transportation problems (because of secondary effects on railways airlines and gas stations) and disruption of oil refineriesrsquo operations Phone service was stressed due to the high call volume and several radio and television stations went off the air It is estimated that the one-day blackout cost $7ndash10 billion in spoiled food lost production overtime wages and other related expenses inflicted on more than one-seventh of the US population [24] A similar vegetation-induced outage in Europe occurred on September 28 2003 when ldquoat 301 am one of the main north-south transit lines ndash the Lukmanier transmission line ndash shut down following a flash-over between a conductor cable and a treerdquo The blackout affected about 56 million people although electricity was restored gradually (about 3ndash6 hours) in most places and in most cities electricity were powered on again during the morning Rolling blackouts reportedly continued to affect about 5 of the population for the next two days as repairs were being made Although the August and September 2003 outage was not geomagnetic in origin solar outbursts during late October and early November 2003 triggered severe geomagnetic storms with wide-ranging effects that were described as follows in a 2008 National Academy of Sciences (NAS) study [25] The Sydkraft utility group in Sweden reported that strong geomagnetically induced currents (GIC) over Northern Europe caused transformer problems and even a system failure and subsequent blackout Radiation storm levels were high enough to prompt NASA officials to issue a flight directive to the [International Space Station] astronauts to take precautionary shelter Airlines took unprecedented actions in their high latitude routes to avoid the high radiation levels and communication blackout areas Rerouted flights cost airlines $10000 to $100000 per flight Numerous anomalies were reported by deep space missions and by satellites at all orbits GSFC Space Science Mission Operations Team indicated that approximately 59 of the Earth and Space science missions were impacted The storms are suspected to have caused the loss of the $640 million ADEOS-2 spacecraft On board the ADEOS-2 was the $150 million NASA SeaWinds instrument Due to the variety and intensity of this solar activity outbreak most industries vulnerable to space weather experienced some degree of impact to their operations Even more serious effects can be expected during future powerful geomagnetic storms To quote the NAS study [25] Because of the interconnectedness of critical infrastructures in modern society the impacts of severe space weather events can go beyond disruption of existing technical systems and lead to short-term as well as to long-term collateral socioeconomic disruptionshellip Collateral effects of a longer-term outage would likely includehellip disruption of the transportation communication banking and finance systems and government services the breakdown of the distribution of potable water owing to pump failure and the loss of perishable foods and medications because of lack of refrigeration The resulting loss of services for a significant period of time in even one region of the country could affect the entire nation and have international impacts as well Our electric power grid has continued to become more vulnerable to disruption from geomagnetic storms For example the power delivery system is now operating closer to margin than in the past As Kappenman states ldquomany of the things that we have done to increase operational efficiency and haul power long distances have inadvertently and unknowingly escalated the risks from geomagnetic stormsrdquo [25] The possible extent of a power system collapse from a 4800 nTmin geomagnetic storm (centered at 50deg geomagnetic latitude) is shown in Figure 2 Similar levelsmdash10 times those experienced during the March 1989 stormmdashwere reached during the great magnetic storm of May 14ndash15 1921 A nuclear weapon would need to be a ~multi-megaton size to cause the equivalent E3 damage [15] The most serious outcome of such power delivery system failures is damage to the transformers although other critical systems on the grid are also at risk As the NAS study points out transformers experience ldquoexcessive levels of internal heating brought on by stray flux when GICs cause a transformerrsquos magnetic core to saturate and to spill flux outside the normal core steel magnetic circuithellip previous well-documented cases have involved heating failures that caused melting and burn-through of large-amperage copper windings and leads in these transformers These multi-ton apparatus generally cannot be repaired in the field and if damaged in this manner they need to be replaced with new units which have manufacture lead times of 12 months or morerdquo Metatech Corp estimates that more than 300 large extra-high voltage (EHV) transformers would be exposed to levels of GIC sufficiently high to place these units at risk of failure or permanent damage requiring replacement [25] Figure 3 shows an estimate of percent loss of EHV transformer capacity by state for a 4800 nTmin threat environment such as might occur during a storm of the magnitude of the May 1921 event As a recent article in the journal Science states ldquoThe surging power-line currents induced by a severe solar storm could push the grid into uncharted territoryrdquo [26] In summary current US grid operational procedures are based largely on limited experience generally do not reduce GIC flows and are unlikely to be adequate for historically large disturbance events Historically large storms have a potential to cause power grid blackouts and transformer damage of unprecedented proportions long-term blackouts and lengthy restoration times and chronic shortages for multiple years are possible [25]

116

Cornell HKHANE Aff

China Turn

High Altitude Nuclear Explosions are key to dissuade China

Castle 6 Colonel Douglas A ldquoShaping Chinarsquos Rise Through Strategic Frictionrdquo USAWC Strategy Research Project March 2006

Continued strengthening of the US military can also decelerate Chinarsquos expanding potency Washington must not allow China to outpace Americarsquos conventional or nuclear capabilities and must maintain its clear technological advantages If the US can stay significantly ahead of China in weapons technology ndash such as advanced missile defense electromagnetic pulse (EMP) weapons and space utilization systems ndash then China would be forced to spend inordinate amounts of money to develop a costly defense infrastructure thereby further delaying its power build-up However this plan depends upon safeguarding technology from espionage corporate transmission and allied governmental transfers to prevent a free ride for China Chinarsquos military growth is disconcerting given that it faces no real regional challenge128 Its development of intercontinental nuclear missiles as well as land- and sea-launched weapons poses a significant threat to the continental US as well as forward-based land and maritime US forces Although China has publicly endorsed a ldquono first-strikerdquo strategic nuclear policy 129 its ldquocult of defenserdquo predilection increases the likelihood of a first-strike scenario130 America is especially vulnerable to the effects of a high-altitude EMP-producing detonation Such an attack would cripple Americarsquos economy and infrastructure yet the US has no publicly-stated policy of response131 An effective operational US anti-missile defense shield and credible EMP deterrence are thus essential to American security

Tellis 7 Ashley J- Senior Associate at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace ldquoChinas Military Space Strategyrdquo Survival Volume 49 Issue 3 September 2007

This has led some observers such as US Senator Jon Kyl to conclude that the solution to redressing emerging American space vulnerabilities in the context of competition with China lies in developing among other things US offensive counterspace capabilities90 These will almost certainly be required if for no other reason than to deter Beijings use of anti-space weaponry and to hold at risk its own emerging assets in space which are likely to become even more important for both economic and military purposes as China evolves into a great power91 Offensive American counterspace instruments serve the limited but critical purpose of raising the costs of Chinas evolving space-denial strategy increasing the probability that Beijing will desist from asymmetric attacks on US space assets

117

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT PGS Prolif

Conventional strike doesnrsquot lead to prolif

Guthe 2 Kurt- Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments ldquoThe Nuclear Posture Review How Is the ldquoNew Triadrdquo Newrdquo 2002

Some argue that greater US reliance on long-range precision-guided conventional weapons will increase the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction They claim that adversaries unable to match US nonnuclear strike capabilities will acquire weapons of mass destruction as an asymmetric counter This reasoning ignores the facts The first major demonstration of the operational effectiveness of US precision-guided weapons was the Gulf War of 1991 Foreign militaries were greatly impressed by the key contribution of precision weapons to the US victory Those hostile to the United States recognized the need for strategies tactics and capabilities to offset the US advantage Weapons of mass destruction have been seen as one response44 But every potential adversary of the United States had or was pursuing nuclear biological or chemical weapons well before 199145 While adversaries may see weapons of mass destruction as counters to US precision-guided weapons US nonnuclear strike capabilities have not been the cause of proliferation which results from political military and technological factors that vary with each country Abandoning this advantage would not reverse proliferation but would seriously impair the ability of the United States to defend itself and others Were certain allies and friends to lose confidence in US defense commitments those countries might seek security in nuclear weapons of their own increasing nuclear proliferation The long-range precision guided weapons of the New Triad offer options for deterring or otherwise preventing WMD use thus contributing to US efforts to deal with the existing problem of proliferation

118

Cornell HKHANE Aff

No Solvency- Conventional EMPs

No Solvency- the US has conventional EMPs that are just as powerful

Muumlller amp Schoumlrnig 1 Harald and Niklas- United Nations Institute for Disarmament Research ldquoRMA and nuclear weapons A calamitous link for arms controlrdquo Disarmament Forum 2001(4)

An alternative way to disrupt the opponentrsquos communication is the use of an Electro-Magnetic Pulse (EMP) weapon which produces a short wave of an intense electromagnetic pulse ruining basic electronic components in communication gear (and of course all electronically based equipment) Until recently a high altitude nuclear explosion was the only means to generate an EMP strong enough to seriously harm electronic devices in enemy territory Tests performed in the early 1960s confirmed that a detonation of a 14 megaton bomb 400 kilometres in orbit resulted in failures of electronic systems 1300 kilometres away13 The effects would be even more severe today as low powered electronic equipment tends to be more sensitive to voltage swings Up to now these scenarios based on nuclear weapons were banned by the Outer Space Treaty (OST) of 1967 signed by virtually all nations with certain and potential nuclear capabilities (with the exception of North Korea) However according to unconfirmed sources recent scientific progress in the United States has led to the design of workable conventional EMP weapons generating a less far reaching but similar shockwave14 With this development severe consequences for the OST are inevitable as nuclear-capable countries may feel the need to deploy nuclear EMP weapons in space as a counter-deterrent

119

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Conventional EMPs Shift

Military leaders would shift to HPM weapons ndash worse than an EMP because itrsquos just as dangerous but more usable

Global Security 5[ldquoHigh-power microwave (HPM) E-Bombrdquo httpwwwglobalsecurityorgmilitarysystemsmunitionshpmhtm]

High-power microwave (HPM) sources have been under investigation for several years as potential weapons for a variety of combat sabotage and terrorist applications Due to classification restrictions details of this work are relatively unknown outside the military community and its contractors A key point to recognize is the insidious nature of HPM Due to the gigahertz-band frequencies (4 to 20 GHz) involved HPM has the capability to penetrate not only radio front-ends but also the most minute shielding penetrations throughout the equipment At sufficiently high levels as discussed the potential exists for significant damage to devices and circuits For these reasons HPM should be of interest to the broad spectrum of EMC practitioners Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP) and High Powered Microwave (HMP) Weapons offer a significant capability against electronic equipment susceptible to damage by transient power surges This weapon generates a very short intense energy pulse producing a transient surge of thousands of volts that kills semiconductor devices The conventional EMP and HMP weapons can disable non-shielded electronic devices including practically any modern electronic device within the effective range of the weapon The effectiveness of an EMP device is determined by the power generated and the characteristic of the pulse The shorter pulse wave forms such as microwaves are far more effective against electronic equipment and more difficult to harden against Current efforts focus on converting the energy from an explosive munitions to supply the electromagnetic pulse This method produces significant levels of directionally focused electromagnetic energy Future advances may provide the compactness needed to weaponize the capability in a bomb or missile warhead Currently the radius of the weapon is not as great as nuclear EMP effects Open literature sources indicate that effective radii of ldquohundreds of meters or morerdquo are possible EMP and HPM devices can disable a large variety of military or infrastructure equipment over a relatively broad area This can be useful for dispersed targets A difficulty is determining the appropriate level of energy to achieve the desired effects This will require detailed knowledge of the target equipment and the environment (walls buildings) The obvious counter-measure is the shielding or hardening of electronic equipment Currently only critical military equipment is hardened eg strategic command and control systems Hardening of existing equipment is difficult and adds significant weight and expense As a result a large variety of commercial and military equipment will be susceptible to this type of attack The US Navy reportedly used a new class of highly secret non-nuclear electromagnetic pulse warheads during the opening hours of the Persian Gulf War to disrupt and destroy Iraqi electronics systems The warheads converted the energy of a conventional explosion into a pulse of radio energy The effect of the microwave attacks on Iraqi air defense and headquarters was difficult to determine because the effects of the HPM blasts were obscured by continuous jamming the use of stealthy F-117 aircraft and the destruction of Iraqs electrical grid The warheads used during the Gulf War were experimental warheads not standard weapons deployed with fielded forces Col William G Heckathorn commander of the Phillips Research Site and the deputy director of the Directed Energy Directorate of the Air Force Research Laboratory was presented the Legion of Merit medal during special retirement ceremonies in May 1998 In a citation accompanying the medal Col Heckathorn was praised for having provided superior vision leadership and direct guidance that resulted in the first high-power microwave weapon prototypes delivered to the warfighter The citation noted that Col Heckathorn united all directed energy development within Army Navy and Air Force which resulted in an efficient focused warfighter-oriented tri-service research program In December of 1994 he came to Kirtland to become the director of the Advanced Weapons and Survivability Directorate at the Phillips Laboratory Last year he became the commander of the Phillips Laboratory while still acting as the director of the Advanced Weapons and Survivability Directorate As with a conventional munition a microwave munition is a single shot munition that has a similar blast and fragmentation radius However while the explosion produces a blast the primary mission is to generate the energy that powers the microwave device Thus for a microwave munition the primary kill mechanism is the microwave energy which greatly increases the radius and the footprint by in some cases several orders of magnitude For example a 2000-pound microwave munition will have a minimum radius of approximately 200 meters or footprint of approximately 126000 square meters Studies have examined the incorporation of a high power microwave weapon into the weapons bay of a conceptual uninhabited combat aerial vehicle The CONOPS electromagnetic compatibility and hardening (to avoid a self-kill) power requirements and potential power supplies and antenna characteristics have been analyzed Extensive simulations of potential antennas have been performed The simulations examined the influence of the aircraft structure on the antenna patterns and the levels of leakage through apertures in the weapons bay Other investigations examined issues concerning the electromagnetic shielding effectiveness of composite aircraft structures Collateral damage from E-bombs is dependent on the size and design of the specific bomb An E-bomb that utilizes explosive power to obtain its damaging microwaves will result in typical blast and shrapnel damage Ideally an E-Bomb would be designed to minimize and dissipate most of the mechanical collateral damage Human exposure to microwave radiation is hazardous within several meters of the epicenter However there is a relatively low risk of bodily damage at further distances Any non-military electronics within range of the E-bomb that have not been protected have a high probability of being damaged or destroyed The best way to defend against E-bomb attack is to destroy the platform or delivery vehicle in which the E-bomb resides Another method of protection is to keep all essential electronics within an electrically conductive enclosure called a Faraday cage This prevents the damaging electromagentic field from interacting with vital equipment The problem with Faraday cages is that most vital equipment needs to be in contact with the outside world This contact point can allow the electromagentic field to enter the cage which ultimately renders the enclosure useless There are ways to protect against these Faraday cage flaws but the fact remains that this is a dangerous weakpoint In most circumstances E-bombs are categorized as non-lethal weapons because of the minimal collateral damage they create The E-bombs non-lethal categorization gives military commanders more politically-friendly options to choose from

120

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Conventional EMPs Shift

HPM triggers all your impacts

Danchev 6 Dancho Independent Security Consultancy Threat Intelligence Analysis (OSINTCyber Counter Intelligence) and Competitive Intelligence researcher ldquoEMP Attacks - Electronic Domination in Reverserdquo httpddanchevblogspotcom200605emp-attacks-electronic-domination-inhtml]

Why wouldnt a reported sponsor of terrorist nations wage EMP warfare or even try to over the US Because they would have the US in their backyard in less than a day but the opportunity to balance the powers or achieve temporary military advantage given the attack remains undetected is a tempting factor for future developments -- the ongoing miniaturization and the fact that intense energy effects can be can be produced without an A-Bomb makes it even worse Surgical HPM and EMP attacks without fear of retaliation is what possible adversaries could be aiming at and of course portability Other HPM weapons being tested by the military are portable and re-usable through battery-power and are effective when fired miles away from a target These weapons can also be focused like a laser beam and tuned to an appropriate frequency in order to penetrate electronics that are heavily shielded against a nuclear attack The deepest bunkers with the thickest concrete walls reportedly are not safe from such a beam if they have even a single unprotected wire reaching the surface

HPM or conventional EMP will be substituted

Krepinevich 1 Andrew- defense policy analyst executive director of the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments ldquoBeyond the Two-MTW Posturerdquo Testimony before the House Committee on Armed Services on June 20 2001

Strategic Strike The United States military is capable of moving beyond near-total reliance on nuclear weapons for prompt effective strategic strike operations Precision munitions have a significant substitution potential with respect to nuclear weapons Various forms of electronic attack (ie IW strikes conventionally generated EMP and HPM strikes) may also possess a significant substitution potential Such weapons are far more ldquouseablerdquo than nuclear weapons and may better deter an enemyrsquos attempts at coercion or aggression They can enable us to reduce the size of our nuclear arsenal (while encouraging others to follow suit)

121

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT Warfighting Advantage

Their warfighting advantage is logically flawed

Burnham 83 David- co-director of the Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse (TRAC) ldquoUS Fears One Bomb Could Cripple The Nationrdquo The New York Times

Many experts question the likelihood that any nuclear war would be limited to the exchange of a handful of nuclear explosions My personal feeling is that if an attack ever came it would be a massive one on our cities and military bases and the effect of EMP on the civilian economy would be irrelevant said Dr Gordon K Soper a senior scientist in the Defense Nuclear Agency But there has been a good deal of talk about the possibility of a protracted nuclear war Mr Latham the Pentagon official expressed the same kind of ambivalence I dont think a cheap shot is likely but there is no way we can know for sure The possibility of using EMP as a oneshot weapon is not considered likely because of impossibility of predicting the exact response

122

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Nuclear Winter Imagery Good

Forecasts of nuclear winter spur change to abandon nuclear madness

Robock amp Toon 10 Alan- Department of Environmental Sciences Rutgers University and Owen Brian- Director and Professor Department of Atmospheric and Oceanic Sciences University of Colorado ldquoLocal Nuclear War Global Sufferingrdquo Scientific American January 2010

Twenty-five years ago international teams of scientists showed that a nuclear war between the US and the Soviet Union could produce a ldquonuclear winterrdquo The smoke from vast fires started by bombs dropped on cities and industrial areas would envelop the planet and absorb so much sunlight that the earthrsquos surface would get cold dark and dry killing plants worldwide and eliminating our food supply Surface temperatures would reach winter values in the summer International discussion about this prediction fueled largely by astronomer Carl Sagan forced the leaders of the two superpowers to confront the possibility that their arms race endangered not just themselves but the entire human race Countries large and small demanded disarmament Nuclear winter became an important factor in ending the nuclear arms race Looking back later in 2000 former Soviet Union leader Mikhail S Gorbachev observed ldquoModels made by Russian and American scientists showed that a nuclear war would result in a nuclear winter that would be extremely destructive to all life on earth the knowledge of that was a great stimulus to us to people of honor and morality to actrdquo Why discuss this topic now that the cold war has ended Because as other nations continue to acquire nuclear weapons smaller regional nuclear wars could create a similar global catastrophe New analyses reveal that a conflict between India and Pakistan for example in which 100 nuclear bombs were dropped on cities and industrial areasmdashonly 04 percent of the worldrsquos more than 25000 warheadsmdashwould produce enough smoke to cripple global agriculture A regional war could cause widespread loss of life even in countries far away from the conflict

123

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Regional Nuclear War

Newest studies indicate small scale nuclear wars would lead to extinction

Robock amp Toon 10 Alan- Department of Environmental Sciences Rutgers University and Owen Brian- Director and Professor Department of Atmospheric and Oceanic Sciences University of Colorado ldquoLocal Nuclear War Global Sufferingrdquo Scientific American January 2010

By deploying modern computers and modern climate models the two of us and our colleagues have shown that not only were the ideas of the 1980s correct but the effects would last for at least 10 years much longer than previously thought And by doing calculations that assess decades of time only now possible with fast current computers and by including in our calculations the oceans and the entire atmosphere mdash also only now possiblemdashwe have found that the smoke from even a regional war would be heated and lofted by the sun and remain suspended in the upper atmosphere for years continuing to block sunlight and to cool the earth India and Pakistan which together have more than 100 nuclear weapons may be the most worrisome adversaries capable of a regional nuclear conflict today But other countries besides the US and Russia (which have thousands) are well endowed China France and the UK have hundreds of nuclear warheads Israel has more than 80 North Korea has about 10 and Iran may well be trying to make its own In 2004 this situation prompted one of us (Toon) and later Rich Turco of the University of California Los Angeles both veterans of the 1980s investigations to begin evaluating what the global environmental effects of a regional nuclear war would be and to take as our test case an engagement between India and Pakistan The latest estimates by David Albright of the Institute for Science and International Security and by Robert S Norris of the Natural Resources Defense Council are that India has 50 to 60 assembled weapons (with enough plutonium for 100) and that Pakistan has 60 weapons Both countries continue to increase their arsenals Indian and Pakistani nuclear weapons tests indicate that the yield of the warheads would be similar to the 15-kiloton explosive yield (equivalent to 15000 tons of TNT) of the bomb the US used on Hiroshima Toon and Turco along with Charles Bardeen now at the National Center for Atmospheric Research modeled what would happen if 50 Hiroshimasize bombs were dropped across the highest population-density targets in Pakistan and if 50 similar bombs were also dropped across India Some people maintain that nuclear weapons would be used in only a measured way But in the wake of chaos fear and broken communications that would occur once a nuclear war began we doubt leaders would limit attacks in any rational manner This likelihood is particularly true for Pakistan which is small and could be quickly overrun in a conventional conflict Peter R Lavoy of the Naval Postgraduate School for example has analyzed the ways in which a conflict between India and Pakistan might occur and argues that Pakistan could face a decision to use all its nuclear arsenal quickly before India swamps its military bases with traditional forces Obviously we hope the number of nuclear targets in any future war will be zero but policy makers and voters should know what is possible Toon and Turco found that more than 20 million people in the two countries could die from the blasts fires and radioactivitymdasha horrible slaughter But the investigators were shocked to discover that a tremendous amount of smoke would be generated given the megacities in the two countries assuming each fire would burn the same area that actually did burn in Hiroshima and assuming an amount of burnable material per person based on various studies They calculated that the 50 bombs exploded in Pakistan would produce three teragrams of smoke and the 50 bombs hitting India would generate four (one teragram equals a million metric tons) Satellite observations of actual forest fires have shown that smoke can be lofted up through the troposphere (the bottom layer of the atmosphere) and sometimes then into the lower stratosphere (the layer just above extending to about 30 miles) Toon and Turco also did some ldquoback of the enveloperdquo calculations of the possible climate impact of the smoke should it enter the stratosphere The large magnitude of such effects made them realize they needed help from a climate modeler It turned out that one of us (Robock) was already working with Luke Oman now at the NASA Goddard Space Flight Center who was finishing his PhD at Rutgers University on the climatic effects of volcanic eruptions and with Georgiy L Stenchikov also at Rutgers and an author of the first Russian work on nuclear winter They developed a climate model that could be used fairly easily for the nuclear blast calculations Robock and his colleagues being conservative put five teragrams of smoke into their modeled upper troposphere over India and Pakistan on an imaginary May 15 The model calculated how winds would blow the smoke around the world and how the smoke particles would settle out from the atmosphere The smoke covered all the continents within two weeks The black sooty smoke absorbed sunlight warmed and rose into the stratosphere Rain never falls there so the air is never cleansed by precipitation particles very slowly settle out by falling with air resisting them Soot particles are small with an average diameter of only 01 micron (μm) and so drift down very slowly They also rise during the daytime as they are heated by the sun repeatedly delaying their elimination The calculations showed that the smoke would reach far higher into the upper stratosphere than the sulfate particles that are produced by episodic volcanic eruptions Sulfate particles are transparent and absorb much less sunlight than soot and are also bigger typically 05 μm The volcanic particles remain airborne for about two years but smoke from nuclear fires would last a decade Killing Frosts in Summer The climatic response to the smoke was surprising Sunlight was immediately reduced cooling the planet to temperatures lower than any experienced for the past 1000 years The global average cooling of about 125 degrees Celsius (23 degrees Fahrenheit) lasted for several years and even after 10 years the temperature was still 05 degree C colder than normal The models also showed a 10 percent reduction in precipitation worldwide Precipitation river flow and soil moisture all decreased because blocking sunlight reduces evaporation and weakens the hydrologic cycle Drought was largely

124

Cornell HKHANE Aff

concentrated in the lower latitudes however because global cooling would retard the Hadley air circulation pattern in the tropics which produces a large fraction of global precipitation In critical areas such as the Asian monsoon regions rainfall dropped by as much as 40 percent The cooling might not seem like much but even a small dip can cause severe consequences Cooling and diminished sunlight would for example shorten growing seasons in the midlatitudes More insight into the effects of cooling came from analyses of the aftermaths of massive volcanic eruptions Every once in a while such eruptions produce temporary cooling for a year or two The largest of the past 500 years the 1815 Tambora eruption in Indonesia blotted the sun and produced global cooling of about 05 degree C for a year 1816 became known as ldquoThe Year without a Summerrdquo or ldquoEighteen Hundred and Froze to Deathrdquo In New England although the average summer temperature was lowered only a few degrees crop-killing frosts occurred in every month After the first frost farmers replanted crops only to see them killed by the next frost The price of grain skyrocketed the price of livestock plummeted as farmers sold the animals they could not feed and a mass migration began from New England to the Midwest as people followed reports of fertile land there In Europe the weather was so cold and gloomy that the stock market collapsed widespread famines occurred and 18-year-old Mary Shelley was inspired to write Frankenstein Certain strains of crops such as winter wheat can withstand lower temperatures but a lack of sunlight inhibits their ability to grow In our scenario daylight would filter through the high smoky haze but on the ground every day would seem to be fully overcast Agronomists and farmers could not develop the necessary seeds or adjust agricultural practices for the radically different conditions unless they knew ahead of time what to expect In addition to the cooling drying and darkness extensive ozone depletion would result as the smoke heated the stratosphere reactions that create and destroy ozone are temperature-dependent Michael J Mills of the University of Colorado at Boulder ran a completely separate climate model from Robockrsquos but found similar results for smoke lofting and stratospheric temperature changes He concluded that although surface temperatures would cool by a small amount the stratosphere would be heated by more than 50 degrees C because the black smoke particles absorb sunlight This heating in turn would modify winds in the stratosphere which would carry ozone-destroying nitrogen oxides into its upper reaches Together the high temperatures and nitrogen oxides would reduce ozone to the same dangerous levels we now experience below the ozone hole above Antarctica every spring Ultraviolet radiation on the ground would increase significantly because of the diminished ozone Less sunlight and precipitation cold spells shorter growing seasons and more ultraviolet radiation would all reduce or eliminate agricultural production Notably cooling and ozone loss would be most profound in middle and high latitudes in both hemispheres whereas precipitation declines would be greatest in the tropics The specific damage inflicted by each of these environmental changes would depend on particular crops soils agricultural practices and regional weather patterns and no researchers have completed detailed analyses of such agricultural responses Even in normal times however feeding the growing human population depends on transferring food across the globe to make up for regional farming deficiencies caused by drought and seasonal weather changes The total amount of grain stored on the planet today would feed the earthrsquos population for only about two months [see ldquoCould Food Shortages Bring Down Civilizationrdquo by Lester R Brown Scientific American May] Most cities and countries have stockpiled food supplies for just a very short period and food shortages (as well as rising prices) have increased in recent years A nuclear war could trigger declines in yield nearly everywhere at once and a worldwide panic could bring the global agricultural trading system to a halt with severe shortages in many places Around one billion people worldwide who now live on marginal food supplies would be directly threatened with starvation by a nuclear war between India and Pakistan or between other regional nuclear powers Typically scientists test models and theories by doing experiments but we obviously cannot experiment in this case Thus we look for analogues that can verify our models Burned cities Unfortunately firestorms created by intense releases of energy have pumped vast quantities of smoke into the upper atmosphere San Francisco burned as a result of the 1906 earthquake and whole cities were incinerated during World War II including Dresden Hamburg Tokyo Hiroshima and Nagasaki These events confirm that smoke from intense urban fires rises into the upper atmosphere The seasonal cycle In actual winter the climate is cooler because the days are shorter and sunlight is less intense the simple change of seasons helps us quantify the effects of less solar radiation Our climate models re-create the seasonal cycle well confirming that they properly reflect changes in sunlight Eruptions Explosive volcanic eruptions such as those of Tambora in 1815 Krakatau in 1883 and Pinatubo in 1991 provide several lessons The resulting sulfate aerosol clouds that formed in the stratosphere were transported around the world by winds The surface temperature plummeted after each eruption in proportion to the thickness of the particulate cloud After the Pinatubo eruption the global average surface temperature dropped by about 025 degree C Global precipitation river flow and soil moisture all decreased Our models reproduce these effects Forest fires Smoke from large forest fires sometimes is injected into the troposphere and lower stratosphere and is transported great distances producing cooling Our models perform well against these effects too Extinction of the dinosaurs An asteroid smashed into Mexicorsquos Yucataacuten Peninsula 65 million years ago The resulting dust cloud mixed with smoke from fires blocked the Sun killing the dinosaurs Massive volcanism in India at the same time may have exacerbated the effects The events teach us that large amounts of aerosols in the earthrsquos atmosphere can change climate drastically enough to kill robust species

125

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Regional Nuclear War

Prefer our evidence- only current research

Robock amp Toon 10 Alan- Department of Environmental Sciences Rutgers University and Owen Brian- Director and Professor Department of Atmospheric and Oceanic Sciences University of Colorado ldquoLocal Nuclear War Global Sufferingrdquo Scientific American January 2010

Some people think that the nuclear winter theory developed in the 1980s was discredited And they may therefore raise their eyebrows at our new assertion that a regional nuclear war like one between India and Pakistan could also devastate agriculture worldwide But the original theory was thoroughly validated The science behind it was supported by investigations from the National Academy of Sciences by studies sponsored within the US military and by the International Council of Scientific Unions which included representatives from 74 national academies of science and other scientific bodies Our current work has appeared in leading peer-reviewed journals Still we seem to be the only ones pursuing research into the global environmental risks of nuclear exchanges We urge others to evaluate and repeat the calculations both for the effects of a superpower conflagration and for more regional nuclear wars

126

Cornell HKHANE Aff

No EMP- Norms Now

Berry 8 Ken Research Coordinator ICNND ldquoNew Weapons Technologyrdquo International Commission on Nuclear Non-proliferation and Disarmament

However it is unlikelymdashthough unfortunately not impossiblemdashthat any nuclear armed state these days would use EMP generated by nuclear weapons Using an atmospheric nuclear blast would attract international opprobrium both for its proliferation implications and also increasingly important for its effects on the environment As has been discussed above the same widespread effects of shutting down a nationrsquos power grid production lines water utilities chemical plants financial institutions telecommunications and transportation routes could be achieved by cyber attack Moreover given the difficulty of tracing the perpetrators of cyberwarfare responsibility for such an attack would be deniable44

No risk of EMP use now

Arquilla and Ronfeldt 2k[John and David RAND ldquoSwarming and the Future of Conflictrdquo]

One of the most effective means of breaking down communications is by an airburst of a nuclear weapon at a high altitude This generation of a highly disruptive electromagnetic pulse (EMP) would temporarily disable most communications in the battlespace it would also damage the many embedded information systems that make modern weapons systems able to fire with accuracy (eg the optical sights of a main battle tank) The fact that the EMP is generated by a nuclear detonationmdashagainst which there are strong normative inhibitionsmdashsuggests that there are few actors who might actually be able to undertake such an action Yet we note the frequent discussion of EMP as a likely threat in cold warndashera ruminations on nuclear strategy44 Further the high-altitude nature of the burst means that there would be virtually no collateral damage Finally it should be noted that the Russian militaryrsquos declaratory stance with respect to nuclear weapons has moved in recent years from ldquono first userdquo to a willingness to engage in ldquofirst userdquo It may be that their inability to match American advances in conventional warfighting will impel the Russians to try to make up for any deficiencies in this manner Indeed the recently announced new Russian military doctrine is clearly more permissive of the use of nuclear weapons from the tactical to the strategic level

127

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Russia CMR Link

Russian military doctrine supports the potential use of EMP

Arquilla and Ronfeldt 2k[John and David RAND ldquoSwarming and the Future of Conflictrdquo]

One of the most effective means of breaking down communications is by an airburst of a nuclear weapon at a high altitude This generation of a highly disruptive electromagnetic pulse (EMP) would temporarily disable most communications in the battlespace it would also damage the many embedded information systems that make modern weapons systems able to fire with accuracy (eg the optical sights of a main battle tank) The fact that the EMP is generated by a nuclear detonationmdashagainst which there are strong normative inhibitionsmdashsuggests that there are few actors who might actually be able to undertake such an action Yet we note the frequent discussion of EMP as a likely threat in cold warndashera ruminations on nuclear strategy44 Further the high-altitude nature of the burst means that there would be virtually no collateral damage Finally it should be noted that the Russian militaryrsquos declaratory stance with respect to nuclear weapons has moved in recent years from ldquono first userdquo to a willingness to engage in ldquofirst userdquo It may be that their inability to match American advances in conventional warfighting will impel the Russians to try to make up for any deficiencies in this manner Indeed the recently announced new Russian military doctrine is clearly more permissive of the use of nuclear weapons from the tactical to the strategic level

128

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Infrastructure CP

The United States federal government should implement the findings of the EMP Commission

Solvency ndash

EMP Commissionrsquos findings havenrsquot yet been implemented

Treadwell and Thompson 9[Mead Treadwell is a Senior Fellow in Security and Defense and Jeremy Thompson is a Research Associate in Security and Defense both at the Institute of the North ldquoEMP Attacks Infrastructure amp Public Policy Concernsrdquo Inside ALEC NovDec]

Yet the dots are not being connected The Department of Homeland Security has made no official move to implement or even accept the recommendations of the EMP Commission report on critical national infrastructures While some members of Congress understand the threat and wish to do something about it most of the ire has been directed at power industry figures as a Congressional hearing earlier this summer illustrates

Solves vulnerability to EMP

EMP Commission 4[ Report of the Commission to Assess the Threat to the United States from Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP) Attack Volume 1 Executive Report 2004 Dr John S Foster Jr Mr Earl Gjelde Dr William R Graham (Chairman) Dr Robert J Hermann Mr Henry (Hank) M Kluepfel GEN Richard L Lawson USAF (Ret) Dr Gordon K Soper Dr Lowell L Wood Jr Dr Joan B Woodard]

The Nationrsquos vulnerability to EMP that gives rise to potentially large-scale long-term consequences can be reasonably and readily reduced below the level of a potentially catastrophic national problem by coordinated and focused effort between the private and public sectors of our country The cost for such improved security in the next 3 to 5 years is modest by any standardmdashand extremely so in relation to both the war on terror and the value of the national infrastructures involved The appropriate response to this threatening situation is a balance of prevention protection planning and preparations for recovery Such actions are both rational and feasible A number of these actions also reduce vulnerabilities to other serious threats to our infrastructures thus giving multiple benefits

129

Cornell HKHANE Aff

NMD CP

McNeill amp Weitz 8 Jena Baker- homeland security policy analyst at The Heritage Foundation and Richard- Senior Fellow and Director of the Center for Political-Military Analysis at Hudson Institute ldquoElectromagnetic Pulse (EMP) Attack A Preventable Homeland Security Catastropherdquo Heritage Foundation Backgrounder 2199 httpwwwheritageorgresearchhomelandsecuritybg2199cfm_ftn19

Build a Comprehensive Missile Defense System The most likely method of EMP attack would be a ballistic missile armed with a nuclear warhead Building a comprehensive missile defense system would allow the US to intercept and destroy a missile bound for the United States The mere implementation of such a system would go a long way to prevent an attack by dissuading those who wish to carry out such actions and sending a clear message that the US takes this threat seriously

Those opposed to missile defense in Congress and elsewhere have attempted to paint such an endeavor as a waste of resources that does nothing to further American security 33 Minutes Protecting America in the New Missile Age A Reader a collection of essays by pre-eminent defense scholars emphasized the need for such measures and recent missile testing by Iran demonstrates that other countries are actively involved in developing missile programsmdashwhich could be used against the US[21]

130

Cornell HKHANE Aff

LoW key to Stability

Hair trigger alert serves as a warning light not to push conflicts too far Plan leads to dangerous confrontations

Perry amp Millot 98 Walter L- Senior Information Scientist and Marc Dean ldquoChapter Three Issues from the Winter Wargamerdquo Issues from the 1997 Army After Next Winter Wargame RAND Corporation 9

The possible exception to the above statement is strategic nuclear war In this instance the technology supporting military operations outstrips the timelines of political decision During the Cold War a Soviet SLBM launched off the eastern seaboard of the United States would have given a President less than 10 minutes to decide whether to order a limited number of response options contained in the Single Integrated Operational Plan or leave that decision to a successor The flight time of Soviet ICBMs allowed the United States less than 45 minutes to execute what might well turn out to be a single retaliatory response The damage done by Soviet nuclear strikes might conceivably deny the United States the capacity to retaliate with weapons other than SLBMs if national leaders chose to decide on a response only after ldquoriding outrdquo the attack and would probably lead to an incoherent response But the damage done by even an incoherent US retaliation would have decimated the Soviet Union and destroyed large portions of its structures for controlling war A Soviet nuclear attack would have left the fate of the United States indeed the world solely in the hands of the President He wouldmdashat bestmdashhave perhaps minutes to confer with his closest advisors and literally no time for consultation or even communication with the Congress the people allies or even the Soviets The requirement to ldquouse it or lose itrdquo would have left no room for a political leaderrsquos wellhoned techniques of crisis management The Soviet leadership faced the same problem and the symmetry provided a powerful incentive for the two superpowers to avoid direct confrontation engage in measures designed to control the risks and consequences of nuclear war and enter into vastly expensive efforts to buy their NCAs and successors some ability to control the conduct of war including limited nuclear options effective means of nuclear attack assessment as well as tactical warning continuity of operations and ultimately strategic defenses

131

• EMP AFF Index
• 1AC Plan
• Solvency
• Future Wars Adv
• Future Wars Adv
• Accidents Adv
• Accidents Adv
• Accidents Adv
• Rogue EMP Adv
• Rogue EMP Adv
• Rogue EMP Adv
• Rogue EMP Adv
• Rogue EMP Adv
• China Advantage
• China Advantage
• General Topicality 12
• General Topicality 22
• General Topicality 1AR 12
• General Topicality 1AR 22
• More Topicality
• Future Wars Conflicts Likely
• Future Wars Ext
• AT Limited War Winter
• Accidents- LoW Bad
• AT FS Remains - Russia
• AT FS Remains - China
• AT FS Remains - Subs
• Rogue- Seeking
• China Solves NoKo
• Rogue Satelites
• Rogue- AT No Tech
• Rogue- AT No Long Range Missiles
• Rogue- AT Uncertain Effects
• Rogue- AT Attribution
• Iran Ev
• NoKo Ev
• Terrorism Adv
• Terrorism Adv
• Terrorism Ext
• China- AT Attribution
• Space Militarization Adv 1
• Space Militarization Adv 2
• Space Militarization Adv 3
• Space Ext
• Data Sharing Adv
• Data Sharing Adv
• Data Sharing Adv
• Data Sharing- Uniqueness
• Data Sharing- Data Needed
• Russia Data Sharing (Testing)
• Russian ARMS control
• Modeling Advantage 1
• Modeling Advantage- Israel
• Modeling Advantage- Israel
• Modeling Advantage- China
• Modeling Advantage- Solvency
• Israeli Strikes Bad
• Testing Advantage
• EMPacts Econ
• EMPacts Heg
• EMPacts Earthquake
• EMPacts GPS
• EMPacts Satelites
• EMPacts Healthcare
• Morality Advantage
• AT Verifiability
• AT Verifiability
• Verifiability Extensions
• AT CMR
• Politics Link Answers
• Politics Link Answers
• Politics Link Turn
• AT Geomagnetic Storms
• AT Geomagnetic Storms
• AT Blackout Alt Causes
• AT Alternative EMP forms
• AT Protective Measures
• AT Protective Measures
• AT Low Altitude Nuclear Explosions
• CP Theories
• AT Hardening CP
• AT Hardening CP
• AT NMD CP
• AT PAROS CP
• AT Asteroids PIC
• AT Japan Rearm
• AT Consult Japan
• AT Primacy DA
• AT Primacy DA
• AT Damage Limitation
• AT Damage Limitation
• AT Damage Limitation
• AT Deterrence DA
• AT Deterrence DA
• AT Deterrence DA
• AT Deterrence DA
• No US Second Strike
• Yes US Second Strike
• Yes US Second Strike
• AT Security Kritik
• AT Kritiks
• AT Religion K
• AT Psychoanalysis
• Negative
• Not Topical
• Tix Links
• GOP Link
• AT Terrorist EMP
• AT State EMP
• AT RussiaChina EMP
• AT Proliferators EMP
• EMPacts False
• AT Strait of Hormuz
• Alt Cause- Geomagnetic Storms
• China Turn
• AT PGS Prolif
• No Solvency- Conventional EMPs
• Conventional EMPs Shift
• Conventional EMPs Shift
• AT Warfighting Advantage
• Nuclear Winter Imagery Good
• Regional Nuclear War
• Regional Nuclear War
• No EMP- Norms Now
• Russia CMR Link
• Infrastructure CP
• NMD CP
• LoW key to Stability

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Data Sharing- Uniqueness49Data Sharing- Data Needed50Russia Data Sharing (Testing)51Russian ARMS control52Modeling Advantage 153Modeling Advantage- Israel54Modeling Advantage- Israel55Modeling Advantage- China56Modeling Advantage- Solvency57Israeli Strikes Bad58Testing Advantage59EMPacts Econ60EMPacts Heg61EMPacts Earthquake62EMPacts GPS63EMPacts Satelites64EMPacts Healthcare65Morality Advantage66AT Verifiability67AT Verifiability68Verifiability Extensions69AT CMR70Politics Link Answers71Politics Link Answers72Politics Link Turn73AT Geomagnetic Storms74AT Geomagnetic Storms75AT Blackout Alt Causes76AT Alternative EMP forms77AT Protective Measures78AT Protective Measures79AT Low Altitude Nuclear Explosions80CP Theories81AT Hardening CP82AT Hardening CP83AT NMD CP84AT PAROS CP85AT Asteroids PIC86AT Japan Rearm87AT Consult Japan88AT Primacy DA89AT Primacy DA90AT Damage Limitation91AT Damage Limitation92AT Damage Limitation93AT Deterrence DA94AT Deterrence DA95AT Deterrence DA96AT Deterrence DA97

2

Cornell HKHANE Aff

No US Second Strike98Yes US Second Strike99Yes US Second Strike100AT Security Kritik101AT Kritiks102AT Religion K103AT Psychoanalysis104Negative105Not Topical106Tix Links107GOP Link108AT Terrorist EMP109AT State EMP110AT RussiaChina EMP111AT Proliferators EMP112EMPacts False113AT Strait of Hormuz114Alt Cause- Geomagnetic Storms115China Turn116AT PGS Prolif117No Solvency- Conventional EMPs118Conventional EMPs Shift119Conventional EMPs Shift120AT Warfighting Advantage121Nuclear Winter Imagery Good122Regional Nuclear War123Regional Nuclear War125No EMP- Norms Now126Russia CMR Link127Infrastructure CP128NMD CP129LoW key to Stability130

3

Cornell HKHANE Aff

1AC Plan

Plan The United States federal government should ban high-altitude nuclear explosions

4

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Solvency

Plan eliminates electromagnetic pulse warfare

Johnston 9 Robert Wm- PhD in physics from UT-Dallas ldquoHigh-altitude nuclear explosionsrdquo 28 January 2009

Several effects are relatively unique to high altitude bursts Electromagnetic pulse (EMP) is important only for high altitude bursts For such detonations ionization

of the upper atmosphere can produce a brief intense pulse of radio frequency radiation which can damage or disrupt electronic devices For explosions above most of the atmosphere EMP can affect large areas

Ionization of the atmosphere from explosions in the atmosphere can interfere with radar and radio communications for short periods

Charged particles produced by explosions above the Earths atmosphere can be captured by the Earths magnetic field temporarily creating artificial radiation belts that can damage spacecraft and injure astronautscosmonauts in orbit

5

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Future Wars Adv

Future great power wars will be initiated with EMP strikes

Lewallen 2 John- Political Science at Whitman University organizer of the Nuclear Peace Action Group Fulbright Scholarship recipient Public Ocean Access Network ldquoHigh-Altitude Nuclear Warrdquo Nuclear Press p30

ldquoIn all the war games in which I have been present and all the ones which I have studied when I have not been present the attack the red attack always begins with an EMP laydown on blue that is a Soviet laydown on the continental United States by multiple megaton high-altitude burstsrdquo-Dr Lowell Wood Nuclear EMP Hearings p173Any major nuclear war these days seems sure to be a two-stage affair First one or several high-altitude nuclear explosions will occur wiping out all unprotected and imperfectly- protected military and civilian electronics within line of sight of the burst If Dr Lowell Wood and Mr William Graham are correct in their 1999 assessment of US nuclear strategic EMP hardening there might not be much left of the US nuclear retaliatory system after the initial EMP attack 35 The second stage low-altitude nuclear war might or might not coincide with or follow the initial high-altitude nuclear EMP strike Certainly all national leaders should have an EMP-hardened communication system to compare notes after the first high-altitude nuclear bomb goes off

In the absence of EMP strikes mutual interest would de-escalation nuclear war

Quinlan 9 Michael- Director of the Ditchley Foundation former British defence strategist and former Permanent Under-Secretary of State ldquoThinking about nuclear weapons principles problems prospectsrdquo p63

There are good reasons for fearing escalation These include the confusion of war its stresses anger hatred and the desire for revenge reluctance to accept the humiliation of backing down the desire to get further blows in first Given all this the risks of escalation are grave in any conflict between advanced powers and Western leaders during the cold war were rightly wont to emphasize them in the interests of deterrence But this is not to say that they are virtually certain or even necessarily odds-on still less that they are so for all the assorted circumstances in which the situation might arise in a nuclear world to which past experience is only a limited guide It is entirely possible for example that the initial use of nuclear weapons breaching a barrier that has held since 1945 might so horrify both sides in a conflict that they recognized an overwhelming common interest in composing their differences The human pressures in that direction would be very great Even if initial nuclear use did not quickly end the fighting the supposition of inexorable momentum in a developing exchange with each side rushing to overreaction amid confusion and uncertainty is implausible It fails to consider what the situation of the decision-makers would really be Neither side could want escalation Both would be appalled at what was going on Both would be desperately looking for signs that the other was ready to call a halt Both given the capacity for evasion or concealment which modern delivery platforms and vehicles can possess could have in reserve significant forces invulnerable enough not to entail use-or-lose pressures (It may be more open to question as noted earlier whether newer nuclear-weapon possessors can be immediately in that position but it is within reach of any substantial state with advanced technological capabilities and attaining it is certain to be a high priority in the development of forces) As a result neither side can have any predisposition to suppose in an ambiguous situation of fearful risk that the right course when in doubt is to go on copiously launching weapons And none of this analysis rests on any presumption of highly subtle or pre-concerted rationality The rationality required is plain

6

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Future Wars Adv

Nuclear planners know that EMP strikes make limited war impossible and are therefore forced to launch a full out nuclear strike at the onset of conflict

CDI 2 Center for Defense Information ldquoRethinking the Unthinkablerdquo The Washington Post July 28 2002 httpwwwcdiorgnuclearrethinking-prcfm

Yet counterforce theories to Blair were equally removed from operational reality The notion that a nuclear war might be rationally fought over an extended periodmdashthat it might involve a number of nuclear exchanges yet result in negotiations before things really got out of handmdashwas never more than pie-in-the-sky academic nonsense The main reason Blair saysmdashas military leaders have always understood in spadesmdashwas that in the early stages of a nuclear war command and control systems on both sides would be extremely vulnerable to what was called decapitation The pilots and battle staff responsible for the airborne SAC command post known at the time as Looking Glass were acutely aware of the decapitation problem Blair says Once the bombs start falling they used to tell him were totally screwed To make matters worse in the early 70s it was discovered that a single high-altitude nuclear explosion would release an intense pulse of electromagnetic energy that would massively disrupt communications and avionics Planes would be falling out of the sky Some aspects of the command and control system could bemdashand subsequently weremdashhardened against attack But some could not And the systems overall vulnerability Blair says meant that no matter how much concrete was packed around a Minuteman missile riding out a first strike was not a viable basis for strategy So what were the military planners to do The answer was to gear the whole war plan to launch on warning This was not acknowledged publiclymdashit was too controversial Blair saysmdashbut insiders knew that the system was designed to force a quick decision and get the missiles out of their silos as soon as possible after learning of an enemy attack Both sides were prepared to do this though the Soviets didnt put their launch-on-warning system in place Blair learned until that scary period in the early Reagan years Call this deterrence if you want Youve certainly got two sides facing off with each armed so heavily as to give the other pause Or call it counterforce All those missiles can be aimed at military targets and fired preemptively at any time But to Blair the label is beside the point What matters is the decision to place thousands upon thousands of potential Hiroshimas on hair-trigger alert in systems within which even a minor error carries the potential for unimaginable horror With a missile taking only 30 minutes to travel from the Soviet Union to the United Statesmdashand far less if delivered from an offshore submarinemdashthe launch-on-warning timetable is impossibly tight In the North American Aerospace Defense Commands bombproof bunker beneath Colorados Cheyenne Mountain they have three minutes from the time the first sensor report comes in to the time they have to say Were under attack Blair says Three minutes Then comes an emergency conference and an officer in Omaha briefs the president And do you know how much time hes allowed to give that briefing Thirty seconds

Plan solves EMP first-strike paranoia and nullifies the benefits of an all out nuclear war

Lewallen 99 John- Public Ocean Access Network ldquoThe Blackout Bomb What It Means To Yourdquo httpnonuclearnettheblackoutbombhtm

Major Stokes did not connect this statement to high-altitude EMP nuclear weaponry In fact his study of Chinarsquos real and imagined electronic weaponry has only cursory mention of EMP Is the Blackout Bomb so secret and potentially panic-causing that even many military strategists are in the dark about its true significance Dr Lowell Wood noted in verbal testimony at the 1997 EMP hearing in Congress that nuclear strategists in the United States do war simulations based on the presumption that a capable enemy would begin hostilities with high-altitude EMP weaponry Since the Russians and Chinese know that we are ready to lay heavy EMP on them at the outset of hostilities they try to be prepared to do the same to us preferably first Therefore if we careen closer to nuclear conflict with Russia or China the advantage of first-strike EMP escalates rapidly

7

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Accidents Adv

EMP warplans force adversaries to adopt a launch on warning policy creating intense time pressure

Schnurr 9 Avi- Executive Director of Israels Missile Defense Association reviewed US technology policy for the the Department of Defense the White House Homeland Security Council Congress and the National Academy of Sciences ldquoThe EMP Threat A Strategic Review of Geopolitical Risk Scenariosrdquo 27th July 2009 httpwwwhenryjacksonsocietyorgstoriesaspid=1227

When scientists saw this it began a new race in the Cold War in which a nuclear exchange would start with an attack intended to disable or destroy infrastructure During the Cold War the U nited S tates had engineers whose entire professions were simply to do EMP testing either in laboratories or with underground nuclear blasts They also protected hardware and command and control systems from these kinds of effects An example of EMP as a Cold War tactic actually came after the Cold War In 19 95 Norway decided it wanted to do an upper atmosphere weather test so they asked NASA to use one of its decommissioned nuclear boosters Norway notified the countries in the area including Russia that they were going to launch this weather test but the person in Russia responsible for taking this information to the defence authorities was sick and his replacement did not understand the protocol In Russia there are three individuals who can recommend a nuclear attack to the president the Prime Minister the Defense Minister and the Interior Minister each of whom could do so independently On this occasion all three were together meeting with the Russian president when someone ran into the room interrupting that they saw a launch coming from the North Sea The Defense Minister turned to Boris Yeltsin and said ldquoDo it Do it now This is it this is the attack Launch all of our missilesrdquo Yeltsin opened his little black box but did nothing When I first heard this story it made no sense to me Why would all of the warheads be launched with one missile coming in before itrsquos even clear that itrsquos heading toward Russia Obviously if they had waited a little bit longer they would have seen that it was only heading in the general direction but this harkens back to the Cold War mindset Both sides were so worried about the possibility of their infrastructures being destroyed by EMP and that they would not be able to launch a counter strike that the protocol said that if there was one missile coming in and it looked as if it could be an attack a response must be made very early This is the reason there is so little time Fear of an EMP attack in 19 95 almost launched World War III The EMP threat is the reason the US president still walks around with someone following him everyday carrying what they call the presidential ldquofootballrdquo The EMP was a primary focus of the US military during the Cold War Thereafter with a sense that the nuclear threat was diminishing the focus on EMP also diminished However in more recent times the Pentagon is beginning again to take it seriously by hardening infrastructure and adopting all of the EMP Commissionrsquos recommendations

8

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Accidents Adv

Launch on warning coupled with the intense time pressure results in massive nuclear war

Cirincione 9 Joseph- President of the Ploughshares Fund ldquoThe Continuing Threat of Nuclear Warrdquo in Global Catastrophic Risks by Nick Bostrom Milan M Ćirković p 383-4

Although much was made of the 1994 joint decision by Presidents Bill Clinton and Boris Yeltsin to no longer target each other with their weapons this announcement had little practical consequences Target coordinates can be uploaded into a warheads guidance systems within minutes The warheads remain on missiles on a high alert status similar to that they maintained during the tensest moments of the Cold War This greatly increases the risk of an unauthorized or accidental launch Because there is no time buffer built into each states decision-making process this extreme level of readiness enhances the possibility that either sides president could prematurely order a nuclear strike based on flawed intelligence Bruce Blair a former Minuteman launch officer now president of the World Security Institute says If both sides sent the launch order right now without any warning or preparation thousands of nuclear weapons ndash the equivalent in explosive firepower of about 70000 Hiroshima bombs ndash could be unleashed within a few minutes4 Blair describes the scenario in dry but chilling detail If early warning satellites or ground radar detected missiles in flight both sides would attempt to assess whether a real nuclear attack was under way within a strict and short deadline Under Cold War procedures that are still in practice today early warning crews manning their consoles 247 have only three minutes to reach a preliminary conclusion Such occurrences happen on a daily basis sometimes more than once per day if an apparent nuclear missile threat is perceived then an emergency teleconference would be convened between the president and his top nuclear advisers On the US side the top officer on duty at Strategic Command in Omaha Neb would brief the president on his nuclear options and their consequences That officer is allowed all of 30 seconds to deliver the briefing Then the US or Russian president would have to decide whether to retaliate and since the command systems on both sides have long been geared for launch-on-warning the presidents would have little spare time if they desired to get retaliatory nuclear missiles off the ground before they and possibly the presidents themselves were vaporized On the US side the time allowed to decide would range between zero and 12 minutes depending on the scenario Russia operates under even tighter deadlines because of the short flight time of US Trident submarine missiles on forward patrol in the North Atlantic Russias early warning systems remain in a serious state of erosion and disrepair making it all the more likely that a Russian president could panic and reach a different conclusion than Yeltsin did in 19956 As Russian capabilities continue to deteriorate the chances of accidents only increase Limited spending on the conventional Russian military has led to greater reliance on an ageing nuclear arsenal whose survivability would make any deterrence theorist nervous Yet the missiles remain on a launch status begun during the worst days of the Cold War and never turned off As Blair concludes Such rapid implementation of war plans leaves no room for real deliberation rational thought or national leadership Former chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee Sam Nunn agrees We are running the irrational risk of an Armageddon of our own making The more time the United States and Russia build into our process for ordering a nuclear strike the more time is available to gather data to exchange information to gain perspective to discover an error to avoid an accidental or unauthorized launch

9

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Accidents Adv

This causes extinction

Helfand amp Pastore 9 Ira- President of Physicians for Social Responsibility and John- Former President of Physicians for Social Responsibility ldquoUS-Russia nuclear war still a threatrdquo

President Obama and Russian President Dimitri Medvedev are scheduled to Wednesday in London during the G-20 summit They must not let the current economic crisis keep them from focusing on one of the greatest threats confronting humanity the danger of nuclear war Since the end of the Cold War many have acted as though the danger of nuclear war has ended It has not There remain in the world more than 20000 nuclear weapons Alarmingly more than 2000 of these weapons in the US and Russian arsenals remain on ready-alert status commonly known as hair-trigger alert They can be fired within five minutes and reach targets in the other country 30 minutes later Just one of these weapons can destroy a city A war involving a substantial number would cause devastation on a scale unprecedented in human history A study conducted by Physicians for Social Responsibility in 2002 showed that if only 500 of the Russian weapons on high alert exploded over our cities 100 million Americans would die in the first 30 minutes An attack of this magnitude also would destroy the entire economic communications and transportation infrastructure on which we all depend Those who survived the initial attack would inhabit a nightmare landscape with huge swaths of the country blanketed with radioactive fallout and epidemic diseases rampant They would have no food no fuel no electricity no medicine and certainly no organized health care In the following months it is likely the vast majority of the US population would die Recent studies by the eminent climatologists Toon and Robock have shown that such a war would have a huge and immediate impact on climate world wide If all of the warheads in the US and Russian strategic arsenals were drawn into the conflict the firestorms they caused would loft 180 million tons of soot and debris into the upper atmosphere mdash blotting out the sun Temperatures across the globe would fall an average of 18 degrees Fahrenheit to levels not seen on earth since the depth of the last ice age 18000 years ago Agriculture would stop eco-systems would collapse and many species including perhaps our own would become extinct

10

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Rogue EMP Adv

Iran is on the brink of achieving EMP capability to be used against the US

Timmerman 8 Kenneth R- director of the Foundation for Democracy in Iran 2006 Nobel Peace Prize Nominee ldquoUS Intel Iran Plans Nuclear Strike on USrdquo News Max 29 Jul 2008

Iran has carried out missile tests for what could be a plan for a nuclear strike on the United States the head of a national security panel has warned In testimony before the House Armed Services Committee and in remarks to a private conference on missile defense over the weekend hosted by the Claremont Institute Dr William Graham warned that the US intelligence community ldquodoesnrsquot have a storyrdquo to explain the recent Iranian tests One group of tests that troubled Graham the former White House science adviser under President Ronald Reagan were successful efforts to launch a Scud missile from a platform in the Caspian Sea ldquoTheyrsquove got [test] ranges in Iran which are more than long enough to handle Scud launches and even Shahab-3 launchesrdquo Dr Graham said ldquoWhy would they be launching from the surface of the Caspian Sea They obviously have not explained that to usrdquo Another troubling group of tests involved Shahab-3 launches where the Iranians detonated the warhead near apogee not over the target area where the thing would eventually land but at altituderdquo Graham said ldquoWhy would they do thatrdquo Graham chairs the Commission to Assess the Threat to the United States from Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP) Attack a blue-ribbon panel established by Congress in 2001 The commission examined the Iranian tests ldquoand without too much effort connected the dotsrdquo even though the US intelligence community previously had failed to do so Graham said ldquoThe only plausible explanation we can find is that the Iranians are figuring out how to launch a missile from a ship and get it up to altitude and then detonate itrdquo he said ldquoAnd thatrsquos exactly what you would do if you had a nuclear weapon on a Scud or a Shahab-3 or other missile and you wanted to explode it over the United Statesrdquo Several participants in last weekendrsquos conference in Dearborn Mich hosted by the conservative Claremont Institute argued that Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was thinking about an EMP attack when he opined that ldquoa world without America is conceivablerdquo

So is North Korea

Wilson 8 Clay- Specialist in Technology and National Security Foreign Affairs Defense and Trade Division ldquoHigh Altitude Electromagnetic Pulse (HEMP) and High Power Microwave (HPM) Devices Threat Assessmentsrdquo Congressional Research Service March 26 2008

Reportedly several potential US adversaries such as Russia or China are now capable of launching a crippling HEMP strike against the United States with a nuclear-tipped ballistic missile and other nations such as North Korea could possibly have the capability by 201532 Other nations that could possibly develop a capability for HEMP operations over the next few years include United Kingdom France India Israel and Pakistan

11

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Rogue EMP Adv

US First strike capabilities prevent China from curbing Iranian and North Korean nuclear ambitions

Wu 8 Anne- Managing the Atom Project at the Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs at Harvard University ldquoEngage China in Nuclear-Proliferation Issuerdquo Providence Journal October 27

Chinas crucial role has not been diminished since the North Korean denuclearization process started in 2003 even if the United States later started direct dialogue with Pyongyang Indeed it was just reported that Washington expects Pyongyang to submit to China a list of verification steps it would allow in return for being removed from the US terrorism-sponsor list Yet the North Korean issue only represents one piece of international non-proliferation efforts At a time when the global non-proliferation regime is weakened in the absence of consensus on priority and process China and the US share a common interest and responsibility to strengthen measures that prevent the proliferation of nuclear weapons The two countries both agree and disagree on nuclear non-proliferation Internationally the two countries are committed to promoting non-proliferation within frameworks such as the United Nations the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG) Regionally they maintain consultations on the nuclear issue on the Korean Peninsula and in Iran Bilaterally they have intensified dialogues and cooperation on export control and intelligence sharing as well as in other areas Yet differences ranging from strategic to practical issues remain The next president together with the Chinese leadership must lead by example through more effective cooperation The United States and China should be the strongest advocates for reducing the currency of nuclear weapons One thing in the way of their partnership is their differing views on their own nuclear weapons Since going nuclear in 1964 China has been committed to a policy of no-first-use of nuclear weapons and no use of nuclear weapons against non-nuclear states or in nuclear-free zones The United States on the other hand reserves its right as part of its nuclear doctrine to strike others in a pre-emptive manner Many Chinese believe that it is unfair for the US to ask other countries to not develop nuclear weapons while it maintains a huge nuclear stockpile And its policies are counterproductive because they continue to provide legitimacy to nuclear weapons in international affairs The United States and China must bridge their respective perceptions of potential nuclear threat and approaches to non-proliferation in order to work together to tackle the most urgent nuclear problems The United States could engage China more effectively on concerns such as the North Korean and Iranian nuclear issues by recognizing Chinas own interests Denuclearization efforts will not succeed without Chinas support and the perception that the United States is only using Chinas influence to reduce a nuclear threat to itself is detrimental to bilateral relations Regarding North Korea and Iran China envisions nuclear non-proliferation as a broad security concept that encompasses all-around solutions China believes that the fundamental purpose of non-proliferation is to safeguard and promote regional and international peace and security To achieve these goals non-proliferation should be pursued in a diplomatic manner that eschews coercion and other hostile measures China also advocates equilibrium between non-proliferation peaceful uses of nuclear energy and disarmament Because of its perceived balanced stance on North Korea and Iran China occupies the formidable middle ground and could play a constructive role in facilitating a solution that avoids full-scale crisis The United States should encourage China to continue its constructive intervention no nuclear-weapons program no escalating confrontations but continued flexible dialogue Otherwise should any of the parties up the ante the international community will lose a valuable avenue to mitigate the crisis

12

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Rogue EMP Adv

Plan prevents rogue acquisition of EMP weapons by garnering Russian and Chinese support

Lewallen 2 John- Political Science at Whitman University organizer of the Nuclear Peace Action Group Fulbright Scholarship recipient Public Ocean Access Network ldquoHigh-Altitude Nuclear Warrdquo Nuclear Press p26-27

That is not to say that there is no danger of missile attack against the US from ldquorogue statesrdquo which may be defined as ldquopoor nations who do not accept the military dominations of the United Statesrdquo More than thirty nations have Scud missiles capable of flinging a nuclear weapon into orbit over Earth and several nations are known to have nuclear weapons 25 In addition arms in general and nuclear weapons in particular are commodities on the world market Despite many treaties and restrictions deigned to staunch the proliferation of nuclear weapons and missiles among nations there is abundant evidence that nuclear missiles are spreading around 26 The pace and scope of nuclear missile proliferation is largely determined by China Russia and the United States If relations are peaceful in the Nuclear Triangle the three nations are inclined to serve their mutual interests in keeping nuclear missiles out of the hands of other powers If the atmosphere of nuclear confrontation heats up in the Nuclear Triangle nuclear missile proliferation accelerates as the three adversaries are driven to arm allies Russia President Vladimir Putin an adroit player of US fears that ldquorogue nationsrdquo might obtain long-range nuclear missiles has positioned himself so that he can threaten to instantly supply long-range nuclear missiles to Americarsquos worst nightmare du jour be it North Korea Ira Iran Libya Cuba or Syria27

EMP strikes are the most likely scenario for rogue lashout

Schneider 7 Mark- National Institute for Public Policy The Emerging EMP Threat to the United States United States Nuclear Strategy Forum No 6 November 2007

Weapons of mass destruction are potentially attractive to rogue states because these weapons can provide an asymmetric response to US conventional superiority International arms control treaties have made chemical and biological weapons the nearly exclusive prerogative of rogue states However the ability of rogue states to inflict effective attacks even with WMD payloads requires certain technical capabilities in the delivery systems Good accuracy is minimally necessary for WMD attacks on major urban industrial centers and for EMP attacks43 According to Dr Lowell Wood ldquoBecause a very small number ndash potentially one ndash nuclear weapon exploded at high altitude over an American expeditionary force attempting forced entry against a major regional power could potentially tip the balance against our efforts all such powers who contemplate confronting us will be incentivized to develop acquire or retain nuclear weaponryrdquo44 A key conclusion of the EMP commission report was that ldquoA determined adversary can achieve an EMP attack capability without having a high level of [technical] sophisticationrdquo45 From a political standpoint including alliance cohesion the most damaging form of attack by a rogue state would be WMD attacks or EMP attacks launched against the capitals or the major cities of the United States its friends or allies The US National Strategy for Combating the Proliferation of Weapons of Mass Destruction recognized that we must respond to any WMD attack rapidly and that ldquothe primary objective of a response is to disrupt an imminent attack or an attack in progress and eliminate the threat of future attacksrdquo46 The objective of rogue state WMD attacks could possibly be to shock the attacked populations into demanding that the war be ended promptly It would be the intent of such adversaries that such attacks would be so destructive that they would break up coalitions and cause our allies to deny the US critical basing rights Attacks might even be directed against nations that were not active participants in the conflict much as in the way Saddam Hussein attacked Israeli cities during Operation Desert Storm Catastrophic attacks using modern weapons of mass destruction can inflict casualties at levels that have not been experienced since World War II Nuclear EMP attack could be attractive to the less technically sophisticated rogue states because of the extensive damage that could be inflicted on a technologically superior adversary with a relatively crude ballistic missile In order to be able to employ high altitude EMP strikes the rogue state would not have to develop reentry vehicles or ballistic missiles with precision accuracy

13

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Rogue EMP Adv

A rogue EMP strike would collapse the economy

Timmerman 8 Kenneth R- director of the Foundation for Democracy in Iran 2006 Nobel Peace Prize Nominee ldquoUS Intel Iran Plans Nuclear Strike on USrdquo News Max 29 Jul 2008

The commission warned in a report issued in April that the United States was at risk of a sneak nuclear attack by a rogue nation or a terrorist group designed to take out our nationrsquos critical infrastructure If even a crude nuclear weapon were detonated anywhere between 40 kilometers to 400 kilometers above the earth in a split-second it would generate an electro-magnetic pulse [EMP] that would cripple military and civilian communications power transportation water food and other infrastructure the report warned While not causing immediate civilian casualties the near-term impact on US society would dwarf the damage of a direct nuclear strike on a US city ldquoThe first indication [of such an attack] would be that the power would go out and some but not all the telecommunications would go out We would not physically feel anything in our bodiesrdquo Graham said As electric power water and gas delivery systems failed there would be ldquotruly massive traffic jamsrdquo Graham added since modern automobiles and signaling systems all depend on sophisticated electronics that would be disabled by the EMP wave ldquoSo you would be walking You wouldnrsquot be driving at that pointrdquo Graham said ldquoAnd it wouldnrsquot do any good to call the maintenance or repair people because they wouldnrsquot be able to get there even if you could get through to themrdquo The food distribution system also would grind to a halt as cold-storage warehouses stockpiling perishables went offline Even warehouses equipped with backup diesel generators would fail because ldquowe wouldnrsquot be able to pump the fuel into the trucks and get the trucks to the warehousesrdquo Graham said The United States ldquowould quickly revert to an early 19th century type of countryrdquo except that we would have 10 times as many people with ten times fewer resources he said ldquoMost of the things we depend upon would be gone and we would literally be depending on our own assets and those we could reach by walking to themrdquo Graham said America would begin to resemble the 2002 TV series ldquoJeremiahrdquo which depicts a world bereft of law infrastructure and memory In the TV series an unspecified virus wipes out the entire adult population of the planet In an EMP attack the casualties would be caused by our almost total dependence on technology for everything from food and water to hospital care Within a week or two of the attack people would start dying Graham says ldquoPeople in hospitals would be dying faster than that because they depend on power to stay alive But then it would go to water food civil authority emergency services And we would end up with a country with many many people not surviving the eventrdquo Asked just how many Americans would die if Iran were to launch the EMP attack it appears to be preparing Graham gave a chilling reply ldquoYou have to go back into the 1800s to look at the size of populationrdquo that could survive in a nation deprived of mechanized agriculture transportation power water and communication ldquoIrsquod have to say that 70 to 90 percent of the population would not be sustainable after this kind of attackrdquo he said America would be reduced to a core of around 30 million people mdash about the number that existed in the decades after Americarsquos independence from Great Britain The modern electronic economy would shut down and America would most likely revert to ldquoan earlier economy based on barterrdquo the EMP commissionrsquos report on Critical National Infrastructure concluded earlier this year

14

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Rogue EMP Adv

This means Global War

Mead 9 [Walter Russell Senior Fellow in US Foreign Policy at the Council on Foreign Relations New Republic February 4 2009]

So far such half-hearted experiments not only have failed to work they have left the societies that have tried them in a progressively worse position farther behind the front-runners as time goes by Argentina has lost ground to Chile Russian development has fallen farther behind that of the Baltic states and Central Europe Frequently the crisis has weakened the power of the merchants industrialists financiers and professionals who want to develop a liberal capitalist society integrated into the world Crisis can also strengthen the hand of religious extremists populist radicals or authoritarian traditionalists who are determined to resist liberal capitalist society for a variety of reasons Meanwhile the companies and banks based in these societies are often less established and more vulnerable to the consequences of a financial crisis than more established firms in wealthier societies As a result developing countries and countries where capitalism has relatively recent and shallow roots tend to suffer greater economic and political damage when crisis strikes--as inevitably it does And consequently financial crises often reinforce rather than challenge the global distribution of power and wealth This may be happening yet again None of which means that we can just sit back and enjoy the recession History may suggest that financial crises actually help capitalist great powers maintain their leads--but it has other less reassuring messages as well If financial crises have been a normal part of life during the 300-year rise of the liberal capitalist system under the Anglophone powers so has war The wars of the League of Augsburg and the Spanish Succession the Seven Years War the American Revolution the Napoleonic Wars the two World Wars the cold war The list of wars is almost as long as the list of financial crises Bad economic times can breed wars Europe was a pretty peaceful place in 1928 but the Depression poisoned German public opinion and helped bring Adolf Hitler to power If the current crisis turns into a depression what rough beasts might start slouching toward Moscow Karachi Beijing or New Delhi to be born The United States may not yet decline but if we cant get the world economy back on track we may still have to fight

15

Cornell HKHANE Aff

China Advantage

China believes the US will use nuclear EMP attacks in future wars

Pry 5 Dr Peter Vincent- EMP Commission Staff ldquoForeign Views Of Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP) Attackrdquo Before The United States Senate Subcommittee On Terrorism Technology And Homeland Security March 8 2005 httpwwwendtimesreportcomEMP_attackhtml

Many foreign analysts perceive nuclear EMP attack as falling within the category of electronic warfare or information warfare not nuclear warfare Indeed the military doctrines of at least China and Russia appear to define information warfare as embracing a spectrum ranging from computer viruses to nuclear EMP attack For example consider the following quote from one of Chinarsquos most senior military theoristsndashwho is credited by the PRC with inventing information warfarendash appearing in his book World War the Third World WarndashTotal Information Warfare ldquoWith their massive destructiveness longrange nuclear weapons have combined with highly sophisticated information technology and computer technology today and warfare of the looming 21st century information war under nuclearInformation war and traditional war have one thing in common namely that the country which possesses the critical weapons such as atomic bombs will have lsquofirst strikersquo and lsquosecond strike retaliationrsquo capabilities As soon as its computer networks come under attack and are destroyed the country will slip into a state of paralysis and the lives of its people will ground to a halt Therefore China should focus on measures to counter computer viruses nuclear electromagnetic pulse and quickly achieve breakthroughs in those technologies in order to equip China without delay with equivalent deterrence that will enable it to stand up to the military powers in the information age and neutralize and check the deterrence of Western powers including the United Statesrdquo (2001)

This forces China to pursue EMP warfare and space militarization

Kueter 7 Jeff- president of the George C Marshall Institute ldquoChinarsquos Space Ambitions ndash And Oursrdquo The New Atlantis Number 16 Spring 2007 pp 7-22

A more important motivation for Chinarsquos investment in civil and military space is of course the countryrsquos perception of its security environment and its understanding of the evolution of modern warfare The Chinese have concluded from observing recent warsmdashincluding Operation Desert Storm NATO operations in the Balkans and the present wars in Afghanistan and Iraqmdashthat ldquothe PLArsquos past approach to wars which relied heavily on mass mobilization and preparation for all-out warfare are frankly no longer appropriaterdquo according to China scholar Dean Cheng of the Center for Naval Analyses Chinese analysts have reached several conclusions about the characteristics of future wars They will extend from operations on the land at sea and in the air to the electromagnetic spectrum and into outer space They will demand widely spread forces operating over large geographic areas demonstrating precise operational coordination and timing and requiring multiple military services working together Future wars will be characterized by long-range operations involve the decisive use of precision-strike weapons and require much higher rates of expenditure of munitions Operations will occur more rapidly and conflicts will conclude more quickly American strategists have reached similar conclusions as is reflected in the doctrines of the US military services embodied in the annual US defense budgets and written into recent Quadrennial Defense Reviews These conclusions have shaped Chinarsquos overall military modernization efforts as well as its outer-space ambitions

16

Cornell HKHANE Aff

China Advantage

Chinarsquos fears are reflected in their acquisition of space warfare and EMP capabilities

Wilson 8 Clay- Specialist in Technology and National Security Foreign Affairs Defense and Trade Division ldquoHigh Altitude Electromagnetic Pulse (HEMP) and High Power Microwave (HPM) Devices Threat Assessmentsrdquo Congressional Research Service March 26 2008

According to a 1999 DOD report China has been actively pursuing the development of electromagnetic pulse weapons and has devoted significant resources to development of other electronic warfare systems and laser weapons The report also noted that Chinarsquos leaders view offensive counter space weapons and other space-based defense systems as part of inevitable scenarios for future warfare The report noted that China could have as many as 60 ICBMs capable of striking the United States by 2010 Also China may replace 20 of its current ICBMs with a longer-range missile by the end of this decade or sooner36

Space weaponization leads to extinction

Mitchell 1 Gordon R- member of CSIS Working Group on Theater Missile Defenses in the Asia-Pacific Region Fletcher Forum On World Affairs Winter 2001

Deployment of space weapons with pre-delegated authority to fire death rays or unleash killer projectiles would likely make war itself inevitable given the susceptibility of such systems to ldquonormal accidentsrdquo It is chilling to contemplate the possible effects of a space war According to Bowman ldquoeven a tiny projectile reentering from space strikes the earth with such high velocity that it can do enormous damagemdasheven more than would be done by a nuclear weapon of the same size In the same laser technology touted by President Reagan as the quintessential tool of peace David Langford sees one of the most wicked offensive weapons ever conceived ldquoOne imagines dead cities of microwave-grilled peoplerdquo Given this unique potential for destruction it is not hard to imagine that any nation subjected to a space weapon attack would escalate by retaliating with maximum force including use of nuclear biological andor chemical weapons An accidental war sparked by a computer glitch in space could plunge the world into the most destructive military conflict ever seen

Plan solves space weaponization by breaking the feedback loop

Lewallen 2 John- Political Science at Whitman University organizer of the Nuclear Peace Action Group Fulbright Scholarship recipient Public Ocean Access Network ldquoHigh-Altitude Nuclear Warrdquo Nuclear Press Pg34

A strategic feedback loop would seem to make it at least ldquostrongly possiblerdquo that the United States China and Russia have high-powered EMP bombs in Earth orbit today The ability to wipe out an adversaryrsquos electronics continent-wide pretty much any time with a maneuverable EMP satellite bomb would confer major if not overwhelming advantage to the aggressor So if the other guy probably has EMP satellite bombs we need them too

17

Cornell HKHANE Aff

General Topicality 12

We reduce missions

Kristensen 98 Hans M- Director of the Nuclear Information Project at the Federation of American Scientists ldquoNuclear Futures Proliferation of Weapons of Mass Destruction and US Nuclear Strategy British American Security Information Council Basic Research Report 982

Other exotic design concepts stem from the emphasis on underground and deeply buried targets and the concern to limit the collateral damage from the use of nuclear weapons These are all prime features of the counterproliferation effort Research contracts for 1997 outlined by the Defense Special Weapons Agency (DSWA) formerly the Defense Nuclear Agency include adjusting Electromagnetic Pulse ( EMP) data for nuclear weapons to allow war planners to assess wide-area distributed target damages ldquoinflicted by nuclear weaponsrsquo EMP effectsrdquo The project aims to lower the burst height of nuclear weapons EMP by two-thirds from the existing boundary of 100 km altitude to 30 km and to revamp the capability to compute air and ground bursts EMP fields as well as shallow buried bursts The project will also investigate alternatives to potential design modification and weapon delivery with the aim to ldquolimit or minimize collateral damagerdquo from the use of nuclear weapons Models for using EMP to knock out blast and shock-hardened buried targets will be developed in order to ldquodevise a new tool for PC-based weapon lethality prediction and target damage assessment [hellipfor use by] USSTRATCOM and other regional commandshellip for their specific missions applications rdquo112

And the mission is current- strike plans prove

Kristensen 9 Hans M Reply to Response to ldquoPentagon Misses Warhead Retirement Deadlinerdquo October 13 2009 httpwwwfasorgblogssp200910w62php

In theory yes and EMP or High-Altitude EMP (HEMP) has been part of US and Russian nuclear strike planning for decades Some also believe China might also use it in a war But in recent years some people have warned about scenarios ranging from DPRK Iran or terrorist organizations using EMP against the United States or its allies to disrupt critical electronic infrastructure An EMP Commission has even been established by Congress in 2001

We reduce size

Lewallen 2k John- Public Ocean Access Network ldquoThe Blackout Bombrdquo North Coast Express Spring 2000 httpsonicnet~doretkIssues00-03-SPRtheblackhtml

Any future global war is likely to begin with a few Blackout Bombs China Russia the U nited S tates and other nuclear powers have several nuclear missiles and perhaps weaponized satellites designed to lay down EMP over continent-size areas instantaneously While every nation on Earth is vulnerable to attack from the United States the United States is vulnerable indeed defenseless to a secret class of nuclear weapons which has captured the attention of the major nuclear powers--China Russia Britain France and the United States itself--for the past thirty-eight years

18

Cornell HKHANE Aff

General Topicality 22

Plan reduces roles

Buchan et al 3 Glenn C David Matonick Calvin Shipbaugh Richard Mesic ldquoFuture Roles Of US Nuclear Forces Implications For US Strategyrdquo RAND sponsored by the United States Air Force

In addressing the role nuclear weapons might play in contemporary US national security policy the first step is a ldquoback to basicsrdquo review of nuclear weapons mdashwhat they do what makes them unique and how they have served US security interests in the past WHAT NUCLEAR WEAPONS DO The most fundamental characteristic of nuclear weapons is their almost unlimited destructive power That destructiveness manifests itself in two ways First is the potentially apocalyptic effects of a large-scale war fought with nuclear weapons That obviously has been the driving force behind movements to reduce or eliminate nuclear weapons since the dawn of the nuclear age Second is the enormous destructive power that can be put into a small package which can then be delivered by any one of a number of means A single nuclear detonation can destroy virtually any individual target or lay waste to large areas (eg destroy a city) That characteristic changed the nature of war dramatically It appeared to make defense in the traditional sense virtually impossible because of the damage that even a single nuclear weapon that leaked through defenses could cause Also when coupled with long-range delivery systems (particularly long-range bombers and ballistic missiles) nuclear weapons allowed those possessing them to destroy an enemyrsquos homeland without necessarily having to defeat its military forces first Thus nuclear weapons if used effectively could prevent an enemyrsquos military from achieving the most fundamental objective of any military establishment protecting its homeland That changed the traditional concepts of warEven in strictly military terms nuclear weapons are simply more effective than other weapons in destroying targets Table 21 shows some classes of targets against which nuclear weapons are particularly effective As experience with the weapons grew so did the range of potential applications Some took advantage of special effects of nuclear weapons other than just heat and blast Electromagnetic pulse (EMP) and radar and communications blackout are examples These characteristics of nuclear weapons offered attractive strategic advantages to those who owned them bull Coercion of enemies by threat or use of nuclear weapons (eg the US nuclear attacks on Japan to coerce Japan to surrender unconditionally and end World War II)bull Deterrence of a range of actions by threat of nuclear use bull A means of offsetting an imbalance of conventional forces (eg the US rationale for its nuclear posture in Europe the original motivation for the Swedish nuclear weapons program which never came to fruition)

19

Cornell HKHANE Aff

General Topicality 1AR 12

Extend that we reduce the missions of the nuclear weapons arsenal Kristensen indicates STRATCOM has specific missions employing EMPs Additionally Dunn indicates that high-altitude nuclear explosions have been in our strike plans since the early stages of the Cold War

Additionally war games prove we have EMP missions in early stages of nuclear warfare

Berry 8 Ken Research Coordinator ICNND ldquoNew Weapons Technologyrdquo International Commission on Nuclear Non-proliferation and Disarmament

An aggressor state deploying such weapons could destroy the vast majority of a target countryrsquos electronics including computers cars phones and the power grid All nuclear armed states have the capacity to achieve this and it has been estimated that as little as three high altitude nuclear explosions could blanket an area the size of continental US40 Western Europe Australia or Brazil Open source material has indicated that the US China France and Russia have all used the tactic of an EMP as a surprise first strike in war games 41 Chinese military writings have described scenarios where EMPmdashpresumably non-nuclearmdashis used against US aircraft carriers in a conflict over Taiwan42 A survey of worldwide military and scientific literature found widespread knowledge about EMP and its potential military utility in countries including Taiwan Israel Egypt India Pakistan Iran and North Korea Moreover some terrorist organizations have apparently sought information relating to EMP produced by nuclear weapons as well as on the technology of directed energy weapons These are small non-nuclear weapons that produce an EMP-like effect but over a very much more restricted area43

Extend that we reduce size- Lewallen says we have nuclear missiles designed for HANEs

And missiles are part of the nuclear weapons arsenal

Los Alamos National Laboratory 9 httpwwwlanlgovnatlsecuritynuclearstockpile Accessed 08-05-09The stockpile also called the nuclear arsenal refers to a countrys supply of readily available nuclear weapons The term nuclear weapons refers to the explosive warheads and the bombs and missiles that can deliver them to enemy targets

Extend that we reduce roles Buchan says that EMP attacks perform vital roles of the nuclear arsenal because of their unique effect including coercion deterrence and asymmetric warfare

Here is evidence that high altitude EMP strikes are key tools in asymmetric warfare

Weston 9 Maj Scott A USAF ldquoExamining Space Warfare Scenarios Risks and US Policy Implicationsrdquo Air amp Space Power Journal - Spring 2009

The United States has just one counterspace weaponmdashan electronic counter communication system specifically designed and fielded with the intent of disrupting enemy satellite communications23 Recently however we successfully utilized the Standard Missile 3 in a dual-use role as a kinetic ASAT weapon24 Although the political repercussions from creating additional space debris will likely prohibit further tests the missile and supporting systems are already fielded in an antiballistic missile (ABM) role therefore we consider it an ASAT system that we could field in the near term The U nited S tates can also conduct asymmetric space attacks (eg an EMP produced by exploding a US nuclear-tipped ballistic missile in space ) Since the United States possesses nearly half of all orbiting satellites such an indiscriminate attack would do more harm to US interests than to those of the enemy But what about our opponentsrsquo capability Does a space weapon ldquogaprdquo exist

20

Cornell HKHANE Aff

General Topicality 1AR 22

Lean aff on topicality the information is highly classified making it impossible for us to definitively prove US nuclear EMP posture

Ruppe 4 David ldquoPlausibility of EMP Threat Classified Expert Saysrdquo Global Security Newswire September 24 2004

When asked following his presentation whether US scientists have developed and tested a kilotons-scale weapon to demonstrate its EMP capability Wood said he could not comment The commission conducted assessments of what the United States and others know about such weapons and questions about such matters were addressed in a classified session with members of Congress following a public presentation of the commissionrsquos report he said ldquoWe presented in open session then we went up and spent another few more hours and presented in closed session where they asked and were given answersrdquo to such questions he said ldquoBut they are members and it was a tightly closed environment a doom roomrdquo he said ldquoIrsquod be willing to take the chance to inform the American people about what the situation is but Irsquom forbidden by law to do sordquo

EMP strikes play a prominent mission in the 2001 NPRrsquos tailored deterrence

Stearns-Boles 7 Sherry L- Air Force Space Command (AFSPC) Chair to Air University (AU) ldquoThe Future Role And Need For Nuclear Weapons In The 21st Centuryrdquo US Air Force 2007

The first official reference to tailored deterrence occurred in the 2001 NPR Spring and Gudgel assessed the tailored deterrence doctrine for nuclear weapons in accordance with the latest NPR [a prescription for] a flexible nuclear weapons policy This is necessary in todaylsquos environment of multiple players with different strengths which has replaced the two-player model of the Cold War [N]ew military requirements should be developed to address this changed environment and to ensure a modern strategic force that is capable of dealing with different missions- Leadership and command and control targets which operate from heavily fortified underground locations- Hostile nuclear coalitions which may include rogue states failed or failing states and powerful terrorist groups based in sanctuary states- New nuclear-armed allies which may or may not have confidence in the United Stateslsquo deterrent ability and- Electromagnetic pulse (EMP) weapons an effective deterrent that adversaries may not be able to wield 129

The New Triad includes EMP strikes

Guthe 2 Kurt- Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments ldquoThe Nuclear Posture Review How Is the ldquoNew Triadrdquo Newrdquo 2002

Differences in the damage mechanisms of New Triad strike capabilities should promote effects based targeting Effects-based targeting is intended not simply to destroy targets but to do so in a way that produces broader military political economic and social effects that further operational and strategic objectives106 The damage mechanisms for nuclear weapons include blast thermal radiation nuclear radiation and electromagnetic phenomena (electromagnetic pulse for example ) Those for nonnuclear munitions are blast fragmentation penetration and fire Damage mechanisms for offensive information operations include software tools (such as malicious code) that manipulate or destroy computer networks within military economic or telecommunications infrastructures and directed energy from high-power microwave weapons that can knock out military or commercial electronic systems Because their damage mechanisms have disparate direct (or first-order) physical effects on targets nuclear weapons nonnuclear munitions and information operations must be compared and traded off in terms of their capabilities for achieving indirect (or higher-order) effects that impair the ability or weaken the will of the enemy to fight The problem is not one of calculating how many more high-explosive weapons are needed in lieu of a single nuclear weapon to produce sufficient blast to destroy a given target Instead the problems will lie in acquiring more detailed intelligence and better understanding of critical vulnerabilities in targets and target systems predicting the effects when different strike capabilities are applied against these vulnerabilities assessing actual effects under wartime conditions (the consequences of offensive information operations may be especially hard to ascertain)

determining the linkages among effects outcomes and objectives and deciding how best to employ the various means of attack

21

Cornell HKHANE Aff

More Topicality

Kristensen 97 Hans M- Director of the Nuclear Information Project at the Federation of American Scientists ldquoTargets of Opportunityrdquo Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists SeptemberOctober 1997

The Defense Special Weapons Agencys 1997 projects include adjusting electromagnetic pulse (EMP) data for nuclear weapons to allow war planners to assess the damage that would be inflicted by nuclear weapons EMP effects The project will also investigate possible design modification and delivery methods that could ldquolimit or minimize collateral damagerdquo Models for using EMP to knock out hardened targets will be developed to devise a new tool for PC-based weapon lethality prediction and target damage assessmentsrdquo28

Dunn 6 JR- editor of the International Military Encyclopedia ldquoThe EMP Threat ElectroMagnetic Pulse Warfarerdquo American Thinker April 21 2006

EMP was discovered as a byproduct of the Starfish Prime nuclear test on July 9 1962 A 15 megaton bomb set off 240 miles over the Central Pacific blew up street lights and TV sets in Hawaii 1000 miles away created a mock aurora visible even further and destroyed a number of orbiting satellites including the Telstar I the pioneering telecommunications satellite In short order nuclear attack plans were modified to commence with an EMP strike over enemy territory Military electronics underwent a hardening process with the development of chips and other components resistant to EMP Today even military jets and missiles are constructed to withstand the effect (The same processes would work for civilian application as well but in most cases would be prohibitively expensive)

The US is continuing to develop nuclear EMP weapons

Merkle 97 Major Scott W- Air Command and General Staff College Maxwell Air Force Base ldquoNon-Nuclear EMP Automating the Military May Prove a Real Threatrdquo Military Intelligence Professional Bulletin

So to this extent the plot of Goldeneye is plausible Any of several nations with nuclear weapons and the capacity to launch them into space including the United States Russia China and even Israel could conceivably pulse us back to shall we say a simpler time when operations orders were done orally with a sandtable instead of with the high-speed graphics and charts that turn into an encyclopedia that few people care to read Even more unsettling however is the fact that the US Defense Technology Plan confirms that development of advanced EMP weapons continues to this day and not just by the Americans According to a report drafted by conservative members of the French National Assembly in 1992 EMP weapons testing was a recommended goal during Frances 1995 underground nuclear tests6

22

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Future Wars Conflicts Likely

There probability of great power nuclear war in the next 50 years is 40 percent (1 - 9950)

Hellman 8 Dr Martin- Stanford Professor of Engineering 2008 ldquoRisk Analysis of Nuclear Deterrencerdquo httpwwwnuclearriskorgpaperpdf

Since conditional probabilities were used they can be multiplied yielding an estimated range of (2E-4 5E-3) for lCMTC the failure rate of deterrence based on just this one failure mechanism The upper limit 5E-3 is within a factor of two of my estimate that the failure rate of deterrence from all sources is on the order of one percent per year and even the lower limit is well above the level that any engineering design review would find acceptable Because this estimate is based on a simplified time invariant model it does not apply to the current point in time when relations between the US and Russia are significantly better than they were on average during the last 50 years However that does not invalidate its conclusions Russian-American relations are deteriorating and new trigger mechanisms are coming into playmdashnotably nuclear proliferation terrorism and the expansion of NATO right up to the Russian bordermdashmaking it possible that the next 50 years could be even more dangerous than the last Furthermore atypical times have a disproportionate effect on risk A significant fraction of the total risk during the last 50 years occurred during the 13 days of the Cuban missile crisismdasha period that constituted just 007 of that time period Because crises produce so much of the overall risk it is important to look beyond todayrsquos relatively benign world and also consider the rare disruptive times when events

The past conflicts our Hellman analysis investigates arose for a variety of reasons They cannot access solvency for all possible scenarios of conflict

Hellman 8 Dr Martin- Stanford Professor of Engineering 2008 ldquoRisk Analysis of Nuclear Deterrencerdquo httpwwwnuclearriskorgpaperpdf

As noted above there have been at least three possible initiating events in the first 50 years of nuclear deterrence the Cuban missiles in 1962 President Reaganrsquos threat to reimpose a naval blockade of Cuba in the 1980s and the current deployment of an American missile defense system in Eastern Europe Taking the average rate of occurrence of these possible initiating events three in 50 years results in an estimate lIE = 006 A higher estimate would result if other crises were included as possible initiating events Examples include the Berlin crisis of 1961 the Six-Day War of 1967 and the Yom Kippur War of 1973 all of which involved at least implied nuclear threats To temper the possibility of this article being seen as alarmist it only considers the first three possible initiating events and therefore uses lIE = 006

23

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Future Wars Ext

Unfortunately future great power wars will be initiated with EMP strikes

Lewallen 2k John- Public Ocean Access Network ldquoThe Blackout Bombrdquo North Coast Express Spring 2000 httpsonicnet~doretkIssues00-03-SPRtheblackhtml

Any future global war is likely to begin with a few Blackout Bombs China Russia the United States and other nuclear powers have several nuclear missiles and perhaps weaponized satellites designed to lay down EMP over continent-size areas instantaneously While every nation on Earth is vulnerable to attack from the United States the United States is vulnerable indeed defenseless to a secret class of nuclear weapons which has captured the attention of the major nuclear powers--China Russia Britain France and the United States itself--for the past thirty-eight years

EMP-gtwar

Lewallen 2 John- Political Science at Whitman University organizer of the Nuclear Peace Action Group Fulbright Scholarship recipient Public Ocean Access Network ldquoHigh-Altitude Nuclear Warrdquo Nuclear Press Pg43

If it comes the next global war almost certainly will begin with high-altitude nuclear EMP Anything done or refrained from to reduce international conflict and promote international cooperation will help humanity avoid the awesome setback of global war The nation-state system itself is perhaps the most dangerous factor auguring high-altitude nuclear war It is perhaps amazing that we humans have gone the past fifty-five years without anyone blowing up a nuclear bomb How much longer can we tickle the dragonrsquos tail before the fundamental flaw of competing armies with nuclear weapons finishes us off The United States fond of calling itself the worldrsquos only superpower has the same tendency as past military empires (although not a self-acknowledged empire) a strong and perhaps inevitable drive to move from world preeminence to world domination The US military-industrial complex is set up to endlessly conceive design produce and deploy new strategic weaponry

24

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT Limited War Winter

a) Quinlin indicates that nuclear war would deescalate after the first detonation War wouldnrsquot escalate to even 100 nukes

b) Nuclear testing disproves their theory

Sublette 1 Carey ldquoGallery of US Nuclear Testsrdquo 6 August 2001 httpnuclearweaponarchiveorgUsaTestsBetween 16 July 1945 and 23 September 1992 the United States of America conducted (by official count) 1054 nuclear tests and two nuclear attacks The number of actual nuclear devices (aka bombs) tested and nuclear explosions is larger than this but harder to establish precisely Some devices that were tested failed to produce any noticeable explosion (some by design some not) other tests (by official definition) were actually multiple device detonations It is not clear whether all multiple device tests have yet been identified and enumerated

c) Their study assumes countervalue targeting which is important because only cities are ignited into firestorms Great powers use counterforce targeting which targets silos in the middle of the desert or Siberia

Madrigal 9 Alexis ldquolsquoRegionalrsquo Nuclear War Would Cause Worldwide Destructionrdquo WIRED Science April 7Millsrsquo work which appears online today in the Proceedings of the National Academies of Science used a model from National Center for Atmospheric Research to look at the impact of throwing 5 million metric tons of black carbon or soot into the atmosphere He found that when a cluster of cities are burning together they end up creating their own weather pumping soot 20000 feet into the atmosphere Once there sunlight would heat the smoke and drive it up 260000 feet above the earthrsquos surface

d) Robock admits limited nuclear war would not cause winter Our Helfand evidence indicates 1000 nukes are needed to cause winter

Harrell 9 Eben ldquoRegional Nuclear War and the Environmentrdquo TIME Jan 22 2009Alan Robock a Professor in the Department of Environmental Sciences at Rutgers University who participated in the original nuclear winter research recently completed a study on the results of a nuclear war between India and Pakistan He spoke with TIME from his office in New Brunswick New Jersey CONTINUED Your study predicts mass cooling With all the heat and radioactivity of the explosions why wouldnt nuclear war warm the planet It has nothing to do with the radioactivity of the explosions mdash although that would be devastating to nearby populations The explosions would set off massive fires which would produce plumes of black smoke The sun would heat the smoke and lift it into the stratosphere mdash thats the layer above the troposphere where we live mdash where there is no rain to clear it out It would be blown across the globe and block the sun The effect would not be a nuclear winter but it would be colder than the little ice age [in the 17th and 18th centuries] and the change would happen very rapidly mdash over the course of a few weeks

25

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Accidents- LoW Bad

Hair trigger alert creates a high risk of extinction

Blair 8 Bruce G- president of the Center for Defense Information and World Security Institute former senior fellow in foreign policy for the Brookings Institution and former Minuteman officer ldquoDe-alerting Strategic Forcesrdquo Reykjavik Revisited Steps Toward a World Free of Nuclear Weapons published by the Hoover Institute httpmediahooverorgdocuments9780817949211_ch2pdf

There are a host of reasons why removing forces from launch ready alert and abandoning archaic nuclear war-fighting strategies are urgent priorities Beyond the familiar arguments about the danger of accidental nuclear attack triggered by false alarms and unauthorized launches by unreliable personnel lurk shadowy new threats stemming from terrorist scenarios and growing cybernetic threats to the nuclear command and warning systems In an era of terrorism and information warfare staking the survival of humanity on the assumption that imperfect human and technical systems of nuclear command and control will forever prevent a disastrous breakdown of safeguards against mistaken or unauthorized use of nuclear weapons is simply imprudent in the extreme An in-depth discussion of the potential exploitable weaknesses in nuclear command systems is beyond the scope of this analysis but a few general observations are pertinent First many of the deficiencies are unknown some will never be found and others will not be discovered until it is too late The complexity of command systems prevents a full reckoning of the risks run by hair-trigger postures Periodic investigations routinely discover glaring weaknesses however For instance a Pentagon investigation conducted by an independent commission in the 1990s at the behest of then Sen Sam Nunn to evaluate the effectiveness of US nuclear safeguards against unauthorized launch found dozens of major deficiencies14 This commission recommended a multitude of remedies including installing a special new safeguard on Trident subsmdashthe inner safe described earliermdashto create a technical barrier to unauthorized launch Second many of the deficiencies that are identified and addressed turn out not to have been corrected The introduction of ldquoenable coderdquo devices into Minuteman launch centers in the 1960s is a case in point In theory the devices required launch crews to receive an eight-digit code from higher authority in order to arm their missilesrsquo warheads prior to launch In practice the Strategic Air Command unbeknownst to higher authority (such as former Defense Secretary Robert McNamara who initiated and pressed for this safeguard) configured the devices so that they were always set to all zerosmdashthat was the secret password known to all launch crews This circumvention persisted until 1976 when actual codes were finally introduced In the interim the posture ran a higher risk of unauthorized launch by crew members or others who might have gained access to the launch centers including terrorists15 Third the nuclear command systems today operate in an intense information battleground on which more than 20 nations including Russia China and North Korea have developed dedicated computer attack programs16 These programs deploy viruses to disable confuse and delay nuclear command and warning processes in other nations The US Strategic Command is no exception Information warfare is now one of its core missions At the brink of conflict nuclear command and warning networks around the world may be besieged by electronic intruders whose onslaught degrades the coherence and rationality of nuclear decision making The potential for perverse consequences with computer-launched weapons on hair-trigger is clear Other information warfare programs are designed to infiltrate and collect information on for example the schedule of the movement of nuclear warheads during peacetime Hacking operations of these sorts are increasing exponentially as the militaries of the world increasingly depend on computer and communications networks The number of attempts by outside hostile actors to break into Defense Department networks has surged by tenfold in the past couple of years Hostile intrusion attempts against Pentagon computer systems now run in the neighborhood of 1000 per day (China is especially active) What is worse some of this expanding illicit penetration involves insiders creating a whole new dimension to the ldquoinsiderrdquo threat to nuclear systems If insiders with knowledge of special passwords or other sensitive information related to nuclear weapons activities collude with outsiders the integrity of nuclear command and control systems and safeguards against the unauthorized launch of nuclear weapons on launch-trigger alert may well be compromised The guiding principle of nuclear safeguards during the past 50 yearsmdashthe twoman rulemdashmay be obsolete in the age of information warfare The notion that having a second person present during any sensitive nuclear operation would prevent an accidental or intentional nuclear incident may have been sound during the labor-intensive and analog dominated era of nuclear command and control but in the modern age of information warfare new safeguards may be needed to prevent the electronic compromise of missiles on hair-trigger alert Adding terrorists to this equation gives further reason to believe that the Cold War nuclear postures are counterproductivemdashthey exacerbate rather than alleviate nuclear problems and they are an accident waiting to happen There is a possibility that terrorists could spoof early warning sensors and thereby engender false alarms that precipitate nuclear overreactions The possibility also exists that terrorists possibly with insider help may get inside the command and communications networks controlling nuclear forces They might gain information useful to interdicting and capturing weapons or unauthorized actors might discover ways to inject messages into the circuits 17 Again the wisdom of keeping nuclear forces ready to fly instantaneously upon receipt of a short stream of computer signals is dubious

26

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT FS Remains - Russia

Without EMP hundreds of strategic weapons would have to be armed- Russia would notice and disperse

Yarynich amp Starr 7 Valery- Professor of the Academy for Military Sciences and Steven- Engineers and Scientists Against Proliferation ldquoNuclear Primacy is a Fallacyrdquo Global Research March 4 2007

Third in order to conduct a first strike it is necessary to implement a number of organizational and technical procedures within the strategic nuclear forces This is because in peacetime there are numerous procedural and technological blocks in place which are designed to protect nuclear weapons against human error accidents and sabotage In order to remove such barriers as a preliminary step towards launching a nuclear first strike it would require the participation of a significant number of crews on duty working at different operational levels The implementation of all the above mentioned circumstances as preparations for a ldquosurpriserdquo first strike would be technically impossible to hide Therefore the opposite side would have a certain amount of time to raise the combat readiness of its strategic nuclear forces If Russia did that then as Lieber and Press recognize themselves nuclear retaliation is inevitable

Mobile missiles make first strike impossible without EMPs

Podvig 6 Pavel- Research Associate at the Center for International Security and Cooperation at Stanford University ldquoNuclear Exchange Does Washington Really Have (or Want) Nuclear Primacyrdquo Foreign Affairs SeptemberOctober 2006

Lieber and Press are right to state that Russia may end up having as few as 150 land-based missiles by the end of the decade But about half of those ICBMs would probably be road-mobile Topols and Topol-Ms which if operated properly would have a good chance of surviving a first strike Lieber and Press dismiss Russias mobile missiles by saying that they rarely patrol In reality very little is known about Russias mobile-missile patrol rates and although it is quite plausible that they are low it is a stretch to assume that they are zero

EMP first strike capability is uniquely dangerous because it requires only a few warheads making the threshold for responding to false warnings much lower

Non EMP first strike requires thousands of warheads which will show up on EWS

Yarynich amp Starr 7 Valery- Professor of the Academy for Military Sciences and Steven- Engineers and Scientists Against Proliferation ldquoNuclear Primacy is a Fallacyrdquo Global Research March 4 2007

Lieber and Press also assume that the Russian Early Warning System will be completely unable to reveal a massed American attack capable of destroying all Russian nuclear forces ldquoA critical issue for the outcome of a US attack [they say] is the ability of Russia to launch on warning (ie quickly launch a retaliatory strike before its forces are destroyed) It is unlikely that Russia could do thisrdquo We believe this important conclusion demands more serious calculations than the mere statement that ldquoit is unlikelyrdquo Its necessary to prove that the Russian EWS will be completely incapable of revealing such massed American attack which is capable of destroying all Russian nuclear forces

27

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT FS Remains - China

Lack of perfect Intel makes a first strike on China impossible post plan

Aby 7 The Liberal 7142007 non-profit internationalist site committed to the dissipiation of information pertaining toworld politics social issues cultures travel tips local customs et el ldquoChinarsquos MAD Nuclear Deterrence Against USArdquo lthttpwwwabytheliberalcomworld-politicschinas-mad-nuclear-deterrance-usagt

Chinarsquos nuclear force is based on a lsquoNo First Uselsquo policy formulated by its erstwhile President Mao Zedong This makes sense as China could not launch a first strike against US without facing obliteration in a strike-back by US The small quantity of nuclear warheads and strategic missiles that China possesses would make a Chinese attack on US nuclear facilities futile as China has neither the accuracy of missiles nor the number of warheads required to destroy the all the US facilities On the other hand United States with its improvised and highly accurate strategic missiles (Trident and Minuteman) could strike and destroy over 75 of Chinarsquos nuclear facilities with just about 2-4 of its nuclear and missile arsenal spent But even in the event of a war a successful destruction of 75-80 of Chinarsquos nuclear facilities leaves at least 20-25 surviving which can be used as a retaliatory attack against the United States A 100 destruction of Chinarsquos nuclear facilities would be highly unlikely considering the logistical impossibility of targeting and destroying all of Chinarsquos mobile and SILO launched nuclear ICBMs Since China canrsquot destroy US nuclear facilities as a retaliatory resort it would strike what hurts USA most - its people This is primarily the reason why US cities have been targets of Chinese ICBMs for the last few decades A DF 5A (Dong Feng) missile launched from hardened or mobile SILOs in Chinarsquos Hunan province will have most of West and Central US in its reach A 12000 km DF 5 Mod 2 goes even further including east coast cities like New York and Atlanta in its range if a polar trajectory is followed A DF 5A ICBM can carry a 35 MT (Megaton) thermonuclear warhead The 35 MT warhead detonated at a height of 2500 meters would have a blast radius of 7 km exposing 154 km2 of the ground surface to a blast overpressure of 10 psi or higher In addition to the immediate energy shockwaves of the blast such a high yield H-Bomb would also cause widespread radiation fallouts and heated firestorms due to the rapid changes in the atmospheric pressure which follow such an explosion If a single such warhead is detonated over a busy megapolis like New York Chicago or Los Angeles at least 15 million people would be eliminated immediately during the explosion and a further million within another 72 hours due to radiation burns sickness and firestorms If only 5 of the DF 5As are launched against 5 US cities and 4 of them successfully strike the US mainland more than 10 million people would face extermination According to US DoD Reports to the Congress in 2006 a DF5A Mod2 can be MIRVed with 6 warheads of 250 KT each In such a case if each warhead detonates 1500 metres above the ground the total blast radius (10 psi) of all the six warheads would exceed 21 kms bringing over 1386 km2 under coverage The fatalities from a single such strike on a city like New York or Chicago would exceed 5 million at the bare minimum In such a scenario if 4 of these missiles with 24 warheads strike 4-10 US cities with an accuracy of 83 at least 14 million people would be annihilated in these cities This still leaves out the DF 31A ICBMs and JL-1 SLBMs which could strike US targets and further the damage From both the cases it can be understood than even a retaliatory second strike by China can inflict severe devastation on the continental US These are just bare conservative estimates reality could be much more deadly and devastating with 40-100 million casualties Chinese military strategists can easily do this calculation themselves and as such it becomes apparent why China is so sure that its relatively small number of ICBMs act as an adequate deterrent against the United States or even India and Russia for that matter The threat of even a few surviving nuclear missiles hitting the United States serves as a robust deterrent for the United States China would not consider a first strike either as it would face total annihilation due to the massive US nuclear and missile stockpile Thus the MAD balance is maintained between these two countries one wary of the other despite their significant disparity in nuclear weapons stockpile and delivery systems

28

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT FS Remains - Subs

China has subs

Stephen Herzog British American Security Information Council August 2008 ldquoThe Dilemma between Deterrence and Disarmament Moving beyond the Perception of China as a Nuclear Threatrdquo Basic Papers lthttpwwwbasicintorgpubsPapersBP57pdfgt

The Jin-class is Beijingrsquos replacement for the defunct Type 092-class (NATO designation Xiaclass) SSBN The Xia-class was Chinarsquos first nuclear-powered ballistic missile-capable submarine and was a resounding failure The PRC only produced two of these SSBNs and they did not conduct patrols outside of Chinese territorial waters27 The Jin-class is silentmdashdue to its nuclear power sourcemdashand is virtually invulnerable to a potential first-strike it ensures that the PRC has a sea-based deterrent to complement its land-based strategic nuclear forces Since China finds itself in a position of significant numerical warhead inferiority to the United Statesmdash possibly facing a first-strike in the event of a confrontationmdashthe Jin-class SSBN could give the Sino leadership confidence in their second-strike capability If this is the case rather than being viewed as a threat Chinese deployment of SSBNs could be seen as a confidence-building stabilizing factor in Chinarsquos relationship with the West While the PRC is known to have three commissioned Jin-class SSBNs the United States United Kingdom and France have a total of 22 SSBNs many of which are armed with MIRV-equipped SLBMs28

Russia has them too

NTI 9ldquoRussia Restores Nuclear-Armed Submarine Patrolsrdquo Global Security Wednesday Feb 18 2009Russia might be maintaining continuous nuclear-armed submarine patrols for the first time in 10 years the Federation of American Scientists announced yesterday (see GSN Feb 13) The number of patrols by ballistic missile submarines declined steadily after reaching a high of more than 100 in 1984 and dropped more steeply after the collapse of the Soviet Union In 2002 there were zero Russian missile submarine patrols Russia last year however conducted 10 patrols the most since 1998 That raises the possibility that Russia is always keeping at least one boat at sea for nuclear deterrence said FAS nuclear expert Hans Kristensen

EMPs threaten sub survivability

Graham 4 Dr William R- Deputy Administrator of NASA The report of the Commission to Assess the Threat to the United States From Electromagnetic Pulse Attackrdquo July 22 2004

Mr Langevin Have you assessed the threat of EMP to our surface fleet and submarines Do submarines have a greater likelihood of retaining operational capabilities if they are underwater during an EMP strike Dr Graham The EMP Commission did consider the threat of EMP to surface vessels and submarines Ballistic Missile Submarines are designed and built to survive an EMP attack Care is taken when the ship is modified or equipment added or upgraded to insure that survivability is maintained Particular attention is paid to the potential vulnerability introduced when the ship is at periscope depth or trailing a wire antenna Submarines do have a greater likelihood of retaining operational capabilities if they are underwater during an EMP attack and not trailing an antenna which can couple energy into the submerged vessel However if land-based communications are impacted the ship may survive but not be capable of receiving orders and therefore accomplishing its mission because the sender cant send The survivability of the surface fleet is uncertain without testing and a submarine in port is a surface ship

29

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Rogue- Seeking

Rogue states are seeking EMP capability

McNeill amp Weitz 8 Jena Baker- homeland security policy analyst at The Heritage Foundation and Richard- Senior Fellow and Director of the Center for Political-Military Analysis at Hudson Institute ldquoElectromagnetic Pulse (EMP) Attack A Preventable Homeland Security Catastropherdquo Heritage Foundation Backgrounder 2199 httpwwwheritageorgresearchhomelandsecuritybg2199cfm_ftn19

The range of actors that might attempt an EMP attack against the United States is obviouslymdashand distressinglymdashlarge and includes conventional military regimes rogue states with limited conventional military capabilities and terrorist groups that seek to inflict catastrophic damage on America Both Russia and China have dabbled in EMP technology for decades There is evidence that suggests that certain Russian nuclear weapons have already been optimized to generate enhanced EMP effects[16] Just this year Russian scientists claimed to have developed a compact apparatus that can fit on a dining table The electromagnetic pulse associated with this device could amount to billions of watts of power in a single platform[17] Analysts have also identified Chinese military writings that discuss using EMP weapons in international conflicts[18] For countries less dependent on modern technologies and electronics including both rogue states like Iran and North Korea as well as stateless terrorist groups EMP provides a potential way to attack the United States through asymmetric means EMPs could be used to circumvent Americas superior conventional military power while reducing vulnerability to retaliation in kind It would certainly not be impossible for a terrorist organization especially if state-sponsored to acquire or construct an unsophisticated ballistic missile (non-working Scuds are reportedly available on the open market for $100000) and use it in an EMP attack against America[19] Such a missile could be launched from a freighter in international waters and detonated in the atmosphere over the United States without warning

30

Cornell HKHANE Aff

China Solves NoKo

China can solve North Korea ndash the alternative is US Strikes which escalate to War ndash US action to influence China is key

Doug Bandow 2009 is a senior fellow at the Cato Institute A former special assistant to President Reagan he is the author of Tripwire Korea and US Foreign Policy in a Changed World (Cato Institute) and co-author of The Korean Conundrum Americas Troubled Relations with North and South Korea (PalgraveMacmillan) July 2 2009 (Real Clear World Time to Play China Card on North Korea)

North Korea appears to have moved from intermittent to constant provocation The only nation with real influence in Pyongyang is China South Koreas President Lee Myung-bak visited Washington two weeks ago but a solution is no closer American diplomacy should focus on encouraging Beijing to do its utmost to solve the problem of the Norths criminal regime The challenge posed by the so-called Democratic Peoples Republic of Korea (DPRK) is obvious to all Probably the most murderous government on earth Kim Jong-ils regime has presided over the death by famine of at least a half million people His regimes brutality is both tragic and legendary While impoverishing his people he has maintained an oversize military including an active nuclear-weapons program And he has created a unique marriage of communism and monarchy apparently designating his youngest son now called the brilliant comrade to be his successor just as he succeeded his father Kim Il-sung Although evil he is not suicidal Kim Jong-il enjoys his virgins in this life rather than desiring them in the next one Nevertheless eliminating his regime would be an obvious humanitarian and security plus Bottom of Form Unfortunately no easy solution presents itself Kims latest confrontational tactics do not prevent a negotiated settlement-US special envoy Stephen Bosworth has emphasized the administrations desire to engage Pyongyang-but the likelihood of diplomacy resulting in a demilitarized peninsula grows ever smaller Even if the DPRK proves willing to halt any new nuclear activities it is very unlikely to turn over existing nuclear materials And while Washington should continue to pursue both bilateral and multilateral negotiations the process may yield little other than frustration Tighter sanctions also offer but a forlorn hope Amid reports that the North is planning a new nuclear test the UN Security Council voted to tighten sanctions Americas UN ambassador Susan Rice said the measure provided a strong very credible very appropriate response But it in fact offered little in the way of increased enforcement North Korea already is the worlds most isolated state Moreover the regime has never let the suffering of its people affect its policies A government which allowed a half million people to starve is not likely to be moved by increased hardship for those who remain alive So is a North Korean nuclear arsenal inevitable Maybe not Only Beijing has the clout necessary to influence the DPRK The former provides the bulk of the Norths food fuel and consumer goods trade between the two nations has been rising Severing that lifeline could bring the North Korean economy to a standstill However so far the Peoples Republic of China (PRC) has demurred Indeed before passage of the latest Security Council resolution the PRC called for an appropriate and balanced measure and emphasized calmness and restraint Even now Chinas government appears to fear a North Korean collapse more than a North Korean nuclear weapon The last option is war-either a limited strike on Pyongyangs atomic bases or a more general attack Washington obviously could destroy nuclear facilities above ground and perhaps underground Whether doing so would permanently block the Norths nuclear efforts and eliminate its existing atomic capabilities are less clear Moreover an attack probably would result in war The Kim regime likely would see a strike as the first step in an attempt at coercive regime change Moreover to do nothing would wreck its credibility at home and stature abroad While it is not likely to foolishly start a losing war the DPRK government isnt likely to passively accept a conflict begun by the United States Although the North would lose any conflict it could cause massive damage to the South whose capital Seoul lies close to the Demilitarized Zone and thus within range of both artillery and Scud missiles Other possible consequences include the dispersion of nuclear debris and creation of mass refugee flows So is a North Korean nuclear arsenal inevitable Maybe not The China card has yet to be played Cynicism about Beijings role in the North Korean crisis abounds Some analysts believe that the PRC can do little to move Pyongyang which has steered an independent course for decades Others accuse China of consciously orchestrating the Norths destabilizing course And the mainstream view is that the PRC is unwilling to risk its relationship with Pyongyang or accept the costs of the regimes potential collapse Indeed Beijing has treated North Korean refugees who face prison and even death when repatriated with unconscionable brutality However Washington might be able to change Chinas calculus Its certainly worth attempting to do so The PRC could cut off aid and commerce Beijing also might be able to undertake covert action to transform the North Korean system

31

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Rogue Satelites

Rogue EMP collapses satellite communications

Haimes 9 Yacov Y- Lawrence Quarles Professor of Engineering and Applied Science Director of the Center for Risk Management of Engineering Systems University of Virginia ldquoRisk Modeling Assessment and Managementrdquo Edition 3 - 2009 p780

The vulnerability of satellites to a high-altitude nuclear detonation and the resulting electromagnetic pulse has been widely documented For example a report by the Defense Threat Reduction Agency [DTRA 2001] states LEO [low earth orbit] satellites will be of growing importance to government commercial and military users in coming years Proliferation of nuclear weapons and longer-range ballistic missile capabilities is likely to continue One low-yield (1 th-12 kt) high-altitude (125-300 km) nuclear explosion could disablemdashin weeks to monthsmdashall LEO satellites not specifically hardened to withstand radiation generated by that explosion The report states that a deliberate effort to cause economic damage with a lower likelihood of nuclear radiation fallout can he initiated by a rogue state facing economic strangulation or imminent military threat and pose economic threat to the industrial world without causing human casualties or visible damage to economic infrastructure An article in Scientific American by Dupont [2004] further highlights the risks to the global satellite system from nuclear explosions in orbit Dupont asserts that ldquoThe launch and detonation of a nuclear-tipped missile in low orbit could disrupt the critical system of commercial and civil satellites for years potentially paralyzing the global high-tech economy More nations (and maybe non-state entities) will gain this capability as nuclear-weapon and ballistic-missile technology spread around the world The possibility of an attack is relatively remote but the consequences are too severe to be ignoredrdquo A study conducted for the Commission to Assess the Threat to the United States from High-Altitude Electromagnetic Pulse Attack [Haimes et al 2005] highlights the risks to interdependent infrastructures and to the US economy due to such attacks and reiterates that the benefits of automation have brought an increased vulnerability Finally according to Dupont [2004] ldquoThe Pentagon has been working for decades to safeguard its orbital assets against the effects of nuclear explosionsHardening satellites is costly however Greater protection means more expense and more massive protective materials And heavier satellites cost significantly more to launchDespite the risks to civil orbiters however the Defense Department has failed to persuade US satellite builders to harden their spacecraft voluntarilyrdquo

32

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Rogue- AT No Tech

Tech is attainable

Schnurr 9 Avi- Executive Director of Israels Missile Defense Association reviewed US technology policy for the the Department of Defense the White House Homeland Security Council Congress and the National Academy of Sciences ldquoThe EMP Threat A Strategic Review of Geopolitical Risk Scenariosrdquo 27th July 2009 httpwwwhenryjacksonsocietyorgstoriesaspid=1227

One misunderstanding is the belief that those willing to use an EMP are not going to have the technology to create an EMP weapon However any small nuclear fission bomb would have this effect In fact without going into details there are ways to enhance the effect that would use a very small bomb Certainly a Hiroshima-sized bomb would be adequate a thermonuclear bomb a fusion bomb would not make it any larger That means the capability to do this is in the hands of anyone who can find a boat for example ndash were they to use a short-range missile ndash so it doesnrsquot have to be an ICBM Hezbollah has 300km missiles that carry half-ton warheads which would be more than adequate and al Qaeda is also well-situated in this regard And launching from a ship minimizes the fingerprints

33

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Rogue- AT No Long Range Missiles

Even if they cannot reach the middle of the US the consequences would be enormous

Birdnow 6 Timothy ldquoEMP and the Unfought Victoryrdquo American Thinker July 01 2006Even if an EMP strike should only hit the West Coast the disaster would be catastrophic the United States electric grid is divided into three segments and this strike will more than likely take the entire western power grid completely out Its going to be very hard to maintain order with no running water in the arid western United States Farmers will lose their crops the sick and elderly will die without air conditioning and other electricitymdashdependent services Of course Silicon Valley will be toast as well as such important places as Lawrence Livermore Labs our days as the highmdashtech leader could be numbered What will this do to our economy supposing the country makes it through in decent shape

Even if rogue states cannot build a big EMP they could use a small one on the battlefield

Wilson 8 Clay- Specialist in Technology and National Security Foreign Affairs Defense and Trade Division ldquoHigh Altitude Electromagnetic Pulse (HEMP) and High Power Microwave (HPM) Devices Threat Assessmentsrdquo Congressional Research Service March 26 2008

A HEMP attack directed against the Unites States continent might involve a one-megaton nuclear warhead or a smaller one that is specially-designed using a burst several hundred miles above the mid-western states to affect computers on both coasts20 However creating a HEMP effect over an area 250 miles in diameter an example size for a battlefield might only require a rocket with a modest altitude and payload capability that could loft a relatively small nuclear device If a medium or higher range missile with a nuclear payload were launched from the deck of a freighter at sea the resulting HEMP could reportedly disable computers over a wide area of the coastal United States

34

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Rogue- AT Uncertain Effects

Extend Schneider that rogues prefer EMP strikes to ground bursts because they are easier to produce Ground bursts require too much precision and rogue states will only engage in asymmetric warfare with a lower chance of retaliation

EMPs are well suited for rogue regimesrsquo goals

Timmerman 2 Kenneth R- director of the Foundation for Democracy in Iran 2006 Nobel Peace Prize Nominee ldquoUS Threatened With EMP Attackrdquo Feb 1 2002

The more backward the country the more attractive EMP becomes as a weapon against the United States Bartlett explains ldquoIf North Korea were to launch a missile straight up and explode a nuclear weapon 500 kilometers over their own territory it wouldnrsquot do them a lot of damage because they have very little dependence on electronic systems But it would have a devastating impact on South Korea as well as on our 37000 troops stationed there With North Korearsquos million soldiers they could just walk all over us with impunityrdquo

35

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Rogue- AT Attribution

Easy to get around attribution

Timmerman 8 Kenneth R- director of the Foundation for Democracy in Iran 2006 Nobel Peace Prize Nominee ldquoUS Intel Iran Plans Nuclear Strike on USrdquo News Max 29 Jul 2008

In his recent congressional testimony Graham revealed that Iranian military journals translated by the CIA at his commissionrsquos request ldquoexplicitly discuss a nuclear EMP attack that would gravely harm the United Statesrdquo Furthermore if Iran launched its attack from a cargo ship plying the commercial sea lanes off the East coast mdash a scenario that appears to have been tested during the Caspian Sea tests mdash US investigators might never determine who was behind the attack Because of the limits of nuclear forensic technology it could take months And to disguise their traces the Iranians could simply decide to sink the ship that had been used to launch it Graham said

Rogues do not fear retaliation

Wilson 8 Clay- Specialist in Technology and National Security Foreign Affairs Defense and Trade Division ldquoHigh Altitude Electromagnetic Pulse (HEMP) and High Power Microwave (HPM) Devices Threat Assessmentsrdquo Congressional Research Service March 26 2008

The threat of an EMP attack against the United States is hard to assess but some observers indicate that it is growing along with worldwide access to newer technologies and the proliferation of nuclear weapons In the past the threat of mutually assured destruction provided a lasting deterrent against the exchange of multiple high-yield nuclear warheads However now even a single specially designed low-yield nuclear explosion high above the United States or over a battlefield can produce a large-scale EMP effect that could result in a widespread loss of electronics but no direct fatalities and may not necessarily evoke a large nuclear retaliatory strike by the US military This coupled with the possible vulnerability of US commercial electronics and US military battlefield equipment to the effects of EMP may create a new incentive for other countries to develop or acquire a nuclear capability

Rogues can use terrorists

Schneider 7 [Dr Mark National Institute for Public Policy ldquoThe Emerging EMP Threat to the United Statesrdquo A Publication of the United States Nuclear Strategy Forum November httpwwwnipporgNational20Institute20PressCurrent20PublicationsPDFEMP20Paper20Final20November07pdf]

The possibility of a terrorist group obtaining a nuclear weapon particularly from a rogue state and launching an EMP attack with a crude ballistic missile such as a Scud missile is certainly within the realm of possibility Cooperation with terrorists may be attractive to nuclear-armed rogue states because of the lesser risk of attribution Indeed in March 2001 an Iranian journal stated that ldquoterrorist information warfare [includes] using the technology of directed energy weapons (DEW) or electromagnetic pulse (EMP)rdquo65

36

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Iran Ev

Iran military writings prove reliance on EMP strikes

Pry 5 Dr Peter Vincent- EMP Commission Staff ldquoForeign Views Of Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP) Attackrdquo Before The United States Senate Subcommittee On Terrorism Technology And Homeland Security March 8 2005 httpwwwendtimesreportcomEMP_attackhtml

Iran though not yet a nuclear weapon state has produced some analysis weighing the use of nuclear weapons to destroy cities as ldquoagainst Japan in World War IIrdquo compared to ldquoinformation warfarerdquo that includes ldquoelectromagnetic pulse for the destruction of unprotected circuitsrdquo An Iranian analyst describes ldquoterrorist information warfarerdquo as involving not just computer viruses but attacks using ldquoelectromagnetic pulse (EMP)rdquo (Tehran Siyasat-e Defa-I 1 March 2001) An Iranian political-military journal in an article entitled ldquoElectronics To Determine Fate Of Future Warsrdquo suggests that the key to defeating the United States is EMP attack ldquoAdvanced information technology equipment exists which has a very high degree of efficiency in warfare Among these we can refer to communication and information gathering satellites pilotless planes and the digital system Once you confuse the enemy communication network you can also disrupt the work of the enemy command and decision-making center Even worse today when you disable a countryrsquos military high command through disruption of communications you will in effect disrupt all the affairs of that country If the worldrsquos industrial countries fail to devise effective ways to defend themselves against dangerous electronic assaults then they will disintegrate within a few years American soldiers would not be able to find food to eat nor would they be able to fire a single shotrdquo (Tehran Nashriyeh-e Siasi Nezami December 1998 -January 1999)Iranian flight-tests of their Shahab-3 medium-range missile that can reach Israel and U S forces in the Persian Gulf have in recent years involved several explosions at high altitude reportedly triggered by a self-destruct mechanism on the missile The Western press has described these flight-tests as failures because the missiles did not complete their ballistic trajectories Iran has officially described all of these same tests as successful The flight-tests would be successful if Iran were practicing the execution of an EMP attack Iran as noted earlier has also successfully tested firing a missile from a vessel in the Caspian Sea A nuclear missile concealed in the hold of a freighter would give Iran or terrorists the capability to perform an EMP attack against the United States homeland without developing an ICBM and with some prospect of remaining anonymous Iranrsquos Shahab-3 medium-range missile mentioned earlier is a mobile missile and small enough to be transported in the hold of a freighter We cannot rule out that Iran the worldrsquos leading sponsor of international terrorism might provide terrorists with the means to execute an EMP attack against the United States

Iran is on the brink of gaining EMP capability

Timmerman 8 Kenneth R- director of the Foundation for Democracy in Iran 2006 Nobel Peace Prize Nominee ldquoUS Intel Iran Plans Nuclear Strike on USrdquo News Max 29 Jul 2008

In May 2007 then Undersecretary of State John Rood told Congress that the US intelligence community estimates that Iran could develop an ICBM capable of hitting the continental United States by 2015 But Iran could put a Scud missile on board a cargo ship and launch from the commercial sea lanes off Americarsquos coasts well before then The only thing Iran is lacking for an effective EMP attack is a nuclear warhead and no one knows with any certainty when that will occur The latest US intelligence estimate states that Iran could acquire the fissile material for a nuclear weapon as early as 2009 or as late as 2015 or possibly later Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld first detailed the ldquoScud-in-a-bucketrdquo threat during a briefing in Huntsville Ala on Aug 18 2004 While not explicitly naming Iran Rumsfeld revealed that ldquoone of the nations in the Middle East had launched a ballistic missile from a cargo vessel They had taken a short-range probably Scud missile put it on a transporter-erector launcher lowered it in taken the vessel out into the water peeled back the top erected it fired it lowered it and covered it up And the ship that they used was using a radar and electronic equipment that was no different than 50 60 100 other ships operating in the immediate areardquo Iranrsquos first test of a ship-launched Scud missile occurred in spring 1998 and was mentioned several months later in veiled terms by the Commission to Assess the Ballistic Missile Threat to the United States a blue-ribbon panel also known as the Rumsfeld Commission I was the first reporter to mention the Iran sea-launched missile test in an article appearing in the Washington Times in May 1999 Intelligence reports on the launch were ldquowell known to the White House but have not been disseminated to the appropriate congressional committeesrdquo I wrote Such a missile ldquocould be used in a devastating stealth attack against the United States or Israel for which the United States has no known or planned defenserdquo Few experts believe that Iran can be deterred from launching such an attack by the threat of massive retaliation against Iran They point to a December 2001 statement by former Iranian President Ali Akbar Hashemi-Rafsanjani who mulled the possibility of Israeli retaliation after an Iranian nuclear strike ldquoThe use of an atomic bomb against Israel would destroy Israel completely while [the same] against the Islamic only would cause damages Such a scenario is not inconceivablerdquo Rafsanjani said at the time

37

Cornell HKHANE Aff

NoKo Ev

North Korea is seeking and would use an EMP

Pry 5 Dr Peter Vincent- EMP Commission Staff ldquoForeign Views Of Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP) Attackrdquo Before The United States Senate Subcommittee On Terrorism Technology And Homeland Security March 8 2005 httpwwwendtimesreportcomEMP_attackhtml

In closing a few observations about the potential EMP threat from North Korea North Korean academic writings subscribe to the view voiced in Chinese Russian and Iranian writings that computers and advanced communications have inaugurated an ldquoinformation agerdquo during which the greatest strength and greatest vulnerability of societies will be their electronic infrastructures According to North Korean press Chairman Kim Chong-il is himself supposedly an avid proponent of this view (M A Kim Sang-hak ldquodevelopment of Information Industry and Construction of Powerful Socialist Staterdquo Pyongyang Kyongje Yongu 20 May 2002)The highest ranking official ever to defect from North Korea Hwang Chang-yop claimed in 1998 that North Korea has nuclear weapons and explained his defection as an attempt to prevent nuclear war According to Hwang in the event of war North Korea would use nuclear weapons ldquoto devastate Japan to prevent the United States from participating Would it still participate even after Japan is devastated That is how they thinkrdquo Although Hwang did not mention EMP it is interesting that he described North Korean thinking about nuclear weapons employment as having strategic purposesndash nuclear use against Japanndashand not tactical purposesndashnuclear employment on the battlefield in South Korea It is also interesting that according to Hwang North Korea thinks it can somehow ldquodevastaterdquo Japan with its tiny nuclear inventory although how precisely this is to be accomplished with one or two nuclear weapons is unknownPerhaps most importantly note that the alleged purpose of a North Korean nuclear strike on Japan would be to deter the United States At the time of Hwangrsquos defection in 1998 North Korearsquos longest-range missile then operational the No Dong limited North Korearsquos strategic reach to a strike on Japan Today North Korea is reportedly on the verge of achieving an ICBM capability with its Taepo Dong-2 missile estimated to be capable of delivering a nuclear weapon to the United States In 2004 the EMP Commission met with very senior Russian military officers who are experts on EMP weapons They warned that Russian scientists had been recruited by Pyongyang to work on the North Korean nuclear weapons program They further warned that the knowledge and technology to develop ldquoSuper-EMPrdquo weapons had been transferred to North Korea and that North Korea could probably develop these weapons in the near future within a few years The Russian officers said that the threat to global security that would be posed by a North Korea armed with ldquoSuper-EMPrdquo weapons is unacceptable The senior Russian military officers who claimed to be expressing their personal views to the EMP Commission said that while the Kremlin could not publicly endorse U S preemptive action Moscow would privately understand the strategic necessity of a preemptive strike by the United States against North Korearsquos nuclear complex

38

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Terrorism Adv

Plan is necessary to prevent multiple scenarios of terrorism

Lewallen 2 John- Political Science at Whitman University organizer of the Nuclear Peace Action Group Fulbright Scholarship recipient Public Ocean Access Network ldquoHigh-Altitude Nuclear Warrdquo Nuclear Press p31

Nuclear Weapons in the War of Terror A Modest Prediction on November 8 2001 Terrorist attacks against the United States will not end until the nuclear strategic balance the ldquobalance of terrorrdquo is restored among Russia China and the United StatesToday geopolitics moves at cyberspeed The War of Terror is spreading and deepening throughout the world Clear analysis of the many dimensions of the War of Terror may lead the world toward widespread peace and prosperity rather than toward the global war and depression which is being created today Rational strategic analysis of terrorism begins with the fact that international governmental cooperation is required to defeat terrorists The complete global defeat of terrorism implies international enforcement a world governmentThe nuclear confrontation of terror among Russia China and the United States is a major source of the feeling of terror sweeping the United States and much of the rest of the world With the nuclear strategic balance now disrupted and a United States having declared war on any nation it chooses with any weapons at hand actual nuclear war in the nuclear triangle is an increasingly imminent possibilityThe Russian and Chinese people are intensely and viscerally terrorized by US nuclear aggression as expressed by the US drive to achieve unilateral domination over them with national missile defense and weapons in spaceWithout the complete and wholehearted cooperation of the Chinese and Russian governments the United States will never defeat terrorismIf United States nuclear aggression continues and escalates we must expect terrorist attacks against the American homeland also to continue and escalateSeeking to avoid nuclear war with the United States Russia and China keep leading international efforts to ban weapons in space uphold the arms control treaty structure and move toward nuclear disarmament However the hands of George W Bush have torn up the treaties and loosed a US push for complete nuclear domination over Russia and ChinaThe Chinese and Russians have good reasons to publicly support the US war against international terrorism while secretly encouraging concealing or even sponsoring terrorism against the United States So much the better if the terrorists chased by the United States are also big problems to China and Russia It seems quite within either Russian or Chinese capability to sponsor acts of terrorism against the United States and to set evidence leading gullible US investigators to any terrorist networkAs I write this the Bush administration is pushing full-bore for national missile defense space weapons and intensified nuclear confrontation with Russia and ChinaThis means that terrorist attacks against the United States will continue and probably increase until the United States joins the world community of peace law and order

39

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Terrorism Adv

Future terrorist attacks threaten to collapse world order

Alexander 3 Yonah Director of Inter-University for Terrorism Studies Washington Times August 28Last weeks 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 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 [eg 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 strategy can be developed [eg 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 [eg 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 Israels 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 US military operation in Iraq eliminated Saddam Husseins 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 terror victory however long and hard the road may be For without victory there is no survival

40

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Terrorism Ext

Terrorists arenrsquot interested in non nuclear HPVs

Wilson 8 Clay- Specialist in Technology and National Security Foreign Affairs Defense and Trade Division ldquoHigh Altitude Electromagnetic Pulse (HEMP) and High Power Microwave (HPM) Devices Threat Assessmentsrdquo Congressional Research Service March 26 2008

It is difficult to assess the threat of a terrorist organization possibly using a smaller-scale HPM weapon against the United States critical infrastructure It could be argued that an HPM bomb by itself may not be attractive to terrorists because its smaller explosion would not be violent enough and the visible effect would not be as dramatic as a larger conventional bomb

41

Cornell HKHANE Aff

China- AT Attribution

China can smuggle the EMP nuke

Buff 6 Joe ldquoChina Myth Gets Dangerousrdquo Today in the Military December 04 2006Launching an ICBM and detonating its warhead in outer space as a ldquonon-lethalrdquo EMP generator above the Pacific would be awfully risky because the launch signature could be mistaken for a first strike against the US homeland inviting massive nuclear retaliation More shrewd would be to smuggle a nuclear weapon into space disguised as one of the PRCrsquos frequent launches of satellites (that this violates international treaties doesnrsquot mean Beijing wouldnrsquot do it) The nuke could then be set off at the appropriate place and time as part of the dreaded ldquoPearl Harbor in spacerdquo that could open outright conflict for hegemony It would be problematic for the US to launch any sort of retaliatory nuclear strike against China after such a surprise info-warfare attack -- discussion board fans of the macho ldquoglassing Chinardquo approach left aside With neither Beijing nor Washington being run by madmen or so we hope a conventional war could be fought beneath an unused umbrella of thermonuclear mutually assured destruction And us having to fight a big war is already a form of defeat We got dragged into World War II because our conventional deterrence failed and that victory cost 400000+ American lives

42

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Space Militarization Adv 1

The world in on the brink of massive space weaponization US space weaponization has contributed to states seeking latent space weapons capability

Hitchens 9 Theresa- Director UN Institute for Disarmament Research ldquoSaving Space Threat Proliferation and Mitigationrdquo International Commission on Nuclear Non-proliferation and Disarmament May 19 2009

During the Cold War the United States and the Soviet Union were the only real space powers The situation today is dramatically different Currently some 47 nations own andor operate satellites with nearly 900 working satellites in orbitmdashmostly for civilcommercial purposes The bulk of todayrsquos satellites are in Geostationary orbit (GEO 36000 kilometers in altitude) for civil and military communications purposes telephony internet services and broadcast television However an increasing number of satellites are being built in Low Earth Orbit (LEO up to 2000 kilometers) for Earth imaging with ever greater resolutions that can provide traditional data such as crop and ocean monitoring as well as data for tracking (and perhaps targeting) of military infrastructure There are approximately 389 working satellites in LEO including Earth observation (both civil and militaryintelligence gathering) weather and mobile communications satellites Of that number about 130 are Earth observation sats owned andor operated by 33 countries plus the European Space Agency Vietnam was the most recent nation to orbit an Earth observation satellite launching it in April 2008 In the military arena India most recently (in April 2009) launched a high-resolution (down to 1 meter) all-weather radar imaging satellite with the explicit purpose of monitoring military activities and terrorist movements primarily in rival Pakistan Indeed some ldquoreal estaterdquo in space is getting crowded particularly the GEO belt and the area over the poles where many satellites cross over each otherrsquos path This fact has created emerging concerns about simple ldquohighway safetyrdquo in space and the need to avoid accidental interference or collisions (see below)Further many other nations have recently been putting more emphasis on obtaining military advantages from spacemdashalthough China is the only other nation that has tested an ASAT and just two other nations India and Israel are currently suspected of pursuing such capabilities China France Germany Italy Israel Spain and the United Kingdom all have dedicated military space assets for communications andor imaging A number of other nations have or are building dual-use satellites that can provide both civil and military functions including India and Japan Iran and North Korea are pursuing space launch and satellite capabilities that also would be assumed to have dual-use functions The increasing interest in military uses of space has been fostered by two major factors The first is the easier access to space capabilities over the past 20 years and improvements in capabilities provided by the information revolution of the 1990s The second is the 1990s ldquorevolution in military affairsrdquo led by the United States which has resulted in the shift of national security space applications from strategic missions such as spying and early warning of missile launches to tactical applications which include perhaps most importantly weapons targeting using global navigation and positioning satellites The United States and Russia have long maintained navigation and positioning satellites for multiple purposes (besides targeting these satellites are important for logistics management and own-force tracking) their respective Global Positioning System (GPS) network and the GLONASS constellation Meanwhile the European Union hopes to deploy its Galileo system by 2013 and China intends to deploy a similar world-wide navigation satellite network dubbed COMPASS by 2015mdashalthough both systems are claimed to have primarily civilian functions The new emphasis on tactical applications of space power while greatly increasing military effectiveness on the ground also has spurred military thinking in many nations about how to negate enemy space assetsmdashthus the renewed interest in ASAT capabilities

43

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Space Militarization Adv 2

EMP war plans fuel space militarization

Danchev 6 Dancho- Bulgarian Association for Security ISECA ldquoWho needs nuclear weapons anymorerdquo Security Knowledge February 09 2006

In 2004 the EMP Commission met with very senior Russian officers and we showed that on the sign They warned that the knowledge and technology to develop what they called super EMP weapons had been transferred to North Korea and that North Korea could probably develop these weapons in the near future within a few years The Russian officers said that the threat that would be posed to global security by a North Korean armed with super EMP weapons was in their view and I am sure Mr Speaker in your view and mine unacceptable Foreign views of Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP) Attack reveals further details on other nations ambitions etc Perhaps one of the most famous commitments towards EMP is the The Trestle Electromagnetic Pulse Simulator that can also be seen at Google Maps still in my opinion its a defensive initiative for an offensive purpose Extending the topic even further The Space Warfare arms race has been an active policy of key worlds leaders for decades and thats not good The US Russia and China as the main players are fuelling the growth in one way or other due to believing in perhaps- that the other sides are actively developing such capabilities and they are because they think the opposite =gt arms race- growing trend towards asymmetric warfare

The US is the last obstacle to banning space weapons

Lewallen 2 John- Political Science at Whitman University organizer of the Nuclear Peace Action Group Fulbright Scholarship recipient Public Ocean Access Network ldquoHigh-Altitude Nuclear Warrdquo Nuclear Press p25

Russian and China are urgently asking the worldrsquos nations to begin talks to ban the militarization of space Chinarsquos ambassador to the United Nations Conference on Disarmament in January 2000 called for international talks to ban testing deployment and use of weapons in outer space 23 In March 2000 Russiarsquos ambassador to the UN Conference on Disarmament echoed this urgent plea for UN negotiations for an international treaty to ban testing stationing and use of weapons systems in outer space Of the 66 member nations of the UN negotiations to ban weapons in space the United States24 To avoid the rapidly approaching nuclear conflict with Russia andor China the United States must abandon its efforts to make a national missile defense system and join international talks to ban weapons in space If cornered the Russians and Chinese will fight the United States and both nations are prepared with high-altitude nuclear EMP weapons to attack US electronic civilization

44

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Space Militarization Adv 3

Space militarization leads to extinction

Mitchell Ayotte amp Helwich 1 Associate Professor of Communication and Director of Debate at the University of Pittsburgh Teaching Fellows in the Department of Communication at the University of Pittsburgh Missile Defence Trans-Atlantic Diplomacy at a Crossroads ISIS Briefing on Ballistic Missile Defence No 6 July

A buildup of space weapons might begin with noble intentions of lsquopeace through strength deterrence but this rationale glosses over the tendency that I the presence of space weapons will result in the increased likelihood of their use33 This drift toward usage is strengthened by a strategic fact elucidated by Frank Barnabv when it comes to arming the heavens anti-ballistic missiles and anti-satellite warfare technologies go hand-in- hand134 The interlocking nature of offense and defense in military space technology stems from the inherent dual capability of space borne weapon components As Marc Vidricaire Delegation of Canada to the UN Conference on Disarmament explains If you want to intercept something in space you could use the same capability to target something on land 35 To the extent that ballistic missile interceptors based in space can knock out enemy missiles in mid-flight such interceptors can also be used as orbiting Death Stars capable of sending munitions hurtling through the Earths atmosphere The dizzying speed of space warfare would introduce intense use or losersquo pressure into strategic calculations with the specter of split-second attacks creating incentives to rig orbiting Death Stars with automated hair trigger devices In theory automation would enhance survivability of vulnerable space weapon platforms However by taking the decision to commit violence out of human hands and endowing computers with authority to make war military planners could sow insidious seeds of accidental conflict Yale sociologist Charles Perrow has analyzed complexly interactive tightly coupled industrial systems such as space weapons which have many sophisticated components that all depend on each others flawless performance According to Perrow this interlocking complexity makes it impossible to foresee all the different ways such systems could fail As Perrow explains [the odd term normal accident is meant to signal that given the system characteristics multiple and unexpected interactions of failures are inevitable36 Deployment of space weapons with we-delegated authority to fire death rays or unleash killer projectiles would likely make war itself inevitable given the susceptibility of such systems to normal accidents according to retired Lt Col Robert M Bowman even a tiny projectile reentering from space strikes the earth with such high velocity that it can do enormous damage - even more than would be done by a nuclear weapon of the same size 37 In the same Star Wars technology touted as a quintessential tool of peace defense analyst David Langford sees one of the most - destabilizing offensive weapons ever conceived One imagines dead cities of microwave-grilled people138 Given this unique potential for destruction it is not hard to imagine that any nation subjected to space weapon attack would retaliate with maximum force including use of nuclear biological andor chemical weapons An accidental war sparked by a computer glitch in space could plunge the world into the most destructive military conflict ever seen

45

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Space Ext

Lewallen 2 John- Political Science at Whitman University organizer of the Nuclear Peace Action Group Fulbright Scholarship recipient Public Ocean Access Network ldquoHigh-Altitude Nuclear Warrdquo Nuclear Press Pg37Every nation in the world wants to join Russia and China in their urgent insistence that space weaponry should be legally prohibited every nation except one the United StatesIronically the United States is the most vulnerable nation on Earth to high-altitude nuclear electromagnetic pulse war One or a few nuclear detonations high above the United States could catastrophically devastate information civilization wiping out computer chips nationwide and also destroying satellites without harming people directlyThe most basic military strategic logic dictates that the United States should avoid war in space at all costs Space is simply a disastrously unfavorable field of battle for the United States The Russians and Chinese would prefer to avoid World War Three but should they deem it inevitable they have prepared the greatest ambush in military history a nuclear electromagnetic pulse surprise attack against the United States

Space AdvLewallen 2 John- Political Science at Whitman University organizer of the Nuclear Peace Action Group Fulbright Scholarship recipient Public Ocean Access Network ldquoHigh-Altitude Nuclear Warrdquo Nuclear Press Pg36The United States military is stumbling blindly into the greatest ambush in history Determined to dominate space the United States has tens of billions of dollars of space weaponry with many more space weapons systems in research and development

Space Sat EMPLewallen 2 John- Political Science at Whitman University organizer of the Nuclear Peace Action Group Fulbright Scholarship recipient Public Ocean Access Network ldquoHigh-Altitude Nuclear Warrdquo Nuclear Press Pg34Any rational person must accept the possibility that all three nations in the Nuclear Triangle have EMP bombs in Earth-orbiting satellites today ready to wipe out an adversaryrsquos electronics on very short notice Everyone knows that classified or secret weapons systems exist It is plain crazy to believe that China Russia and the United States are not prepared with high-altitude EMP and low-altitude nuclear weapons in satellites either ready to launch or in orbit alreadyA strategic feedback loop would seem to make it at least ldquostrongly possiblerdquo that the United States China and Russia have high-powered EMP bombs in Earth orbit today The ability to wipe out an adversaryrsquos electronics continent-wide pretty much any time with a maneuverable EMP satellite bomb would confer major if not overwhelming advantage to the aggressor So if the other guy probably has EMP satellite bombs we need them too

Lewallen 2 John- Political Science at Whitman University organizer of the Nuclear Peace Action Group Fulbright Scholarship recipient Public Ocean Access Network ldquoHigh-Altitude Nuclear Warrdquo Nuclear Press Pg25

Russia and China are urgently asking the worldrsquos nations to begin talks to ban the militarization of space Chinarsquos ambassador to the United Nations Converence on Disarmament in January 2000 called for international talks to ban testing deployment and use of weapons in outer space23 In March 2000 Russiarsquos ambassador to the UN Congerence on Disarmament echoid this ugent plea for UN negations for an international treaty to ban testing stationing and use of weapons systems in outer space CONT

46

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Data Sharing Adv

Potential exists for EMP intelligence sharing with Russia which is key to combat rogue or terrorist EMP attacks

Wood 4 Lowell L- member of the Technical Advisory Group US Senate Select Committee on Intelligence a member of the Undersea Warfare Experts Group US House of Representatives Committee on Armed Services a visiting fellow at the Hoover Institution and Stanford University The report of the Commission to Assess the Threat to the United States From Electromagnetic Pulse Attackrdquo July 22 2004

This is particularly strong in the circumstance of the Soviet Union where they detonated most of their high-altitude explosions over their own territory and thus had an opportunity to make extensive measurements That large body of physical data has come forth in a somewhat fragmentary fashion idiosyncratic fashion really over the years But since the end of the Cold War in particular in the context of cooperation against large-scale terrorism Russian workers and indeed the Russian government has indicated a willingness to collaborate with the United States against the common threat that EMP poses to both the Russian Federation and the United States in the hands of both state-substate-scale actors to Russian and American civilizations So there is the prospect for substantially improved understanding in the United States as far as what was actually observed but the large program that the government supported from the early 1960s up into the early 1990s to understand nuclear weaponry effects has run a very consistent thread through the limited body of experimental data that exists to the end of atmospheric testing

However Russia fears US nuclear EMP strikes

Pry 5 Dr Peter Vincent- EMP Commission Staff ldquoForeign Views Of Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP) Attackrdquo Before The United States Senate Subcommittee On Terrorism Technology And Homeland Security March 8 2005 httpwwwendtimesreportcomEMP_attackhtml

Many foreign analystsndashparticularly in Iran North Korea China and Russiandashview the United States as a potential aggressor that would be willing to use its entire panoply of weapons including nuclear weapons in a first strike They perceive the United States as having contingency plans to make a nuclear EMP attack and as being willing to execute those plans under a broad range of circumstances

Russiarsquos scientific community is especially aware of this EMP threat

Zak 6 Anatoly ldquoTHE K PROJECT Soviet Nuclear Tests In Spacerdquo The Nonproliferation Review Volume 13 Issue 1 March 2006

At the same time scientists realized that along with their higher efficiency nuclear-tipped ABMs would generate highly dangerous blast effects and electromagnetic pulse radiation (EMP) in the surrounding atmosphere and on the very territory they were designed to protect Among the affected infrastructure could be radar installations strategic communications networks and other command-and-control assets To further complicate the situation the Soviet military planners envisioned a scenario in which a nuclear attack on the USSR would likely be preceded by a US high-altitude nuclear explosion designed to ldquoblindrdquo the Soviet ABM tracking network1

47

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Data Sharing Adv

Russiarsquos fears prevent them pursuing cooperative programs and intelligence sharing

Robichaud 7 Carl- Program Officer at The Century Foundation and co-editor of Breaking the Nuclear Impasse New Prospects for Security against Weapons Threats ldquoThe Perils of Primacyrdquo The Century Foundation 9-5-2007 httpwwwtcforgprintasptype=NCamppubid=1673

Moreover primacy has costs The first is reduced conflict stability which heightens risks even for the dominant nation If Russia knows that it is at risk of being disarmed by a bolt from the blue it is likely to disperse its weapons shorten launch times and devolve control to sub-commanders Such a posture would exacerbate the risk of accidental or unauthorized launch in the context of a crisis Depending on how Russia responded to American primacy these risks could well outweigh whatever modest bargaining benefits it offered Already Russia is taking some provocative steps to mitigate its vulnerabilitymdashincluding the announcement last month that its nuclear bombers will for the first time since 1992 resume long-range patrols ldquoon a permanent basisrdquo Second the search for primacy directly undermines the Nunn-Lugar Cooperative Threat Reduction Program which remains our best defense against nuclear terrorism One of the reasons that progress on these programs has slowed to a crawl is Russiarsquos suspicion that the initiative is a cover for espionage into its nuclear installations

Russiarsquos important- they have the leading physicists

Wilson 8 Clay- Specialist in Technology and National Security Foreign Affairs Defense and Trade Division ldquoHigh Altitude Electromagnetic Pulse (HEMP) and High Power Microwave (HPM) Devices Threat Assessmentsrdquo Congressional Research Service March 26 2008

Vladimir Lukin the former Soviet Ambassador to the United States and former Chairman of the International Affairs Committee for the Russian Parliament reportedly has stated that Russia currently has a capability to create a HEMP effect over the United States37 During 1962 the then Soviet Union conducted a series of atmospheric nuclear tests and observed HEMP effects that included surge protector burnouts power supply breakdowns and damage to overhead and underground buried cables at distances of 600 kilometers Since then Russia has reportedly made extensive preparations to protect their infrastructure against HEMP by hardening both civilian and military electronic equipment and by providing continuous training for personnel operating these protected systems38 Other sources have reportedly stated that Russia may also have some of the leading physicists in the world currently doing research on electronic warfare weapons and electromagnetic pulse effects39

The US needs Russiarsquos data- we lack the capability

Riddle 4 Lieutenant Colonel Thomas C- United States Army ldquoNuclear High Altitude Electromagnetic Pulse ndash Implications For Homeland Security And Homeland Defenserdquo US Army War College 03 May 2004

Another area of concern is that many of the remaining nuclear physicist personnel specifically those associated with EMP are retiring without a next generation to follow their lead76 Similarly the physical plant to conduct EMP testing and simulation has atrophied almost to the point of non-existence77 Building upon a suggestion originally proposed by Doctor Wood Congress should mandate and oversee the creation of an interagency DoD-DHS led organization to champion the revitalization of both of these resources78

48

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Data Sharing Adv

Increased EMP knowledge is key to effectively hardening our infrastructure

McNeill amp Weitz 8 Jena Baker- homeland security policy analyst at The Heritage Foundation and Richard- Senior Fellow and Director of the Center for Political-Military Analysis at Hudson Institute ldquoElectromagnetic Pulse (EMP) Attack A Preventable Homeland Security Catastropherdquo Heritage Foundation Backgrounder 2199 httpwwwheritageorgresearchhomelandsecuritybg2199cfm_ftn19

The US cannot continue to ignore the EMP threat While some progress has been made in hardening potential US targets against attack including critical military and government systems the vast majority of electrical systems are unshielded and unprotected especially in the civilian sector If properly shielded electrical devices and systems can generally survive even the strongest EMPs[20] Congress and the new Administration must 1 Perform More Research on the Threat Further research is needed in order to ensure that America can respond to the EMP threat appropriately without wasting government resources on flimsy or useless security measures Although there are numerous methods to harness EMPs capable of affecting electronic systems there is still a theoretical limit to what damage they can produce in terms of both geographic size and intensity Some EMP weapons release just enough energy to disable small electrical devices while others can destroy all the electronic devices and systems within a city block Altitude plays a major role in whether an EMP attack will be successful lower heights typically expose a smaller surface area to EMP damage Some systems are simply more vulnerable to EMP attack than others such as devices plugged into power grids and commercial computer equipment The US government must gain knowledge of the attributes and capabilities of EMP and understand the amount of money time and effort that will be required for meaningful prevention EMP research should also include actions by Congress to simulate the effects of an EMP attack on Washington and other high-value targets and re-examine the Graham Report recommendations

Protections drastically reduce the dangers of EMP strikes

Chisholm 5 Patrick ldquoProtect our electronics against EMP attackrdquo Christian Science Monitor December 19 2005

Fortunately protecting electronics and critical infrastructure against an EMP is doable It involves enclosing every electronic component with a metallic cage that blocks out electromagnetic waves Sound impossible Actually electronic components already enjoy some form of shielding against electromagnetic interference Federal Communications Commission standards require it Such shielding is designed to prevent everyday electromagnetic radiation from entering andor exiting the device Your computer contains this shielding from metal housings down to the little metal coverings soldered to your motherboard There even are housings the size of rooms or buildings that protect sensitive equipment inside Without electromagnetic shielding many electronic devices would not work properly However most existing shielding may not be enough to protect against an EMP While US military standards often require electronic components to be protected against an EMP commercial standards do not And while our power grid is shielded against things such as lightning strikes it is not tested for protection against an EMP Upgrading to shield against an EMP would entail using more robust shielding materials especially for the cords cables andor wires that connect devices to external entities such as power supplies or networks Cables and wires act as antennas through which an EMP travels directly into a device

49

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Data Sharing- Uniqueness

Potential exists for collaboration between Russia and the US to reduce EMP dangers

Weldon 4 Curt- vice-chair of the Armed Services Committee and the House Homeland Security Committee The report of the Commission to Assess the Threat to the United States From Electromagnetic Pulse Attack Committee on Armed Services House of Representatives One Hundred Eighth Congress second session hearing held July 22 2004

Let me get into the area of the joint US -Russian initiative that Dr Wood mentioned It just so happens that last year in our defense bill we created the establishment of the Teller-Kurchatov Alliance for Peace Edward Teller and Igor Kurchatov were the two fathers of the nuclear weapons in both the US and Russia Now the head of Kurchatov Institute Dr Evgeny Velikhov is very eager to establish a more proactive relationship for the peaceful purposes of dealing with nuclear energy Is that Dr Wood potentially a forum since Livermore is involved with that effort to begin a formal process of engaging the Russians They just changed their chief of military operations this past week General Baluevskii has now been put in the head position I had a chance to meet with him one month ago in Moscow He has now taken General Kvashnins place as the top military general and I think he has a different outlook on perhaps US American relations and the military So Dr Wood would that be perhaps a vehicle that we could begin to move aggressively into what you alluded to Dr Wood Yes Mr Weldon I believe that that is indeed the case The recent events in the Russian military to which you referred of course appear at least on the surface to be somewhat hopeful in respect to the progress of more collegial relationships between the American and Russian military establishments the potential collaboration with leaders civilian leaders then Soviet now Russian military technologists such as academicians Evgeny Velikhov the head of the Kurchatov Institute personifies I believe at least has prospects So I very much applaud the committees initiatives along these lines both with respect to the Teller-Kurchatov fellowships and the nuclear strategy forum initiative These are directions in which US policy and practice surely should go

50

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Data Sharing- Data Needed

Past US tests failed to record the necessary data

Emanuelson 9 Jerry ldquoNotes about nuclear EMPrdquo Futurescience LLC Jan 26 2009There have only been a few high altitude nuclear explosions There have been none since November 1962 At that time scientists were just beginning to understand the phenomenon well enough to even know what to try to measure This means that there is a very limited amount of data available and only a part of that data is unclassified The largest nuclear EMPs probably occurred with the Hardtack-Teak and Hardtack-Orange tests over Johnston Island in August 1958 however very little information is openly available about the EMP from these tests and it is likely that not much data was obtained due to equipment malfunctions relevant to EMP measurement and a lack of accurate understanding of the EMP phenomenon Although scientists were aware of nuclear EMP in 1958 in many critical respects it was misunderstood Those early errors in the understanding of EMP made good data acquisition very difficult Both of these August 1958 tests used the 38 megaton W39 thermonuclear warhead There have been unconfirmed reports that one or both of these 1958 tests caused power outages in Hawaii

Computer simulations are indecisive

Emanuelson 9 Jerry ldquoNotes about nuclear EMPrdquo Futurescience LLC Jan 26 2009Because of the insufficient amount of hard data scientists have tried to do mathematical calculations about the strength and effects of the different components of the EMP There has never been any clear consensus about whose calculations are correct Since more testing cannot be done there is no way to test the accuracy of the calculations made by various scientists since 1962 The United States National Laboratories have a computer code in which they have a high level of confidence since it closely matches the sparse amount of actual data that does exist

Data is key to protect critical infrastructure

Chisholm 5 Patrick ldquoProtect our electronics against EMP attackrdquo Christian Science Monitor December 19 2005

Radasky one of the worlds few experts on protecting electronics against an EMP thinks that most electronics would undergo only a temporary disruption in the event of an EMP You may just have to restart the computer and everything would be fine said Radasky But a temporary shutdown of a control system for a critical infrastructure system he said would be troublesome And if just 1 percent of all electronics failed havoc could ensue Just think about the power outage in August of 03 when a couple of wires hit a tree observed Radasky That was a single failure propagated over a huge area Now imagine at the speed of light every place in the United States some portion of electronics failing Now you have a very widespread problem The only way to know the extent to which an EMP would knock out electronics is to conduct testing with EMP simulators Unfortunately since the end of the cold war most EMP simulators in the United States have been closed according to Radasky And the few that remain open are for military use not civilian use

51

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Russia Data Sharing (Testing)

Understanding EMP effects is key to prevent testing

Farley 9 Robert is an assistant professor at the University of Kentuckyrsquos Patterson School of Diplomacy and International Commerce ldquoNeocons Salivating Over Their Next Great Exaggerated Threat Electromagnetic Pulse Attackrdquo October 22 2009

Along with their Soviet and Chinese counterparts US military planners and scientists studied the potential dangersmdashand opportunitiesmdashpresented by EMP However since only one nation the United States has ever attacked another country with an atomic bomb the precise extent of EMPrsquos power to damage electronic-dependent infrastructures is not fully understood Testing bans have also prevented the established nuclear powers from fully investigating the EMP effect (prompting some EMP awareness activists to argue for a resumption of nuclear testing)

Nuke War

Johnson 2001(Rebecca Executive Dir Acronym Institute for Disarmament Diplomacy The Guardian 7-17Then the international arms control and non-proliferation regimes collapsed Americans werent bothered at first for hadnt the government promised a super-sophisticated force field round the whole nation that no terrorist or missile would ever penetrate So nuclear testing resumed in Nevada for new warheads to improve the kill prospects of missile interceptors and to penetrate deep into enemies bunkers India had been waiting for just such a go-ahead and Pakistan soon followed both raced to test warheads to fit on to missiles upping the tension in Kashmir and along the borders with China Free now to resume its own testing China boosted its programme to modernise and increase the size of its small nuclear arsenal Somewhat reluctantly Russia followed Moscow suspended all further reductions and cooperative security and safety programmes for its still-large nuclear arsenal and facilities Within a few short years the nuclear non-proliferation treaty was just another discarded agreement Many governments with nuclear power programmes developed nuclear weapons as well while others fitted anthrax or sarin on to weapons just in case Most hadnt wanted to but fearful that their neighbours would all felt compelled Regional rivalries grew quickly into major international problems Alliances collapsed amid suspicion and recriminations The burgeoning arms races even spread into outer space threatening military surveillance as well as public communication entertainment and navigation No one knew who had what Deterrence was empty as defence analysts calculated the advantages of the pre-emptive strike In that terrified atmosphere of insecurity and mistrust someone launched first And then it was too late to speak out The Republicans hadnt yet managed to get missile defence to work Such a doomsday scenario is not so fanciful On July 7 the New York Times announced that President Bush wants to ditch the comprehensive test ban treaty A week before the administration asked nuclear laboratories to work out how quickly the US could resume testing after its nine-year moratorium If Bush were to back out of the test ban treaty or break the moratorium on nuclear testing - undertaken with China Russia Britain and France - he would also explicitly breach agreements made last May when 187 countries negotiated measures to strengthen and implement the non-proliferation treaty The test ban is no outdated cold war instrument but a fundamental tool to prevent new destabilising developments in nuclear weapons Over several decades from the Arctic to the Pacific from the capitals of Europe to the deserts of Nevada people have marched petitioned demonstrated and even sailed or hiked into test sites Many have been imprisoned and some even lost their lives trying to stop the nuclear weapons governments from polluting our oceans and earth with radioactivity from nuclear explosions conducted for one purpose only - to make better nuclear bombs It took three arduous years to complete negotiations on the comprehensive test ban treaty It isnt perfect No product of compromise ever is The verification system is very thorough but it also had to be affordable financially and politically The treaty stopped short of closing and dismantling the known test sites or banning laboratory testing which the weapon states said they needed to assure the safety and reliability of weapons in the stockpiles (pending achievement of their other treaty obligations to eliminate the nuclear arsenals completely) But it does ban all nuclear test explosions in all environments India panicked because the treaty would close off its nuclear options It refused to sign and then let off a string of nuclear explosions in May 1998 Pakistan followed to prove it could Even so the treaty held Neither government has felt able to keep testing which means their options for further developments were curbed Bush has embarked on a very slippery slope that could potentially put at risk the future of the citizens of even the most advanced military nation Mumbling and grumbling wont keep us safe It is time to speak out

52

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Russian ARMS control

Lewallen 2 John- Political Science at Whitman University organizer of the Nuclear Peace Action Group Fulbright Scholarship recipient Public Ocean Access Network ldquoHigh-Altitude Nuclear Warrdquo Nuclear Press p22-23Russia today is a collapsing superpower with an arsenal of thousands of nuclear missiles which it cannot afford to maintain Six thousand Russian strategic missiles are ready to launch today with about 2250 on high alert ldquoWhat counts most now is that Russia and United States start moving jointly or along parallel courses toward radically lowered ceilings on nuclear warheads without any holdupsrdquo Russiarsquos President Putin said on November 14 2000 Russian officials said President Putin would like to cut strategic missile arsenals to 1000 each for the US and Russia Still the Russians clearly want to maintain second-strike nuclear threat credibility against the United States

53

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Modeling Advantage 1

United States failure to reject nuclear EMP warfare has eroded the nuclear taboo surrounding high-altitude explosions and has led several states to incorporate nuclear EMP strikes into warplans

Pry 5 Dr Peter Vincent- EMP Commission Staff ldquoForeign Views Of Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP) Attackrdquo Before The United States Senate Subcommittee On Terrorism Technology And Homeland Security March 8 2005 httpwwwendtimesreportcomEMP_attackhtml

Some foreign analysts judging from open source statements and writings appear to regard EMP attack as a legitimate use of nuclear weapons because EMP would inflict no or few prompt civilian casualties EMP attack appears to be a unique exception to the general stigma attached to nuclear employment by most of the international community in public statements Significantly even some analysts in Japan and Germanyndashnations that historically have been most condemnatory of nuclear and other weapons of mass destruction in official and unofficial forumsndashappear to regard EMP attack as morally defensible For example a June 2000 Japanese article in a scholarly journal citing senior political and military officials appears to regard EMP attack as a legitimate use of nuclear weapons ldquoAlthough there is little chance that the Beijing authorities would launch a nuclear attack which would incur the disapproval of the international community and which would result in such enormous destruction that it would impede postwar cleanup and policies a serious assault starting with the use of nuclear weapons which would not harm humans animals or property would be valid If a nuclear warhead was detonated 40 kilometers above Taiwan an electromagnetic wave would be propagated which would harm unprotected computers radar and IC circuits on the ground within a 100 kilometer radius and the weapons and equipment which depend on the communications and electronics technology whose superiority Taiwan takes pride in would be rendered combat ineffective at one stroke If they were detonated in the sky in the vicinity of Ilan the effects would also extend to the waters near Yonakuni [in Okinawa] so it would be necessary for Japan too to take care Those in Taiwan having lost their advanced technology capabilities would end up fighting with tactics and technology going back to the 19th century They would inevitably be at a disadvantage with the PLA and its overwhelming military force superiorityrdquo (Su Tzu-yun Jadi 1 June 2000) An article by a member of Indiarsquos Institute of Defense Studies Analysis openly advocates that India be prepared to make a preemptive EMP attack both for reasons of military necessity and on humanitarian grounds ldquoA study conducted in the U S during the late 1980s reported that a high-yield device exploded about 500 kilometers above the ground can generate an electromagnetic pulse (EMP) of the order of 50000 volts over a radius of 2500 kilometers around the point of burst which would be collected by any exposed conductor Such an attack will not cause any blast or thermal effects on the ground below but it can produce a massive breakdown in the communications system It is certain that most of the land communication networks and military command control links will be affected and it will undermine our capability to retaliate This in fact is the most powerful incentive for a preemptive attack And a high-altitude exo-atmospheric explosion may not even kill a bird on the groundrdquo Although India Pakistan and Israel are not rogue states they all presently have missiles and nuclear weapons giving them the capability to make EMP attacks against their regional adversaries An EMP attack by any of these statesndasheven if targeted at a regional adversary and not the United Statesndashcould collaterally damage U S forces in the region and would pose an especially grave threat to U S satellites Many foreign analystsndashparticularly in Iran North Korea China and Russiandashview the United States as a potential aggressor that would be willing to use its entire panoply of weapons including nuclear weapons in a first strike They perceive the United States as having contingency plans to make a nuclear EMP attack and as being willing to execute those plans under a broad range of circumstances

54

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Modeling Advantage- Israel

The exclusion of EMP from the nuclear taboo means Israel will EMP strike Iran leading to the closure of the Strait of Hormuz and international terrorist attacks

Nagle 210 Chet- Pentagons International Security Affairs department Intel Research Corporation author of Iran Covenant ldquoItrsquos time to play the war cardrdquo The Daily Caller 021010

The world knows the US military can destroy any target in the world without using nuclear weapons But what about Israel That country with a population less than that of New York City has developed a ldquotriadrdquomdashthe capability to launch a nuclear strike from aircraft missile silos and submarines Besides Israel only the US Russia and China have that deterrent power But would Israel use nuclear weapons in a pre-emptive strike on Iran I suggest that is unlikely because as we will see below it is unnecessary in the usual sense As for a non-nuclear pre-emptive strike Israel cannot successfully attack Iran with conventional weapons or aircraft The distance is great the defenses formidable and the casualties would be very high Instead I believe Israel will use an electromagnetic pulse (EMP) weapon Whatrsquos that In 1962 the US conducted an atmospheric test called Starfish Prime In it a 14 megaton weapon was detonated 400 kilometers above Johnson Island in the Pacific The EMP from that test knocked out street lights in Hawaii 900 miles away The Soviets held similar tests and discovered EMP effects can penetrate far underground If Israel used one of its Jericho III missiles to detonate 400 kilometers above north central Iran there would be no blast or radiation effects on the ground In fact if the strike was at noon on a sunny day the people below would not know it happened except their lights would go out cars stop fridges die power line transformers short out refineries shut down and yes those uranium enrichment centrifuges in caverns stop spinning This bloodless annihilation coupled with a selective cyber attack would freeze Iran for decades What could be Iranrsquos response to such an attack If they can find a working radio they can announce they have mined the Strait of Hormuz Because of depth width and its hydrographic features the Strait cannot be mined but if Iran says it is mined it would have the same effect Lloyds will cancel insurance for any tanker transiting the Strait Then we revisit ldquoTanker Warrdquo tactics of 1985 and the US Navy would escort any ship anxious to cash in on the crisis If shore missile batteries were somehow still operational a battle group in the area together with bombers from Diego Garcia would reduce them to rubble along with associated infrastructure like military harbors A rain of missiles from Hezbollah in Syria would have to be endured by Israel unless another EMP weapon was used Terror attacks would be made on Israelis and Americans but those can be dealt with by law enforcement and military forces especially if they are forewarned Of course the price of oil and gold would spike for a while On the positive side Iranian ldquoGreenrdquo opposition forces would have an opportunity to take to the darkened streets of Tehran and rid themselves of the corrupt clerical regime So it seems the ldquowar cardrdquo is in the hands of Israel and the card has ldquoEMPrdquo on it

55

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Modeling Advantage- Israel

This shuts off the worldrsquos oil supply

Klare 2 Michael- Five Colleges professor of Peace and World Security Studies boards of directors of Human Rights Watch and the Arms Control Association ldquoResource Wars The New Landscape of Global Conflictrdquo p 72-73

Iran does not pose a direct threat to audi Arabia and the southern Gulf kingdomsmdashat least not for the time being However by building up its navy and deploying antiship missiles along its coasts Iran may imperil oil shipping in the Persian Gulf and the all-important Strait of Hormuz the Gulfs narrow opening to the Arabian Sea and the larger world beyond Although lacking major warships Iran has acquired three submarines twenty missile-armed patrol boats numerous shore-based missile batteries and a large inventory of antishipping mines This is enough General Zinni testified in 1999 to jeopardize open access to Gulf shipping lanes Only six miles wide at its narrowest point the Strait of Hormuz is described by the US Department of Energy as the worlds most important oil chokepoint because of the sheer volume of oilmdashover 15 million barrels per daymdashthat passes through it With missile batteries deployed at both entrances to the strait and a large inventory of anti-shipping mines Iran is in an ideal position to impede shipping through this vital channel Pentagon strategists suggest moreover that Iran will seek to do so in the event of a future clash with the United States Iran also seeks to extend its control over Abu Musa and both Greater and Lesser Tunb a small group of islands that guard the western approaches to the strait Iran seized the Tunbs from Ras al-Khaimah (part of the United Arab Emirates) in 1971 and has occupied them since It shared Abu Musa with Sharjah (another UAE component) until 1994 when it took control of the entire island When pressed by the UAE to submit the dispute over the islands to international mediation Tehran declared that they were an inseparable part of Iran46 Since then the Iranians have deployed antiship missiles on Abu Musa and fortified their positions on the Tunbs47

Collapses the global economy

Roberts 4 Paul- regular contributor to Harpers and NYT Magazine ldquoThe End of Oil On the Edge of a Perilous New Worldrdquo p 93-4

The obsessive focus on oil is hardly surprising given the stakes In the fast moving world of energy politics oil is not simply a source of world power but a medium for that power as well a substance whose huge importance encompasses entire nations in a global web that is sensitive to the smallest of variations A single oil event -- a pipeline explosion in Iraq political unrest in Venezuela a bellicose exchange between Russia and Saudi Arabia -- sends shockwaves through the world energy order pushes prices up or down and sets off tectonic shifts in global wealth and power In the volatile would of oil the tide could turn quickly As anxieties over the uncertainties in Iraq drove oil prices up to $40 the oil tide abruptly changed direction transferring tens of billions of dollars from the G-8 countries to the oil exporting countries and threatening the global economic recovery So embedded has oil became in todays political and economic spheres that the major Western governments now watch the oil markets as closely as they once watched the spread of communism This is because six of the last seven global recessions have been preceded by an oil price rise and fear is growing among economists and policy makers that in todays growth-dependent and energy-intensive global economy oil price volatility itself may eventually pose more risks to prosperity and stability and mere survival than terrorism or even war

56

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Modeling Advantage- China

China would love to drop a HEMP on Taiwan- lack of norm

Schneider 9 Mark- National Institute for Public Policy The Nuclear Doctrine and Forces of the Peoples Republic of China Comparative Strategy Volume 28 Issue 3 July 2009

There is also concern about Chinese preparations for a nuclear electromagnetic pulse attack on Taiwan the United States and Japan as part of its strategy to facilitate the conquest of Taiwan The Congressional Commission on the Threat to the United States from Electromagnetic Pulse reported that ldquoChina and Russia have considered limited nuclear attack options that unlike Cold War plans employ EMP as the primary or sole means of attackrdquo121 The 2005 Pentagon report on Chinese military power observed that ldquoSome PLA theorists are aware of the electromagnetic effect of using a high-altitude electromagnetic pulse (HEMP) and might consider using HEMP in an unconventional attack believing that the United States and other nations would not consider it as a use of force and a crossing of the nuclear thresholdrdquo122 A Congressional Research Service report by Ronald ORourke concluded that a US naval force coming to the aid of Taiwan against a Chinese attack would have to be prepared for use of nuclear weapons and EMP because ldquoChina could also use a nuclear-armed ballistic missile to detonate a nuclear warhead in the atmosphere to create a high-altitude electromagnetic pulse (EMP) intended to temporarily or permanently disable the electronic circuits of US or other civilian and military electronic systemsrdquo123 China expert Dr Michael Pillsbury has linked nuclear EMP attack to the Chinese ldquoassassins macerdquo concept of defeating the superior with the inferior Pillsbury has elsewhere noted that the March 2000 issue of Chinas Military Digest featured an article by Xian Fengli Lu Young and Ming Xiang which argued that ldquoEMP warheads will make it much easier to cross the nuclear thresholdrdquo124 The designers of the Chinese DF-11 SRBM ldquohave demonstrated the most interest in HEMP [high altitude nuclear EMP] weaponsrdquo125 According to the Wall Street Journal ldquoChina and Russia have the capability to launch EMP weaponsmdashand have let us know it China recently published an article on EMP in a Chinese-language technical journal To make sure the US got the message the article appeared in Englishrdquo126

This would collapse civilization

Straits Times 2k (Singapore) ldquoNo one gains in war over Taiwanrdquo June 25 lexisThe high-intensity scenario postulates a cross-strait war escalating into a full-scale war between the US and China If Washington were to conclude that splitting China would better serve its national interests then a full-scale war becomes unavoidable Conflict on such a scale would embroil other countries far and near and -horror of horrors -raise the possibility of a nuclear war Beijing has already told the US and Japan privately that it considers any country providing bases and logistics support to any US forces attacking China as belligerent parties open to its retaliation In the region this means South Korea Japan the Philippines and to a lesser extent Singapore If China were to retaliate east Asia will be set on fire And the conflagration may not end there as opportunistic powers elsewhere may try to overturn the existing world order With the US distracted Russia may seek to redefine Europes political landscape The balance of power in the Middle East may be similarly upset by the likes of Iraq In south Asia hostilities between India and Pakistan each armed with its own nuclear arsenal could enter a new and dangerous phase Will a full-scale Sino-US war lead to a nuclear war According to General Matthew Ridgeway commander of the US Eighth Army which fought against the Chinese in the Korean War the US had at the time thought of using nuclear weapons against China to save the US from military defeat In his book The Korean War a personal account of the military and political aspects of the conflict and its implications on future US foreign policy Gen Ridgeway said that US was confronted with two choices in Korea -truce or a broadened war which could have led to the use of nuclear weapons If the US had to resort to nuclear weaponry to defeat China long before the latter acquired a similar capability there is little hope of winning a war against China 50 years later short of using nuclear weapons The US estimates that China possesses about 20 nuclear warheads that can destroy major American cities Beijing also seems prepared to go for the nuclear option A Chinese military officer disclosed recently that Beijing was considering a review of its non first use principle regarding nuclear weapons Major-General Pan Zhangqiang president of the military-funded Institute for Strategic Studies told a gathering at the Woodrow Wilson International Centre for Scholars in Washington that although the government still abided by that principle there were strong pressures from the military to drop it He said military leaders considered the use of nuclear weapons mandatory if the country risked dismemberment as a result of foreign intervention Gen Ridgeway said that should that come to pass we would see the destruction of civilisation There would be no victors in such a war While the prospect of a nuclear Armaggedon over Taiwan might seem inconceivable it cannot be ruled out entirely for China puts sovereignty above everything else

57

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Modeling Advantage- Solvency

Establishing an environment that discourages EMP attacks is critical to prevent them from occurring

EMP Commission 4 Report of the Commission to Assess the Threat to the United States from Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP) Attack Volume 1 Executive Report 2004 Dr John S Foster Jr Mr Earl Gjelde Dr William R Graham (Chairman) Dr Robert J Hermann Mr Henry (Hank) M Kluepfel GEN Richard L Lawson USAF (Ret) Dr Gordon K Soper Dr Lowell L Wood Jr Dr Joan B Woodard

An EMP attack is one way for a terrorist activity to use a small amount of nuclear weaponrymdashpotentially just one weaponmdashin an effort to produce a catastrophic impact on our society but it is not the only way In addition there are potential applications of surface-burst nuclear weaponry biological and chemical warfare agents and cyber attacks that might cause damage that could reach large-scale long-term levels The first order of business is to prevent any of these attacks from occurring The US must establish a global environment that will profoundly discourage such attacks We must persuade nations to forgo obtaining nuclear weapons or to provide acceptable assurance that these weapons will neither threaten the vital interests of the United States nor fall into threatening hands

Plan resurrects the taboo

Bin amp Hongyi 9 Li- director of Arms Control Program at the Institute of International Studies and Nie- officer in the Peoplersquos Liberation Army ldquoAn Investigation of China ndash US Strategic Stabilityrdquo translation of an article published in Chinese in World Economics amp Politics 5-22-09

Damage to the nuclear taboo also comes from some pseudoscientific discussions These discussions completely ignore the effect of the nuclear taboo making casual suppositions about the use of nuclear weapons for example supposing nuclear nations after defeat in a conventional conflict must use nuclear weapons to reverse the war situation During every form of nuclear dialog between China and the United States American academics frequently engage in this type of ldquoacademicrdquo persuasion with the Chinese side The starting point is defending the US refusal to make a no first use pledge but this so-called academic propagandizing objectively weakens the confidence of Chinese scholars in the nuclear taboo During the Cold War the international anti-nuclear movement strengthened the nuclear taboo After the end of the Cold War because the large scale nuclear confrontation between the US and the Soviet Union fundamentally ended the influence of the grass roots of the international anti-nuclear movement has weakened This is not beneficial to the maintenance and strengthening of the nuclear taboo China from the perspective of protecting its own national interest should invest resources in propagandizing the danger of nuclear war oppose the first use of nuclear weapons and the threat to use nuclear weapons strengthening the nuclear taboo

58

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Israeli Strikes Bad

Israeli preemption causes conflagration

Eiland 10 Maj Gen Giora- senior researcher at the Institute for National Security Studies (INSS) in Tel Aviv former head of the Israeli National Security Council ldquoIsraels Military Optionrdquo The Washington Quarterly Volume 33 Issue 1 January 2010 pages 115 - 130

With these risks in mind Israel has made it clear that a military attack is an option The risks however are immense First an attack could fail tactically which would seriously harm Israels deterrent and provide Iran with a good excuse to attack Israel Second Iran could fight back conventionally which is more likely or even with chemical and biological weapons which would be more devastating Third an attack would mobilize Hezbollah increasing the chances of a conflict between Israel and Syria Fourth Israel will certainly lose its already minor international support More importantly Iran will no longer be seen as the bad guy Fifth Iran may choose to retaliate using Persian Gulf oil markets Closing the Strait of Hormuz or attacking the oil fields of the Persian Gulf states will create a serious worldwide crisis Sixth an attack will change the perspective of the Iranian public which currently does not have very strong negative feelings toward Israel And seventh it will increase the anti-Israel sentiment throughout the region An Israeli attack will involve other countries (Israel might need to use their air space with or without permission) This indirect and passive assistance to Israel will push Persian Gulf countries to take anti-Israel or anti-US steps The attack in fact could serve as the straw that breaks the camels back and may even provoke strong reactions from governments throughout the region

59

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Testing Advantage

Mohan 87 C Raja- Henry Alfred Kissinger Scholar in the John W Kluge Center at the Library of Congress ldquoNuclear Test Ban Receding Hopesrdquo Economic and Political Weekly Vol 22 No 7 (Feb 14 1987)The most lucrative among the nuclear weapons on the design board are the so- called third generation nuclear weapons The first generation weapons are those based on nuclear fission-the atomic bombs The second generation weapons are those designed around nuclear fusion-the hydrogen bombs The transition from the first generation to the second saw enormous increases in explosive power and tremendous design efficiency-in terms of yield-to-weight ratio that is larger explosive power for lesser overall weight of the weapons facilitating the development of a variety of nuclear weapons for different delivery systems The third generation weapons involve the development of a number of sophisticated designs which would channel a part of the nuclear explosive energy to a form more precisely tailored to the need than just blast and heat the most well known effects of nuclear weapons in the past4 The neutron bomb built in the 1970s was a precursor to the third generation nuclear weapons Among the major third generation concepts under investigation are the X-ray laser the gamma-ray laser the microwave bomb and the electomagnetic pulse (EMP) bomb The first two designs seek to convert nuclear explosive power into high energy radiation either in the X- or gamma-region of the electromagnetic spectrum It is hoped that such powerful laser weapons driven by nuclear weapons could play a central role in the proposed defence against a missile attack (star wars) Although the SDI has been advertised as a non-nuclear defence against nuclear weapons nuclear-driven exotic weapons have emerged as serious components of the programme In a microwave weapon the nuclear explosive energy is converted into microwaves Having lesser energy than the gamma- or X-ray laser the microwave beam weapons are not designed to destroy Soviet missiles in flight but would be used to debilitate the electronics of the missile and its warhead The EMP bomb is based on the observation that a nuclear explosion in the upper atmosphere would generate an intense pulse of high voltage electric charge which could put out all electric installations over a large area on the ground5 The EMP bomb would maximise the generation of this electromagnetic pulse The American nuclear weapons laboratories thus see the continuation of nuclear testing as essential for the investigation of these new concepts in the design of nuclear weapons Not only would they need to test but do a lot of it Because of the complexity of the third generation nuclear weapon design much more testing than before is required to develop these weapons According to American weapons designers the perfection of any one of the third generation designs could require 100 to 200 test explosions6 In the past only about six underground number tests on the average were required to develop a new nuclear weapon The requirements of the US nuclear strategy in coming years thus clearly demands more intensive testing of nuclear weapons A Comprehensive Test Ban which would block the new round of qualitative improvement in the design of nuclear weapons is clearly not on the American agenda

Acronym Institute 4 ldquoBallistic Missile Defence and the Weaponisation of Spacerdquo httpwwwacronymorgukspacerejintrohtmAt present any high altitude nuclear detonation would violate the provisions of the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT) Pending this treatys entry into force the ban on nuclear explosions is bolstered by moratoria undertaken by all the nuclear weapon states and by India and Pakistan Few would have the technological capacity to undertake such an explosion and it would be extremely difficult if not impossible for a perpetrator to evade detection As with a hostile missile launch the origin of a nuclear detonation can be quickly identified and would invite unified international diplomatic action or failing that overwhelming retaliation Though the technology to prevent a high altitude nuclear explosion is not available the perpetrator would incur high political costs for crossing the nuclear threshold and damaging space assets beneficial to millions around the world For a number of technological and political reasons therefore a high altitude nuclear detonation is unlikely although it cannot be ruled out altogether

60

Cornell HKHANE Aff

EMPacts Econ

Kills global econ

Riddle 4 Lieutenant Colonel Thomas C- United States Army ldquoNuclear High Altitude Electromagnetic Pulse ndash Implications For Homeland Security And Homeland Defenserdquo US Army War College 03 May 2004

Additionally the worldwide economy has grown increasingly interdependent The economic disruptions that occurred in the wake of the 2001 attacks provided a clear demonstration of this interdependence The disruption of the interdependent critical infrastructure of the United States would likely produce worldwide economic disruption The extended loss of the American consumer markets disruption of domestic manufacturing capability and chaotic financial institutions would contribute to an extended period of worldwide economic disruption

US economic collapse will destroy the global economy

Mead 4 Walter Russell- Senior Fellow at Council on Foreign Relations ldquoAmericas Sticky Powerrdquo Foreign Policy MarApr 2004

Similarly in the last 60 years as foreigners have acquired a greater value in the United States-government and private bonds direct and portfolio private investments-more and more of them have acquired an interest in maintaining the strength of the US-led system A collapse of the US economy and the ruin of the dollar would do more than dent the prosperity of the United States Without their best customer countries including China and Japan would fall into depressions The financial strength of every country would be severely shaken should the United States collapse Under those circumstances debt becomes a strength not a weakness and other countries fear to break with the United States because they need its market and own its securities Of course pressed too far a large national debt can turn from a source of strength to a crippling liability and the United States must continue to justify other countries faith by maintaining its long-term record of meeting its financial obligations But like Samson in the temple of the Philistines a collapsing US economy would inflict enormous unacceptable damage on the rest of the world That is sticky power with a vengeance

Electricity would be out for years

Emanuelson 9 Jerry ldquoNuclear Electromagnetic Pulserdquo Futurescience LLC Jan 26 2009A nuclear EMP attack would knock out most if not all of the electric power grid The extent of the electrical grid damage would depend upon the size of the bomb Full repair of the power grid would take anywhere from two months to three years or more Many components such as large transformers which are normally resistant to large voltage transients would be destroyed by the DC-like current induced by the E3 component of the pulse when they are connected to very long copper wires The design life of the transformers in the United States power grid is 40 years but the average age of these transformers is already more than 42 years If power companies were to keep adequate spare parts on hand the repair time could be kept closer to the two-month time frame Adequate parts are not currently being kept on hand and in most cases there are very long lead times for replacement parts for the electrical grid if the parts are not kept on hand by the electrical utility There is currently no United States manufacturing capability for the large power transformers in its power grid All of these extremely heavy transformers have to be manufactured and imported from other countries The current delivery time for these transformers is 3 years from the time that the order is placed but widespread destruction of these transformers would completely overwhelm the very limited worldwide production capacity

61

Cornell HKHANE Aff

EMPacts Heg

EMP attack kills heg

Riddle 4 Lieutenant Colonel Thomas C- United States Army ldquoNuclear High Altitude Electromagnetic Pulse ndash Implications For Homeland Security And Homeland Defenserdquo US Army War College 03 May 2004

To jump start national recovery efforts would likely require significant portions of the remaining overseas military resources of the United States to focus their efforts on domestic recovery The resulting lack of a viable forward presence coupled with an American government intently focused on internal recovery could result in numerous regional conflicts as nations attempted to gain advantage or to redress old grievances Several of these regional conflicts (India-Pakistan Israel-Syria China-Russia China-India) certainly have the potential to involve further use of WMD

Heg collapse results in wars around the globe

Ferguson 4 Niall Senior Fellow the Hoover Institution Stanford JulyAugust 2004 ldquoA World without Powerrdquo httpwwwforeignpolicycomstorycmsphpstory_id=2579amppage=3 ACC 91604 p online

The worst effects of the new Dark Age would be felt on the edges of the waning great powers The wealthiest ports of the global economymdashfrom New York to Rotterdam to Shanghaimdashwould become the targets of plunderers and pirates With ease terrorists could disrupt the freedom of the seas targeting oil tankers aircraft carriers and cruise liners while Western nations frantically concentrated on making their airports secure Meanwhile limited nuclear wars could devastate numerous regions beginning in the Korean peninsula and Kashmir perhaps ending catastrophically in the Middle East In Latin America wretchedly poor citizens would seek solace in Evangelical Christianity imported by US religious orders In Africa the great plagues of AIDS and malaria would continue their deadly work The few remaining solvent airlines would simply suspend services to many cities in these continents who would wish to leave their privately guarded safe havens to go there For all these reasons the prospect of an apolar world should frighten us today a great deal more than it frightened the heirs of Charlemagne If the United States retreats from global hegemonymdashits fragile self-image dented by minor setbacks on the imperial frontiermdashits critics at home and abroad must not pretend that they are ushering in a new era of multipolar harmony or even a return to the good old balance of power Be careful what you wish for The alternative to unipolarity would not be multipolarity at all It would be apolaritymdasha global vacuum of power And far more dangerous forces than rival great powers would benefit from such a not-so-new world disorder

62

Cornell HKHANE Aff

EMPacts Earthquake

Nuclear EMPs cause earthquakes

Mahler 10 William K- M2 Technologies ldquoHugo Chavez Cites Russian Sourcesrdquo Cape Cod Today January 22 2010

As for the ability to make an Earthquake Electro Magnetic Pulse has been around since the first atomic bomb tests way back during World War II It can be separated from a blast meaning it functions on its own as a tool no nuke explosions necessary (remember Hiroshima and Nagasaki) Over in Europe some years back it was around the Netherlands or a neighboring country where citizens protested a USA weapon involving EMP Why They feared (and rightfully so) that weapon would be used to hurt Russia for example How bad could it hurt Give the weapon a target such as a large building like our Empire State Building in New York once fired there would be hole clean through I suppose as clean as a light saber blade could cut in sci-fi such as Star Wars The EMP can penetrate anything to my knowledge so yes a shock jolt from an EMP could absolutely trigger an Earthquake no doubt about it and probably sans the radiation fallout guaranteed by an atomic (nuclear) blast

63

Cornell HKHANE Aff

EMPacts GPS

The EMP would disable GPS technologies

Scott 9 William B- Rocky Mountain Bureau Chief for Aviation Week amp Space Technology Michael J Coumatos- US Space Command director of wargaming William J Birnes- PhD from New York University ldquoCounterspace The Next Hours of World War IIIrdquo p 18

The high-level cram course on nuclear weapons effects Aster had received when he took over as STRATCOM chief had provided a basic understanding of electromagnetic pulse effects But that was thin knowledge at best The general needed more to assess the full spectrum of impacts nowMajor why would GPS be affected by that nuke All the Navstars are in much higher mid-Earth orbits something like twelve-thousand-plus miles right Thats too high for EMP effects cause theres no air to ionize that far outCorrect sir But that detonation created an extremely high radiation flux and its basically charging up the Van Allen Belt even though its way out there too In turn that causes what we call secondary radiation effects in electronic circuits on GPS birdsmdashthings like electronic gate latch-ups data losses and other effects It also created an ion-charged layer in the upper atmosphere which acts like a shield that blocks the weak signals from GPS and other satellites Most GPS navigation and timing signals are now prevented from reaching Earth especially out in the Pacific Probably going to affect the downlinks from some GEO birds too the major added referring to platforms in geostationary orbit 22500 miles from Earth

64

Cornell HKHANE Aff

EMPacts Satelites

A HANE would wipe out satelites

Kueter 7 Jeff- president of the George C Marshall Institute ldquoChinarsquos Space Ambitions ndash And Oursrdquo The New Atlantis Number 16 Spring 2007 pp 7-22

Another type of threat to space assets is high-altitude nuclear detonation An enemy could arm a missile with a nuclear warhead launch it and explode the warhead in space All satellites within the line of sight of the explosion would be destroyed or rendered ineffective immediately with the effects dissipating with distance from the explosion Whatrsquos more the radiation released by a single low-yield high-altitude nuclear explosion ldquocould disablemdashin weeks to monthsmdashall low-Earth orbit satellites not specifically hardened to withstand the radiation generated by that explosionrdquo according to the Defense Threat Reduction Agency Most US satellitesmdashincluding those commercial satellites that are used extensively for defense communicationsmdashare not hardened to withstand such an attack and they lack the maneuvering capabilities needed to ldquoget out of the wayrdquo of the attacking missile the explosion or the radioactive effects China certainly has the missile and nuclear capabilities required to conduct such an attack (So too do the United States Russia the United Kingdom France and possibly Israel India and Pakistan North Korea apparently lacks the missile competence and Iran probably does not have either the missile or nuclear know-howmdashas of this writing) Needless to say this most extreme measure would likely be attempted only in times of acute international crisis

Bright 2 Melanie ldquoHigh-Altitude Nuclear Explosions Blind Deaf And Dumbrdquo Janes Defence Weekly October 23 2002 httpwwwglobalsecurityorgorgnews2002nuke_explosionhtm

However blowing up targets on the Earths surface is only part of the story According to Dr Dennis Papadopoulos from the Department of Physics University of Maryland If someone were to explode a 10kT nuclear weapon at a high enough altitude over their own territory 90 of the worlds low earth orbit [LEO] satellites would be lost within a month In addition to the electromagnetic pulse (EMP) phenomenon generally understood satellites are vulnerable to the Christofilos Effect When a high-altitude nuclear explosion (HANE) is detonated at about 100km altitude the Earths magnetic field accelerates the large cloud of electrons and protons released by the blast The radiation particles speed up spread out all the while accelerating circling the globe until racing around it at speeds approaching the speed of light This effect is named after Dr Nicholas Christofilos who predicted this phenomenon The detonation produces an artificial radiation belt that within weeks to at most months delivers a lethal dose of radiation to [LEO] satellites said Dr Papadopoulos who worked with Dr Christofilos at what is now the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory The superpowers conducted six scheduled nuclear explosions in space during the Cuban Missile Crisis These HANEs damaged or destroyed all seven satellites then in orbit These tests conducted before the 1963 Atmospheric Test Ban Treaty provided the only experimental data on the vulnerability of satellites to nuclear detonation Today the implications of a HANE are far greater as millions use the 250-plus satellites in LEO

65

Cornell HKHANE Aff

EMPacts Healthcare

Ross 8 LH Jr Mihelic FM ldquoHealthcare vulnerabilities to electromagnetic pulserdquo Am J Disaster Med 2008 Nov-Dec3(6)321-5 Center for Homeland Security Studies Graduate School of Medicine University of Tennessee Knoxville Tennessee USA

The US healthcare system is particularly vulnerable to the effects of electromagnetic pulse (EMP) attack because of the systems technological sophistication but while national defense planners prepare for the considerable threat that EMP poses there has been little or no recognition of this threat within the US healthcare community and neither has there been any significant healthcare planning to deal with such an eventuality Recognition of the risk presented by EMP and advance institution of appropriate strategies to mitigate its effects on the healthcare system could enable the preservation of much of that systems function in the face of EMP-related disruptions and will greatly further all-hazards disaster preparations

66

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Morality Advantage

Wilson 8 Clay- Specialist in Technology and National Security Foreign Affairs Defense and Trade Division ldquoHigh Altitude Electromagnetic Pulse (HEMP) and High Power Microwave (HPM) Devices Threat Assessmentsrdquo Congressional Research Service March 26 2008

HEMP and HPM energy weapons primarily damage electronic systems with little or no direct effect on humans however these effects may be difficult to limit or control As HEMP or HPM energy fields instantly spread outward they may also affect nearby hospital equipment or personal medical devices such as pace-makers or other parts of the surrounding civilian infrastructure For this reason some international human rights organizations may object to the development or testing of HEMP or HPM weapons

67

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT Verifiability

Plan results in verifiable operational change and posture changes still have positive effects

Feiveson 99 Harold- Senior Research Policy Scientist at Princeton co-principal investigator of Princetons research Program on Science and Global Security ldquoChapter 4 Nuclear Strategy and Targeting Doctrinerdquo in ldquoThe Nuclear Turning Pointrdquo The Brookings Institution 1999

It will not be easy to break out of cold war thought patterns regarding the use of nuclear weapons War plans are carefully guarded secrets and changes in them can at best be verified only indirectly and over time through corresponding changes in force posture Nuclear doctrine is important however because it is the basis for force structure and operations and could largely determine how the entire nuclear command system would react in a crisis An evolving dialogue between US and Russian military leaders on this subject would be useful and could help pave the way toward very deep reductions in nuclear forces

Plan leads to removal of specific warheads although we cannot predict the exact change because the information is classified

Bernardin 99 Michael- Provost for Theoretical Institute of Thermonuclear Studies Los Alamos National Laboratory ldquoElectromagnetic Pulse Threats to US Military And Civilian Infrastructurerdquo Hearing Before The Military Research And Development Subcommittee October 7 1999

The Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) and the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) identify current and projected nuclear weapon threats and provide inputs to the Department of Energy nuclear design labs Los Alamos and Livermore National Laboratories who model foreign nuclear weapons The labs each have over 25 years of experience in performing this type of modeling The weapon models serve as a basis for associated EMP threat assessmentsFor the purpose of EMP assessment it is convenient to group the threat weapons into the following five categories One single-stage fission weapons two single-stage boosted weapons three nominal two-stage thermonuclear weapons with yields up to a few megatons four two-stage thermonuclear weapons with yields over a few megatons and five special technology thermonuclear weaponsThe reason for this grouping and the threat weapons themselves will be discussed in closed session The EMP produced by these weapons is also a topic delegated largely to closed session

Specific warhead removal is verifiable

Davis et al 10 ldquoTechnical Steps to Support Nuclear Arsenal Downsizingrdquo American Physical Society Report Commitee Jay Davis Chair John Browne Patricia Lewis Carolyn Pura Allen Sessoms Tom Shea Francis Slakey Benn Tannenbaum Jim Tape John Taylor Peter D Zimmerman Feb 18 2010

As bilateral US-Russian nuclear stockpile reductions result in arsenals that no longer dwarf those of other nuclear-armed states further reductions will require working with scientists and negotiators from a broader range of countries At some point it may be useful to monitor warhead dismantlement in such a way that the specific model (eg W88) can be determined Template methods (matching a particular radiation signature) may be useful in addition to attribute measurements (ensuring that certain measured levels exceed defined limits in order to increase confidence in the contents) and may prove to be very attractive for some applications A distinctive template would be created for each model and individual samples would then be compared to the templates on file to confirm (or reject) a declared item The templates could include for example a combination of passive radiation signatures andor radiation signatures caused by subjecting an item to a stream of neutrons andor gamma rays

68

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT Verifiability

The US has specific missiles designed to lay down an EMP attack

Lewallen 2k John- Public Ocean Access Network ldquoThe Blackout Bombrdquo North Coast Express Spring 2000 httpsonicnet~doretkIssues00-03-SPRtheblackhtml

Any future global war is likely to begin with a few Blackout Bombs China Russia the U nited S tates and other nuclear powers have several nuclear missiles and perhaps weaponized satellites designed to lay down EMP over continent-size areas instantaneously While every nation on Earth is vulnerable to attack from the United States the United States is vulnerable indeed defenseless to a secret class of nuclear weapons which has captured the attention of the major nuclear powers--China Russia Britain France and the United States itself--for the past thirty-eight years

Missile removal is verifiable

Davis et al 10 ldquoTechnical Steps to Support Nuclear Arsenal Downsizingrdquo American Physical Society Report Commitee Jay Davis Chair John Browne Patricia Lewis Carolyn Pura Allen Sessoms Tom Shea Francis Slakey Benn Tannenbaum Jim Tape John Taylor Peter D Zimmerman Feb 18 2010

Recent monitoring and inspection practices affecting the United States and Russia focused on verifying the numbers and locations of launchers and delivery platforms (and hence deducing the maximum number of warheads that could be deployed on strategic delivery systems) Modest reductions in US and Russian stockpile numbers (eg 1500) may rely primarily on these existing practices while more significant reductions in total stockpiles (1000 or fewer) will likely require the use of more intrusive techniques to verify numbers of warheads If and when reductions in all nuclear arsenals are verified by multilateral agreements the techniques employed and the inspectors must guarantee international assurance of compliance

Unilateral willingness to verify is best- formal agreements fail

Bunn 2 Matthew- the Project on Managing the Atom (MTA) Belfer Center Harvard ldquoIntroduction Monitoring Nuclear Stockpiles and Reductionsrdquo NTI October 28 2002 httpwwwntiorge_researchcnwmmonitoringindexasp

Finally it is important to understand that while most formal US-Russian transparency initiatives have been stymied by continuing secrecy concerns and the lack of strong incentives for both governments to agree to them informal measures have created an absolutely unprecedented degree of openness transparency and cooperation between the two nuclear weapons complexes As a result of a broad range of scientific and threat-reduction cooperation US and Russian experts have now visited most of the key facilities in the other nationrsquos nuclear weapons complexes and there has been a huge increase in the level of detailed understanding of what goes on at individual facilities and buildings within these complexes Some threat reduction programs have formalized this transparency with specific agreements regulating access to sensitive sites Both sides (particularly the United States ) have also unilaterally revealed a wealth of information about their nuclear stockpiles and complexes in both published reports and other sources The level of openness that now exists would have been completely unthinkable as recently as early 1994 (when it was still true that Russia was refusing to allow US experts direct access for implementing security upgrades at any facility in Russia where actual HEU or plutonium existed)

69

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Verifiability Extensions

Specific weapons are designed for EMP strikes

Schneider 7 Mark- National Institute for Public Policy The Emerging EMP Threat to the United States United States Nuclear Strategy Forum No 6 November 2007

All nuclear weapons detonated at high altitude produce EMP but some types of nuclear weapons are designed specifically to be efficient at producing EMP In 2004 Clay Wilson of the Congressional Research Service reported that ldquoA HEMP [high altitude electromagnetic pulse] attack directed against the United States might involve a one-megaton nuclear warhead or a smaller warhead that is specially-designed [to produce EMP] using a burst several hundred miles above the mid-western states to affect computers on both coastsrdquo 3

Extension- Missile removal is verifiable

WSLF 2 ldquoBanning Ballistic Missilesrdquo Western States Legal Foundation Feb 1 2002 httpwwwwslfweborgspaceMCRbriefhtm

A ban on missile flight tests would be relatively easy to verify It should include a system of inspections to assure that civilian rocket launches do not conceal efforts to develop weapons delivery systems These inspections could make it more difficult to develop and deploy weapons systems that operate through or from space If the type of inspections appropriate for controlling ballistic missiles worked well it could provide the technical and political basis for more comprehensive agreements aimed at preventing the further militarization of space

Specific warheads and their composition can be verified

Davis et al 10 ldquoTechnical Steps to Support Nuclear Arsenal Downsizingrdquo American Physical Society Report Commitee Jay Davis Chair John Browne Patricia Lewis Carolyn Pura Allen Sessoms Tom Shea Francis Slakey Benn Tannenbaum Jim Tape John Taylor Peter D Zimmerman Feb 18 2010

The techniques that have received the most attention for the purposes of warhead or material verification involve passive gamma and neutron measurements Medium resolution gamma measurements (eg by sodium iodide (NaI) detectors) could be used to indicate the presence or absence of plutonium and to match weapon template signatures High-resolution gamma measurements (eg high-purity Germanium detectors) provide in addition the ability to determine isotopic ratios indicative of weapons grade plutonium and americium content thus revealing whether the plutonium is weapons grade and the time since the last americium separation In general neutron measurement methods ranging from simple neutron counting to more complex coincidence and multiplicity techniques have been used to determine plutonium massesMeasurements of some highly-enriched uranium (HEU) characteristics and material mass using specially-developed gamma measurement techniques have been shown to be possible under some carefully-controlled conditions It is likely that high confidence measurements of HEU characteristics will require the use of active interrogation techniques Experiments and demonstrations using a range of measurement systems ndash sodium iodide highpurity germanium and helium-3 detectors as well as neutron multiplicity counters ndash have been performed to determine the feasibility and applicability of these techniques for potential verification measures

70

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT CMR

The pentagon is no longer cares about EMPs

Timmerman 2 Kenneth R- director of the Foundation for Democracy in Iran 2006 Nobel Peace Prize Nominee ldquoUS Threatened With EMP Attackrdquo Feb 1 2002

Twenty years ago only the Soviet Union had the capability to launch an EMP attack on the United States by exploding a nuclear warhead 500 kilometers (310 miles) in space Pentagon planners spent billions of dollars protecting US military equipment against EMP during the Cold War But during the last decade the military has canceled many of those protection programs alleging an end to the threat of a Soviet nuclear strike And none of our civilian infrastructure is protected because of the high cost

71

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Politics Link Answers

Congress doesnrsquot care about minor operational changes like the plan

Woolf 7 Amy F Specialist in National Defense Congressional Research Service ldquoCongress And US Nuclear Weapons Review and Oversight of Policies and Programsrdquo The Nonproliferation Review (peer-reviewed) Volume 14 Issue 3 November 2007

The US Congress charged with overseeing US nuclear weapons policy and programs usually addresses such policies and programs through the annual authorization and appropriations process focusing mostly on questions of how many and what types of weapons the United States should deploy with little attention paid to questions about nuclear weapons strategy doctrine and policy The oversight process has brought about some significant changes in the plans for US nuclear weapons including the elimination of funding for the Robust Nuclear Earth Penetrator study and the shift of that funding into a study of the Reliable Replacement Warhead But with the focus on authorizations and appropriations along with the divided jurisdiction over nuclear weapons policy and programs in congressional committees Congress has not either recently or during the Cold War and post-Cold War eras conducted a more comprehensive review of US nuclear weapons strategy policy or force structure Changes in committee jurisdictions could affect the oversight process but as long as nuclear weapons policy and programs remain a relatively low priority for most members of Congress and the country at large it is unlikely that Congress will pursue such a comprehensive debate

No link- EMP weapons donrsquot have a constituency

Forstchen 8 William R PhD Author of ldquoOne Second Afterrdquo httpwwwonesecondaftercompbwp_d10e87d9wp_d10e87d9html

EMP has managed to ldquostealthrdquo its way on to the highly dangerous list and few except for a small number of personnel in the Pentagon various research labs and men like Congressman Bartlett (R MD) who heads the Congressional Investigative Committee on EMP are aware of it For one it has a certain ldquosci-firdquo sound to it which makes many dismiss the potential before the discussion has even started Second the only way to truly evaluate the threat and demonstrate it is to detonate a nuclear weapon something we have not done since the full test ban went into effect decades ago It is therefore not ldquovisiblerdquo to us the way another airliner smashing into a skyscraper is now forever imprinted on our national psyche feared and prepared for Next with all the competing issues and threats in the world EMP simply does not have a ldquoconstituencyrdquo of influence Only a few members of Congress our military and scientific community are issuing the warnings There are no Hollywood stars placing themselves in front of cameras with this as their cause the few times it has been used in popular movies it has been portrayed inaccurately often absurdly

72

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Politics Link Answers

Congress doesnrsquot care

Matthews 8 William ldquoLittle Congressional Interest in EMP Threatrdquo Defense News Jul 10 2008Once again a congressional commission is warning that an electromagnetic pulse attack against the United States could wipe out the nations electronics-dependent civilization And again hardly anyone is listening Only a handful of the 60 members of the House Armed Services Committee showed up for a hearing on the EMP threat July 10 and most didnt stick around for the whole two-hour sessionIts obvious that theres not very much interest in it said Rep Roscoe Bartlett R-Md who asked for the hearing There are lots of seats vacant he lamented

Failure to reduce the threat of EMP strikes on the US will kill Obamarsquos capital

Kessler 9 Ronald- chief Washington correspondent of Newsmaxcom ldquoObama Democrats Expose US to EMP Attackrdquo Newsmax 17 Aug 2009

Despite polls showing that Americans overwhelmingly support missile defense President Obamarsquos administration already has cut the Pentagonrsquos missile defense budget by $14 billion or 15 percent If an EMP attack occurs we will have the Democrats to blame But without voting machines or any form of communication Americans who survive will not be able to vote them out of office

Plan prevents capital draining disputes for Obama

Hitchens 9 Theresa- Director UN Institute for Disarmament Research ldquoSaving Space Threat Proliferation and Mitigationrdquo International Commission on Nuclear Non-proliferation and Disarmament May 19 2009

While it remains to be seen what direction the new administration of President Barak Obamamdashwho spoke out against space weapons during the presidential campaign mdashwill take regarding national security in space (as well as regarding overall relations with China) it cannot be denied that the issue of how best to approach protection of space assets remains in mid-2009 a major issue in the domestic US debate over national security

73

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Politics Link Turn

Plan is a win for Obama- bolsters his agenda

New York Times 9 Christopher Drew October 28 2009 lthttpwwwnytimescom20091029business29defensehtml_r=1gt

When the Obama administration proposed canceling a host of expensive weapons systems last spring some of the military industryrsquos allies in Congress assumed as they had in the past that they would have the final say But as the president signed a $680 billion military policy bill on Wednesday it was clear that he had succeeded in paring back nearly all of the programs and setting a tone of greater restraint than the Pentagon had seen in many years Now the question is whether Mr Obama can sustain that push next year when the midterm elections are likely to make Congress more resistant to further cuts and job losses White House officials say Mr Obama took advantage of a rare political moment to break through one of Washingtonrsquos most powerful lobbies and trim more weapons systems than any president had in decades Rahm Emanuel the White House chief of staff said Wednesday that the plan was to threaten a veto over a prominent program mdash in this case the F-22 fighter jet mdash ldquoto show we were willing to expend political capital and could win on something that people thought we could notrdquo Once the Senate voted in July to stop buying F-22s Mr Emanuel said in an interview that success ldquoreverberated downrdquo to help sustain billions of dollars of cuts in Army modernization missile defense and other programs Mr Emanuel said the strategy emerged when the defense secretary Robert M Gates told Mr Obama they needed to ldquoshake up sacred cows and be seen as taking on fightsrdquo Military analysts said Mr Gates a holdover from the Bush administration also aimed at the most bloated programs And Senator John McCain of Arizona the former Republican presidential candidate who has criticized the Pentagonrsquos cost overruns provided Mr Obama with political cover to make the cuts without being seen as soft on the military ldquoThey probably get an lsquoArsquo from the standpoint of their success on their major initiativesrdquo said Fred Downey a former Senate aide who is now vice president for national security at the Aerospace Industries Association ldquoThey probably got all of them but one or maybe two and thatrsquos an extraordinarily high scorerdquo

Winners win

Pascal 9 Marc staff writer for The Moderate Voice 1052009 lthttpthemoderatevoicecom48571obamaE28099s-only-priority-get-re-electedgt

Many political leaders incorrectly confuse political capital with financial capital The first is a perpetually renewable commodity if used correctly and the latter is always finite no matter how much is amassed One cannot hoard political capital for some future battle that may or may not come It grows and shrinks directly as one uses it and it directly mirrors political fights taken and avoided Actually winning on certain core issues and major legislative battles helps increase political capital for future use But not using political capital causes it to dissolve rapidly Talking too much and never getting anything accomplished is a good recipe to dissipate valuable political capital

74

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT Geomagnetic Storms

Geomagnetic storms are predictable- prevention measures exist

PSEPC 2 Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness Canada ldquoGeomagnetic Storms - Reducing the Threat to Critical Infrastructure in Canadardquo 25 April 2002 httpwwwsolarstormsorgCanadaPipelineshtml

Preventative measures have been implemented to avoid events such as the 1989 Quebec blackout System operators in Canada have developed and implemented procedures to respond to these emergencies thereby reducing potential damage due to GICs Since 1989 Hydro-Quebec has spent more than $12 billion installing transmission line series capacitors These capacitors block GIC flow in order to prevent them from causing damage to the system Hydro-Quebec has also installed monitoring equipment that spots voltage fluctuations and immediately notifies operators so that they may redistribute the load to other parts of the network Additional protective measures include disconnecting the links between power grids desensitizing automatic control systems delaying power station maintenance and delaying the replacement of equipment Utilities are also relying on space weather forecasting to help remain operational during geomagnetic storms Operators can implement conservative operating procedures once they have received an advance warning of a storm threat

EMPs are too spontaneous- the protections fail

Survival 9 ldquoElectromagnetic Pulse (EMP) Review of One Second Afterrdquo Survival 2013 September 20 2009EMP is the energy surge that comes off a nuclear explosion If that explosion takes place in space say 300 miles above the surface we will feel only the tingling sensation thatrsquos similar to what we feel when lightning strikes nearby But all the electronics in the country will feel it and will be blown out The pulse travels down anything that serves as an antenna anything that is metal and fries all the equipment thatrsquos running Because the pulse is ldquofront-loadedrdquo therersquos no build-up or warning to allow surge protectors or circuit breakers to function It will stop cars dead in their tracks (unless yoursquore driving one of the 1965 or so models that the government wants to get off the road) and will do even more damage to airplanes (As many as a quarter million people who are flying at any given time would be killed immediately)

Geomagnetic storms pale in comparison to EMP strikes

Foster et al 8 ldquoReport of the Commission to Assess the Threat to the United States from Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP) Attackrdquo April 2008 Dr John S Foster Jr Mr Earl Gjelde Dr William R Graham (Chairman) Dr Robert J Hermann Mr Henry (Hank) M Kluepfel Gen Richard L Lawson USAF (Ret) Dr Gordon K Soper Dr Lowell L Wood Jr Dr Joan B Woodard

Geomagnetic storms represent an approximation to an E3-induced voltage effect The experience to date is of events that may be orders of magnitude smaller in scope and less severe than that expected from an EMP mdash although the Commission has also investigated the impact of a 100-year superstorm The induced geomagnetic superstorm currents in the transmission lines will cause hundreds of high voltage transformers to saturate creating a severe reactive load in the power system leading to voltage collapse in the affected area and damage to elements of the transmission system The nature of this threat did not allow for experimental testing of the E3 effect so this historical record is the best information on the effect

75

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT Geomagnetic Storms

Three times the damage

Foster et al 8 ldquoReport of the Commission to Assess the Threat to the United States from Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP) Attackrdquo April 2008 Dr John S Foster Jr Mr Earl Gjelde Dr William R Graham (Chairman) Dr Robert J Hermann Mr Henry (Hank) M Kluepfel Gen Richard L Lawson USAF (Ret) Dr Gordon K Soper Dr Lowell L Wood Jr Dr Joan B Woodard

The late time EMP or E3 follows E1 and E2 and may last for a minute or more The E3 pulse is similar in a great many respects to geomagnetic effects induced by solar storms Solar storms and their impacts on electrical systems with long lines have been thoroughly evaluated and are known to cause serious damage to major electrical system components at much lower levels than the reasonably possible E3 impact This damage has been incurred in spite of functioning in-place protective systems Given the preceding E1 and E2 pulse damage to the protective systems and other system components damage from E3 to unprotected major system components is virtually assured

EMPs worse- no ozone protection and cascading effects

Forstchen 8 William R PhD Author of ldquoOne Second Afterrdquo httpwwwonesecondaftercompbwp_d10e87d9wp_d10e87d9html

EMP is shorthand for Electro Magnetic Pulse It is a rather unusual and frightening by-product when a nuclear bomb is detonated above the earthrsquos atmosphere We all know that our atmosphere and the magnetic field which surrounds our planet is a thin layer which not only keeps us alive but also protects us from dangerous radiation from the sun On a fairly regular basis there are huge solar storms on the sunrsquos surface which emit powerful jets of deadly radiation If not for the protective layer of our atmosphere and magnetic field those storms would fry us At times though the storm is so power that enough disruptive energy reaches the earthrsquos surface that it drowns out radio waves and even shorts electrical power grids this happened several years back in CanadaView the detonation of a nuclear bomb two hundred miles straight up as the same thing but infinitely more powerful since it is so close by As the bomb explodes it emits a powerful wave of gamma rays As this energy release hits the upper atmosphere it creates a electrical disturbance know as the Compton Effect The intensity is magnified View it as a small pebble rolling down a slope hitting a larger one setting that in motion until finally you have an avalanche

EMP strikes are frontloaded- no protection

Forstchen 8 William R PhD Author of ldquoOne Second Afterrdquo httpwwwonesecondaftercompbwp_d10e87d9wp_d10e87d9html

Wouldnrsquot circuit breakers and surge protectors stop it This is where the effect of EMP starts to get complex All electricity travels of course at the speed of light The circuit breakers that are built into our electrical system or the ones you buy to plug your own computer in to are designed to ldquoreadrsquo the flow of current If it suddenly exceeds a certain level the breaker snaps and takes you off line thus protecting everything beyond it More than a few of us have found out that when you buy a cheap surge protector for ten or twenty bucks sure it will snap off but the surge has already passed through and fried your expensive pla sma television or new computer Unlike a lightning strike or other power surge an EMP surge is ldquofront loadedrdquo Meaning it doesnrsquot do a build up for a couple of mirco-seconds allowing enough time for the circuit breaker to ldquoreadrdquo that trouble is on the way and shut down It comes instead like a wall of energy without any advance wave building up as a warning It therefore slams through nearly all commercial and even military surge protectors already in place and is past the ldquosafety barrierrdquo and into the delicate electronics before the system has time to react

76

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT Blackout Alt Causes

Alt causes to blackout are not as severe

Foster et al 8 Chairman of the Board of GKN Aerospace Transparency Systems ldquoReport of the Commission to Assess the Threat to the United States from Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP) Attackrdquo April 2008 Dr John S Foster Jr Mr Earl Gjelde Dr William R Graham (Chairman) Dr Robert J Hermann Mr Henry (Hank) M Kluepfel Gen Richard L Lawson USAF (Ret) Dr Gordon K Soper Dr Lowell L Wood Jr Dr Joan B Woodard

Distinctions Past electric power blackouts provide a baseline for assessing the impact of an EMP attack on the power grid as discussed previously However there are several important factors that distinguish the EMP collapse scenario from these historical experiences 1048715 In the historical power system outages only one or a few critical elements within an entire system have been debilitated For example a power generation facility may trip because a surge of current is unexpectedly presented through a fault from a particular load Yet a substantial portion of the system may well be rendered out of service as the disruption triggers a series of cascading failures each instigating the next failure (eg first a generator trips then the frequency sags and a load trips off or a transmission line trips out with its associated loads which in turn causes the frequency to overrun and another generator trips out and it continues to oscillate until the interconnected system comes down) In the case of an EMP attack elements within many critical facility components are likely to be damaged or disrupted simultaneously over a relatively broad geographic area thus creating an almost certain cascading collapse of the remaining elements Similarly while lightning might strike a single plant transmission line or large load causing it to trip out lightning has not hit multiple locations spread over a very wide area of the system with sufficient intensity and hitting all simultaneously to the extent that would be representative of an EMP attack 1048715 During historical outages the telecommunications system and associated control systems have continued to function This provides the system operators with eyes and ears to know what was damaged where damage occurred and in some cases the range of damage While the power system may still come down it is more possible to take protective measures to minimize damage and impact in order to effectuate rapid restoration The communications and control systemsrsquo functionality are at high risk of disruption and damage themselves during an EMP attack A minimum communications capability is needed to support immediate responses to isolate parts for continued operation and to implement necessary measures to restore the electrical system 1048715 In the early stages of the EMP attack even before the disruptions could be sensed and trips could occur that would lead to collapse some or many of the protective devices will be damaged that have ensured critical system components are safe to allow fast recovery As a result some and perhaps much of the electrical system would not be able to protect itself from the effects of multiple simultaneous and cascading failures Widespread damage to the generation transmission and distribution infrastructures and equipment are probable Rather than simply restoring power to an intact infrastructure with only a very few damaged components the recovery task would be to replace an extensively damaged system under very difficult and decaying circumstances and then proceeding to restoration 1048715 The control systems would be damaged to some extent as opposed to remaining fully operational as in historical outages The operations and dispatch centers where the vast interconnected system is controlled and managed would probably have damaged and disrupted components the readings from the system would be fragmented and in many cases false or nonexistent and communication by whatever means would be difficult to impractical to impossible Control and knowledge would range from unreliable at best to simply nonexistent Finding what and where damage has occurred and getting it repaired would be very problematic in any reasonable time frame even within the control centers themselves let alone out over the vast network with millions of devices 1048715 Skilled labor for a massive and diverse repair effort is not currently available if allocated over a large geographic area with great numbers of components and devices to check and repair where necessary This scope of damage could cover perhaps 70 percent or possibly more of the continental United States as well as a significant part of Canadarsquos population This is far too large to bring in the limited skilled labor from very distant points outside the affected area in any reasonable time even if one could coordinate them and knew where to send them and they had the means to get there Thus the extensive support from nearby fringe areas used so effectively in historical outages is likely to be unavailable as a practical matter as they themselves would be affected The blackout resulting from Hurricane Katrina an event comparable to a small EMP attack overtaxed the ability of the Nation to quickly restore electric power a failure that contributed to the slow recovery of the afflicted region 1048715 Other infrastructures would be similarly impacted simultaneously with the electrical system such as transportation communication and even water and food to sustain crews The ability to find and get spare parts and components or purchase services would be severely hampered by lack of normal financial systems in addition to communication transportation and other factors The Hurricane Katrina blackout caused precisely such problems 1048715 Fuel supplies for the power generation would be interrupted First the SCADA and DCS systems used in delivery of the fuel would be adversely impacted In addition much of the fuel supply infrastructure is dependent upon the electrical system For example natural gas-fired plants (which make up such a large share of the domestic generation) would be rendered inoperable since their fuel is delivered just in time for use Coal plants have stockpiles that variously might be adequate for a week to a month The few remaining oil-fired plants similarly have a limited storage of fuel Nuclear plants would reasonably be expected to still have fuel but they would have to forego protective regulations to continue to operate Many renewable fueled resources would still have their fuel supply but EMP effects on controls may still render them inoperable

77

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT Alternative EMP forms

Nuclear EMPs affect the whole continental US Other HPMs only travel a mile

Wilson 8 Clay- Specialist in Technology and National Security Foreign Affairs Defense and Trade Division ldquoHigh Altitude Electromagnetic Pulse (HEMP) and High Power Microwave (HPM) Devices Threat Assessmentsrdquo Congressional Research Service March 26 2008

HEMP is produced when a nuclear weapon is detonated high above the Earthrsquos surface creating gamma-radiation that interacts with the atmosphere to create an intense electromagnetic energy field that is harmless to people as it radiates outward but which can overload computer circuitry with effects similar to but causing damage much more swiftly than a lightning strike6 The effects of HEMP became fully known to the United States in 1962 during a high-altitude nuclear test (code named ldquoStarfish Primerdquo) over the Pacific Ocean when radio stations and electronic equipment were disrupted 800 miles away throughout Hawaii The HEMP effect can span thousands of miles depending on the altitude and the design and power of the nuclear burst (a single device detonated at an appropriate altitude over Kansas reportedly could affect all of the continental United States)7 and can be picked up by metallic conductors such as wires or power cables acting as antennas to conduct the energy shockwave into the electronic systems of cars airplanes and communications equipment Description of High-Power Microwave HPM is a non-nuclear radio frequency energy field It can be produced as a weapon when a powerful chemical detonation is instantly transformed by a special coil device called a flux compression generator into a strong electromagnetic field of microwave energy8 Other methods such as powerful batteries can also be used to create a reusable HPM weapon HPM energy can be focused using a speciallyshaped antenna or emitter to produce effects similar to HEMP but only within a very limited range Unlike HEMP however HPM radiation is comprised of shorter wave forms at higher-frequencies which make it highly effective against electronic equipment and more difficult to harden against A mechanically simple suitcasesized device using a chemical explosive and special focusing antenna might theoretically produce a one-time instantaneous HPM shockwave that could disrupt many computers within a 1-mile range9 Also HPM energy at higher power levels (megawatts) and powered for a longer time interval reportedly could cause physical harm to persons near the source emitter or possibly in the path of a narrowly focused energy beam10

HPMs donrsquot effect a large area

Wilson 8 Clay- Specialist in Technology and National Security Foreign Affairs Defense and Trade Division ldquoHigh Altitude Electromagnetic Pulse (HEMP) and High Power Microwave (HPM) Devices Threat Assessmentsrdquo Congressional Research Service March 26 2008

Electromagnetic energy characterized as weapon potentially threatening to national security can be created as a pulse traditionally by two methods overhead nuclear burst and microwave emission High-Altitude Electromagnetic Pulse (HEMP) is an instantaneous electromagnetic energy field produced in the atmosphere by the power and radiation of a nuclear explosion and that is damaging to electronic equipment over a very wide area depending on the design of the nuclear device and altitude of the burst High-Power Microwave (HPM) electromagnetic energy can be produced as an instantaneous pulse created through special electrical equipment that transforms battery power or powerful chemical reaction or explosion into intense microwaves that are very damaging to electronics within a much smaller area

78

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT Protective Measures

The blast zaps through hardened electronics

Wilson 8 Clay- Specialist in Technology and National Security Foreign Affairs Defense and Trade Division ldquoHigh Altitude Electromagnetic Pulse (HEMP) and High Power Microwave (HPM) Devices Threat Assessmentsrdquo Congressional Research Service March 26 2008

Electronic equipment may be hardened by surrounding it with protective metallic shielding which routes damaging electromagnetic fields away from highly sensitive electrical components This method known as Faraday cage protection is traditionally used to protect electronic equipment from a lightning strike However power surges HEMP or HPM weapons could possibly involve peak currents of tens of millions of amps which can pass through a protective Faraday cage Additionally equipment placed within a Faraday cage may also be made vulnerable by any wires running into to the cage which can conduct the electromagnetic shockwave into the equipment Depending on the power level involved points of entry into the shielded cages can sometimes be protected from electromagnetic pulse by using specially designed surge protectors special wire termination procedures screened isolated transformers spark gaps or other types of specially-designed electrical filters Critical systems may also be protected by increasing the number of backup units and by keeping these units dispersed and out of range of the electromagnetic pulse source emitter26

The second stage of the EMP blast eats through protective barriers

Wilson 8 Clay- Specialist in Technology and National Security Foreign Affairs Defense and Trade Division ldquoHigh Altitude Electromagnetic Pulse (HEMP) and High Power Microwave (HPM) Devices Threat Assessmentsrdquo Congressional Research Service March 26 2008

A high altitude nuclear explosion (that creates HEMP) produces three major energy components that arrive in sequence and which have measurably different effects that can be cumulatively damaging to electronic equipment The first energy component is the initial energy shockwave which lasts about one microsecond and is similar to extremely intense static electricity that can overload circuitry for every electronic device that is within line of sight of the burst A secondary energy component then arrives which has characteristics that are similar to a lightning strike By itself this second energy component might not be an issue for some critical infrastructure equipment if anti-lightning protective measures are already in place However the rise time of the first component is so rapid and intense that it can destroy many protective measures allowing the second component to further disrupt the electronic equipment The third energy component is a longer-lasting magnetic signal from about one microsecond to one full second in duration This geomagnetic signal causes an effect that is damaging primarily to long-lines electronic equipment A localized magnetic effect builds up throughout the length of the transmission lines and then quickly collapses producing a magnetohydrodynamic (MHD) ldquoheaverdquo or ldquolate-timerdquo power surge that overloads equipment connected to the power and telecommunications infrastructure This latetime effect adds to the initial HEMP effect and systems connected to long-lines power and communications systems may be further disrupted by the combined effects Smaller isolated systems do not collect so much of this third energy component and are usually disrupted only by the first energy component of HEMP

79

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT Protective Measures

Commercial surge protectors will fail

Wilson 8 Clay- Specialist in Technology and National Security Foreign Affairs Defense and Trade Division ldquoHigh Altitude Electromagnetic Pulse (HEMP) and High Power Microwave (HPM) Devices Threat Assessmentsrdquo Congressional Research Service March 26 2008

Some assert that little has been done by the private sector to protect against the threat from electromagnetic pulse and that commercial electronic systems in the United States could be severely damaged by either HEMP or smaller-scale HPM8 Commercial electronic surge arresters used for lightning strikes reportedly do not clamp fast enough to protect against the instantaneous effects of electromagnetic pulse9 In March 2007 a survey of state Adjutants General who oversee National Guard units throughout the country found that most state-based emergency responders are not actively preparing against an attack on the United States by electromagnetic pulse The survey entitled Missile Defense and the Role of the States was conducted jointly by the Anchorage-based Institute of the North and the Claremont Institute of Claremont California Survey questions were sent to Adjutants General of all 50 states with more than half responding Although 96 of state Adjutants General indicated significant concern over an EMP attack the majority had done little or no analysis of the effects of an overhead EMP attack and little or no training or preparation to harden electronic equipment None of the Adjutants General surveyed indicated that they were actively involved in a formal planning process for response to an EMP attack10

80

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT Low Altitude Nuclear Explosions

Low altitude nuclear explosions do no cause any of the dangerous EMP effects

Johnston 9 Robert Wm- PhD in physics from UT-Dallas ldquoHigh-altitude nuclear explosionsrdquo 28 January 2009

Several effects are relatively unique to high altitude bursts Electromagnetic pulse (EMP) is important only for high altitude bursts For such detonations ionization

of the upper atmosphere can produce a brief intense pulse of radio frequency radiation which can damage or disrupt electronic devices For explosions above most of the atmosphere EMP can affect large areas

Ionization of the atmosphere from explosions in the atmosphere can interfere with radar and radio communications for short periods

Charged particles produced by explosions above the Earths atmosphere can be captured by the Earths magnetic field temporarily creating artificial radiation belts that can damage spacecraft and injure astronautscosmonauts in orbit

Ground attacks do not destroy satellites in LEO

Kueter 7 Jeff- president of the George C Marshall Institute ldquoChinarsquos Space Ambitions ndash And Oursrdquo The New Atlantis Number 16 Spring 2007 pp 7-22

There are numerous ways our space assets could be disabled or destroyed One likely threat to US space assets resides in a very terrestrial environment strikes against ground stations and launch systems Such attacks could constrain the usefulness of our existing satellites or reduce our ability to put new satellites into orbit But such ground attacks would probably at worst only diminish our ability to use our space assets since the data transmitted from orbiting satellites could in most cases be rerouted to other receiving stations on the ground and since our launch systems are (somewhat) redundant Of more concern is the possibility of attacks that directly destroy or damage satellites since they cannot at present be replaced quickly easily or cheaply Without a reorientation of the way it acquires space hardware the United States faces substantial barriers to repairing or replacing damaged satellites

81

Cornell HKHANE Aff

CP Theories

Conditionality is a voter and justifies the aff capturing the perma) Time skew ndash the aff has to invest time in multiple worlds that the neg can just kickb) Strat skew ndash the neg can run multiple contradictory worldviews that prevent us from making our best

argumentsc) in-depth education is impossible when the neg can just kick any position that we really press them on

PICs are a voting issuea) Strat skew- by mooting the 1AC they deprive the aff of a third of speech timeb) Vague plan writing- trading off with more educational negative groundc) Aff contradiction ndash PICs force us to argue against ourselves Our strike plans not verifiable card could

be used against usd) Inifintely regressive- justifying any single pic opens up the floodgates for menial one word pics

International fiat is abusive and a voting issue1 Not Predictable- There are an infinite number of international actors that the aff can never be ready to

debate2 Literature- The negative should have to produce solvency evidence that speaks to the exact mandates

of the plan in context to their international actor so that they can ensure predictability within the literature

3 Bad Advocacy Model- The judge is supposed to be a US policy maker not have international jurisdiction These types of counterplans make world peace CPs and utopia CPs legitimate

4 Infinitely regressive- they can have as many actors as they want as well as the ability to fiat the object of resolution That allows them to literally fiat out our advantages and win on a small risk of disads meaning debate is never fair or predictable

5 International organizations are uniquely abusive- they compromise multiple countries including the US which makes them plan-plus and not competitive because US action is involved

82

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT Hardening CP

Perm do both

CP alone signals a new race and causes escalation

Lewallen 2 John- Political Science at Whitman University organizer of the Nuclear Peace Action Group Fulbright Scholarship recipient Public Ocean Access Network ldquoHigh-Altitude Nuclear Warrdquo Nuclear Press p48

If a US national effort to defend vital systems against nuclear EMP attack is done in the context of moving away from national missile defense and space weapons in general and toward cooperation for disarmament and non-proliferation of nuclear weapons with Russia China and other nations it will be viewed by US adversaries as a prudent defensive move to protect American civilization However if the United States starts to harden civilian electronics against EMP in the current context of a military domination of space and invulnerability to missile attack it will send an aggressive and offensive signal that the US is preparing to fight World War Three This is a war we well all lose

Guidelines will not be implemented

Sirak 4 Michael- JDW Staff Reporter ldquoUS vulnerable to EMP attackrdquo Janersquos Defence Weekly 26 July 2004While the US military has grown increasingly dependent on computers electronics and information systems it has relaxed requirements for EMP-hardened systems since the end of the Cold War and its overall record of adherence to its guidelines for such robust equipment has been spotty they said This trend continues in the wrong direction the panel noted Similarly the US civilian critical infrastructure is not adequately prepared to deal with the effects of an EMP attack according to the panel which is known formally as the Commission to Assess the Threat to the United States from Electromagnetic Pulse Attack Congress created the panel in 2000 out of concern that this issue was not receiving enough attention

Even CP protects military infrastructure the military will be undermined because they rely on commercial electronics

Wilson 8 Clay- Specialist in Technology and National Security Foreign Affairs Defense and Trade Division ldquoHigh Altitude Electromagnetic Pulse (HEMP) and High Power Microwave (HPM) Devices Threat Assessmentsrdquo Congressional Research Service March 26 2008

The US military has adopted a policy where commercial electronic equipment is now used extensively in support of complex US weapons systems For example a large percentage of US military communications during Operation Iraqi Freedom was reportedly carried by commercial satellites and much military administrative information is currently routed through the civilian Internet43 Many commercial communications satellites particularly those in low earth orbit reportedly may degrade or cease to function shortly after a high altitude nuclear explosion44 However some observers believe that possible HEMP and HPM vulnerabilities of military information systems are outweighed by the benefits gained through access to innovative technology and increased communications flexibility that come from using state-of-the-art electronics and from maintaining connections to the civilian Internet and satellite systems

Bright 2 Melanie ldquoHigh-Altitude Nuclear Explosions Blind Deaf And Dumbrdquo Janes Defence Weekly October 23 2002 httpwwwglobalsecurityorgorgnews2002nuke_explosionhtm

The most obvious solution to HANEs is to harden civilian satellites In fact this is not an option with current technology More shielding means more weight

83

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT Hardening CP

Hardening sends threatening signals

Lewallen 99 John- Public Ocean Access Network ldquoThe Blackout Bomb What It Means To Yourdquo httpnonuclearnettheblackoutbombhtm

However I respectfully disagree with Dr Woods recommendation that any civilian hardening to protect us from EMP be done After a flirtation with civil defense and bomb shelters Americans have realized that nuclear attack against the United States is not something they are willing to prepare for because there is no rational way to prepare for it I believe Russia China and the United States form a Nuclear Triangle with constant low-to high-key nuclear weapons confrontation in the air If we start hardening our civilian infrastructure to withstand EMP it will signal to the Russians and Chinese that we are moving toward the brink of nuclear war

CP links to politics

Chisholm 5 Patrick ldquoProtect our electronics against EMP attackrdquo Christian Science Monitor December 19 2005

It is a thorny question as to whether the FCC should revise its standards to require electronics manufacturers to build in EMP protection This could be prohibitively expensive for the manufacture of individual components But businesses and government agencies should install EMP protection at the system level (This also would provide protection against other electromagnetic disturbances such as lightning)

84

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT NMD CP

Lewallen 2 John- Political Science at Whitman University organizer of the Nuclear Peace Action Group Fulbright Scholarship recipient Public Ocean Access Network ldquoHigh-Altitude Nuclear Warrdquo Nuclear Press p9-10

Dr Graham noted that a nuclear missile could have ldquosympatheticrdquo or ldquosalvagerdquo fusing which means it could be detonated when attacked by a missile defense system In other words US national missile defense if effective could cause a high-altitude nuclear EMP burst

Lewallen 2 John- Political Science at Whitman University organizer of the Nuclear Peace Action Group Fulbright Scholarship recipient Public Ocean Access Network ldquoHigh-Altitude Nuclear Warrdquo Nuclear Press Pg45The Chinese weapon to trump the National Missile Defense is a missile satellite or fractional orbiting nuclear bomb either intended for high-altitude nuclear EMP or fused to detonate when attacked by a hit-to-kill National Missile Defense system As noted by William Graham at the Weldon Hearings ldquoone of the ways an offensive nuclear weapon on a missile can be armed is in what is called a sympathetic or a salvage fusing mode so that even if you intercepted above the atmosphere before it reaches its target once it knows it is being attacked once the offensive nuclear warhead knows it is being attacked its fusing system may choose to detonate itself there to get at least the EMP and space radiation effect of the weaponrdquoIn short Clintonrsquos hit-to-kill National Missile Defense if effective could cause high-altitude nuclear explosions Laser missile defense systems in earlier stages of research and development are coming to be focused on shooting down missiles in their boost phase before they achieve high altitude The Russians and Chinese are very unlikely to allow effective boost-phase missile attack systems to be set up by the United StatesAll attempts by the United States or any other nuclear power to develop homeland missile defense systems suffer from three fatal flaws First counter-measures to any system can be developed much more cheaply than the system itself Secondly missile defense systems will take years to deploy at best while the Russians and Chinese have high-altitude and low-altitude nuclear weapons deployed and ready to strike the United States nowThirdly a credibly effective national missile defense of the United States poses much greater threat of nuclear missile attack against the US than do the incredibly ineffective systems now publicly visible The imminent deployment of a missile defense system that would work (or that an adversary believes would work or even believes that the United States commanders believe would work) poses Russia or China with an ugly choice submit to US military domination or launch a preemptive nuclear strike against the US before its defenses are set up

Doesnrsquot solve spaceLewallen 2 John- Political Science at Whitman University organizer of the Nuclear Peace Action Group Fulbright Scholarship recipient Public Ocean Access Network ldquoHigh-Altitude Nuclear Warrdquo Nuclear Press Pg33On Feb 4 2001 Sergei Ivanov Russian President Putinrsquos closest military advisor got up at a Munich meeting of defense ministers from many nations and said that any US national missile defense system would by definition abolish the 1972 Antiballistic Missile Treaty (ABM)ldquoAndrdquo Mr Ivanov added ldquothe destruction of the ABM treaty we are quite confident will result in the annihilation of the whole structure of strategic stability and create prerequisites for a new arms race ndash including one in spacerdquo

85

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT PAROS CP

Perm do both Curbing Chinese space ambitions is a prerequisite for a successful PAROS

Hitchens 9 Theresa- Director UN Institute for Disarmament Research ldquoSaving Space Threat Proliferation and Mitigationrdquo International Commission on Nuclear Non-proliferation and Disarmament May 19 2009

Finally the test also reverberated in the diplomatic arena calling into question the credibility of Chinarsquos longstanding efforts to push forward a treaty on the Prevention of an Arms Race in Outer Space (PAROS) and threatening to further weaken already shaky chances for negotiations on such a treaty to commence at the Conference on Disarmament (CD) in Geneva Disagreement on starting PAROS negotiations had been at the center of the CDrsquos 12-year standstill blocking the acceptance of a formal program of work and most specifically preventing negotiations on a Fissile Material Cutoff Treaty (FMCT)mdashdue to the standoff between the US and China on whether one set of talks should go forward without the other Although Russia and China dropped the demand for simultaneous negotiations in 2003 (instead calling for ldquodiscussionsrdquo of PAROS) at the time the Bush administration was not interested in a deal on either FMCT or PAROS With the May 29 agreement by the CD on a new program of work that includes both FMCT negotiations and PAROS discussions progress toward nuclear disarmament and nonproliferation looking more achievable than it has in many years Certainly this momentous shift is largely due to the dramatic change in US policy emerging from the Obama administration Nonetheless there remain major obstacles to a PAROS treaty (elaborated below)

86

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT Asteroids PIC

Quantitatively even if we only win 11000 probability for the solvency deficit it outweighs the risk of an asteroid hitting Earth even assuming the nuclear weapon works

Anissimov 9 [Michael Media Director for the Singularity Institute and Fundraising Director North America for the Lifeboat Foundation consultant for a variety of future-oriented non-profit organizations and for-profit companies including the Methuselah Foundation Center for Responsible Nanotechnology and Kurzweil Technologies ldquoEurekalert How to deflect asteroids and save the Earthrdquo Thursday Apr 16 httpwwwacceleratingfuturecommichaelblog200904eurekalert-how-to-deflect-asteroids-and-save-the-earth]

The asteroid risk is a great one to get people acquainted with the concept of catastrophic risk in general because it is statistically pinned down very well However according to some calculations the risk of a civilization-ending asteroid hitting Earth in the next 100 years is only 15000 leading to a 1500000 annual probability Say we give a 1500 annual probability estimate of the end of civilization due to nuclear war (Seems like quite the underestimate) According to standard cost-benefit analysis we should assign roughly 1000 times more importance to the task of minimizing the chance of catastrophic nuclear war than to deflecting asteroids We may see some common miscalculations on this score as asteroids are new and exciting and nuclear war is the same boring old risk that has been around for over half a century

PICs are a voting issuee) Strat skew- by mooting the 1AC they deprive the aff of a third of speech timef) Vague plan writing- trading off with more educational negative groundg) Aff contradiction ndash PICs force us to argue against ourselves Our strike plans not verifiable card could

be used against ush) Inifintely regressive- justifying any single pic opens up the floodgates for menial one word pics

Conditionality is a voter and justifies the aff capturing the permd) Time skew ndash the aff has to invest time in multiple worlds that the neg can just kicke) Strat skew ndash the neg can run multiple contradictory worldviews that prevent us from making our best

argumentsf) in-depth education is impossible when the neg can just kick any position that we really press them on

87

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT Japan Rearm

Japan likes the plan ndash they think US EMP attacks would damage Japan

Birdnow 6 Timothy contributor to American Daily Review writer for The American Thinker ldquoEMP and the Unfought Victoryrdquo July 1 httpwwwamericanthinkercom200607emp_and_the_unfought_victoryhtml

Couple an EMP attack on the West Coast with a terrorist strike and you have a recipe for chaos Here is one simple scenario send men into the CaliforniaArizonaNevada scrubland and light fires Without aircraft or water those fires could engulf the entire west This would be an easy lowmdashtech way to maximize damage while keeping operational costs to a minimum Of course the usual terrorist methods mdash bombs sniper attacks etc would also work well You could light natural gas wells oil wells and other combustible facilities on fire and watch the black smoke pour into the sky You could take steps to poison water sources so that people would die from drinking tainted water The point is nobody will be able to stop sleeper cells from acting after such an attack and the terrorists would know the best ways to strike to maximize their damage The real question is how would the United States respond to such an attack Will we launch a nuclear strike against North Korea killing millions and poisoning the entire region (including our friends in Japan and South Korea) An EMP attack against the DPRK would be the equivalent of embargoing gasoline on Sitting Bull they have so few high tech gadgets it would be pointless

88

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT Consult Japan

Japan says no ndash they fear an EMP attack

a) China

Pry 5 Dr Peter Vincent- EMP Commission Staff ldquoForeign Views Of Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP) Attackrdquo Before The United States Senate Subcommittee On Terrorism Technology And Homeland Security March 8 2005 httpwwwendtimesreportcomEMP_attackhtml

Some foreign analysts judging from open source statements and writings appear to regard EMP attack as a legitimate use of nuclear weapons because EMP would inflict no or few prompt civilian casualties EMP attack appears to be a unique exception to the general stigma attached to nuclear employment by most of the international community in public statements Significantly even some analysts in Japan and Germanyndashnations that historically have been most condemnatory of nuclear and other weapons of mass destruction in official and unofficial forumsndashappear to regard EMP attack as morally defensible For example a June 2000 Japanese article in a scholarly journal citing senior political and military officials appears to regard EMP attack as a legitimate use of nuclear weapons ldquoAlthough there is little chance that the Beijing authorities would launch a nuclear attack which would incur the disapproval of the international community and which would result in such enormous destruction that it would impede postwar cleanup and policies a serious assault starting with the use of nuclear weapons which would not harm humans animals or property would be valid If a nuclear warhead was detonated 40 kilometers above Taiwan an electromagnetic wave would be propagated which would harm unprotected computers radar and IC circuits on the ground within a 100 kilometer radius and the weapons and equipment which depend on the communications and electronics technology whose superiority Taiwan takes pride in would be rendered combat ineffective at one stroke If they were detonated in the sky in the vicinity of Ilan the effects would also extend to the waters near Yonakuni [in Okinawa] so it would be necessary for Japan too to take care Those in Taiwan having lost their advanced technology capabilities would end up fighting with tactics and technology going back to the 19th century They would inevitably be at a disadvantage with the PLA and its overwhelming military force superiorityrdquo (Su Tzu-yun Jadi 1 June 2000)

b) North Korea

Weldon 99 Curt Weldon A Representative From Pennsylvania Chairman Military Research And Development Subcommittee Electromagnetic Pulse Threats To US Military And Civilian Infrastructure House of Representatives Committee on Armed Services Military Research and Development Subcommittee Washington DC Thursday October 7 1999 httpcommdocshousegovcommitteessecurityhas280010000has280010_0HTM

The EMP threat may have acquired new and urgent relevance as the proliferation of nuclear weapons and missile technology accelerates North Korea for example is assessed as already having developed one or two atomic weapons and is on the verge of testing an Inter-Continental Ballistic Missiles (ICBM) capable of delivering a nuclear warhead to the United States North Korea already has missiles capable of delivering a nuclear warhead against US regional allies and US forces based in Japan and South Korea

89

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT Primacy DA

Primacy collapse is inevitable in the status quo- rogue states will achieve EMP capability that can decimate the US Their primacy good cards assume that the US will be the only country capable of a first strike And This is impossible because Primacy leads other nations to seek asymmetric warfighting tactics like EMP

Calleo 3 David P- Currently director of the European Studies Program and Professor of The Johns Hopkins University Taught at Brown Yale and Columbia ldquoEurope and America Different Geopolitical Wavelengthsrdquo Annual Foreign Policy Conference Heinrich Boumlll Stiftung - November 13th 2003

Military superiority is frequently vulnerable to what might be called the ldquoLaw of Asymmetrical Deterrencerdquo In the Cold War for example despite the huge nuclear arsenals of the superpowers anyone else with a ldquosecond-strikerdquo capability could have a reasonable deterrent with only a few hundred missiles Nothing has changed in that realm since the Soviet collapse ndash except that there are a few more nuclear powers Nuclear deterrence still seems a cheap way for the weak to counter the strong This seems true of weapons of mass destruction in general Not only are they relatively cheap equalizers but the presence of a superpower actively exercising its military superiority is a great inducement for others to acquire these equalizing weapons

EMP warfare shatters US primacy since the consequences are so huge and the US is the most vulnerable

Lewallen 2 John- Political Science at Whitman University organizer of the Nuclear Peace Action Group Fulbright Scholarship recipient Public Ocean Access Network ldquoHigh-Altitude Nuclear Warrdquo Nuclear Press Pg38

The United States has overwhelming military superiority and a gargantuan vulnerability to high-altitude nuclear EMP attack Russia and China have had several decades to fill their weapons bag with specialized nuclear EMP weapons and to prepare to sling them over the American homeland by missile by satellite or in a fractional orbiting bomb flung into orbit with a Scud or other short-range missile David knew that Goliath had a soft spot in his forehead just as the Russians and Chinese are perfectly aware that the United States in the words of Representative Weldon is the ldquomost vulnerable nation on Earth to electronic warfarerdquo

Primacy via EMP weapons makes nuclear apocalypse inevitable

Lewallen 2 John- Political Science at Whitman University organizer of the Nuclear Peace Action Group Fulbright Scholarship recipient Public Ocean Access Network ldquoHigh-Altitude Nuclear Warrdquo Nuclear Press Pg43

If it comes the next global war almost certainly will begin with high-altitude nuclear EMP Anything done or refrained from to reduce international conflict and promote international cooperation will help humanity avoid the awesome setback of global war The nation-state system itself is perhaps the most dangerous factor auguring high-altitude nuclear war It is perhaps amazing that we humans have gone the past fifty-five years without anyone blowing up a nuclear bomb How much longer can we tickle the dragonrsquos tail before the fundamental flaw of competing armies with nuclear weapons finishes us off The United States fond of calling itself the worldrsquos only superpower has the same tendency as past military empires (although not a self-acknowledged empire) a strong and perhaps inevitable drive to move from world preeminence to world domination The US military-industrial complex is set up to endlessly conceive design produce and deploy new strategic weaponry

90

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT Primacy DA

Extend our CDI and Schorr evidence that EMP primacy causes dangerous crisis escalation and accidental nuclear war

Nuclear primacy causes uncontrollable crisis dynamics

Schwarz 6 Benjamin- literary editor and the national editor of The Atlantic foreign policy analyst at the RAND Corporation ldquoThe Perils of Primacyrdquo The Atlantic JanuaryFebruary httpwwwtheatlanticcomdoc200601primacy

Lieber and Press emphasize that their analysis doesnt prove that a US first strike would succeed but it highlights a development that is grave if only because its one that prudent planners in Russia and China who conduct similar analyses are no doubt already surmising that their countries can no longer be confident of having a viable deterrent Surely adding to their alarm is the realization that the nuclear imbalance troubling enough already will only grow in the coming years Washingtons withdrawal from the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty and its concomitant pursuit of a national missile-defense system will greatly enhance its offensive nuclear capabilities because although critics of missile defense correctly argue that it could never shield America from a massive full-scale nuclear attack it could quite plausibly deal with the very few missiles an adversary might have left to deploy after a US first strike Whats more the United States is actively pursuing a series of initiativesmdashincluding further advances in anti-submarine and anti-satellite warfare in missile accuracy and potency and in wide-area remote sensing aimed at finding relocatable targets such as mobile ICBMsmdashthat will render Russias and Chinas nuclear forces all the more vulnerable To be sure Americas emerging nuclear hegemony could bring benefits including potential leverage vis-agrave-vis our superpower counterparts in such areas of competition as the Balkans and Taiwan It will also force China to divert defense resources from its power-projection efforts in East Asia (This however would be both a blessing and a curse We should expect a new prolonged and intense nuclear arms race Lieber and Press conclude) But whether or not America has deliberately pursued the ability to win a nuclear conflict that capability will increase the risk of great-power war US-Chinese relations are bound to be edgy or worse for the foreseeable future and although relations between Washington and Moscow are nowhere near their Cold War nadir actual and potential strains remain formidable Each country has nuclear-armed missiles that can be delivered against the other within minutesmdashand in Americas nuclear-war plans the overwhelming number of targets remain inside Russia Most important any shift in the nuclear balance itself will engender a volatility that could cause seemingly small conflicts between countries to quickly spiral Confronted with the growing nuclear imbalance Russia and China will be forced to try to redress it but given Americas advantages that effort as Lieber and Press note could take well over a decade Until a nuclear stalemate is restoredmdashif it ever ismdashMoscow and Beijing will surely buy deterrence by spreading out their nuclear forces decentralizing their command-and-control systems and implementing launch on warning policies If more than half a century of analyzing nuclear dangers and crisis stability has taught us anything it is that all these steps can cause crises to escalate uncontrollably They could trigger the unauthorized or accidental use of nuclear weapons this could lead to inadvertent nuclear war American military preponderance now embraces the entire spectrum of conflict as Pentagon planners put it That is to say were miles ahead of everyone in every type of warfare But if that preponderance is leading to a world in which Russian and Chinese launch commanders are fingering nuclear hair triggers the game may not be worth the candle Without any public scrutiny or debate the United States has emerged as the nuclear hegemon in possession of a destabilizing first-strike capability It does not matter whether this has come about by accident or design or whether Americas motives are worthy or malign the condition itself is the problem The ramifications of this state of affairs are of the gravest significance to Americas securitymdashand the worlds Its time for scrutiny and debate to begin

91

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT Damage Limitation

The ability to engage in various levels of nuclear war is key to damage limitation

Gray amp Payne 80 Colin S and Keith ldquoVictory is Possiblerdquo Foreign Policy Summer 1980 pp 14-27Nuclear war is unlikely to be an essentially meaningless terminal event Instead it is likely to be waged to coerce the Soviet Union to give up some recent gain Thus a president must have the ability not merely to end a war but to end it favorably The United States would need to be able to persuade desperate and determined Soviet leaders that it has the capability and the determination to wage nuclear war at even higher levels of violence until an acceptable outcome is achieved For deterrence to function during a war each side would have to calculate whether an improved outcome is possible through further escalation An adequate US deterrent posture is one that denies the Soviet Union any plausible hope of success at any level of strategic conflict offers a likely prospect of Soviet defeat and offers a reasonable chance of limiting damage to the United States Such a deterrence posture is often criticized as contributing to the arms race and causing strategic instability because it would stimulate new Soviet deployments However during the 1970s the Soviet Union showed that its weapon development and deployment decisions are not dictated by American actions Western understanding of what determines Soviet defense procurement is less than perfect but it is now obvious that Soviet weapon decisions cannot be explained with reference to any simple action-reaction model of arms-race dynamics In addition highly survivable US strategic forces should insure strategic stability by denying the Soviets an attractive first-strike target set

EMP warfare undermines our ability to perform limited nuclear war

Burnham 83 David- co-director of the Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse (TRAC) ldquoUS Fears One Bomb Could Cripple The Nationrdquo The New York Times

Another reason for the recent concern in the Government is the adoption by both the Carter and Reagan Administrations of a nuclear strategy that includes the possibility that this country might have to wage a prolonged limited nuclear war For a nation to conduct such a war military analysts stress much would depend on its ability to organize an effective civil defense that would enable a large part of the population to continue to house and feed itself CONTINUES The potential chaos that may be created by high altitude EMP has national security implications the Energy Department said in a statement explaining why it had started the new research program During a period of national crisis electrical power will be required to operate military installations civil defense facilities and critical industries In addition if EMP caused a disruption of the financial manufacturing retail transportation and communication industries as well as basic utilities serious economic and social consequences would result Disruption of the nations electrical power supply has grave implications In an article in Spectrum the authoritative magazine of the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers Eric J Lemer a contributing editor expressed similar concerns Power Grids Vulnerability The potential impact on the national power grid of a small number of high altitude EMP bursts would be comparable to that produced by large lightning bolts hitting every power line segment in the country he said When it is considered that two ordinary lightning bolts were the proximate cause of the 1977 New York City blackout it is easy to see why many analysts believe that a complete shutdown of the national power grid could be achieved by a handful of EMP detonations

92

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT Damage Limitation

Non Nuclear Pulse devices allow for damage limitation without undermining the escalation ladder

Wilson 8 Clay- Specialist in Technology and National Security Foreign Affairs Defense and Trade Division ldquoHigh Altitude Electromagnetic Pulse (HEMP) and High Power Microwave (HPM) Devices Threat Assessmentsrdquo Congressional Research Service March 26 2008

DOD research on pulsed-power HPM electromagnetic weapons is currently being done at Kirtland Air Force Base in Albuquerque New Mexico Weapons now being developed by the US military for electronic warfare can disrupt the trajectory of missiles while in flight and can overpower or degrade enemy communications telemetry and circuitry Other HPM weapons being tested by the military are portable and re-usable through battery-power and many are effective when fired miles away from a target These weapons can also be focused like a laser beam and tuned to an appropriate frequency in order to penetrate electronics that are heavily shielded against a nuclear attack The deepest bunkers with the thickest concrete walls reportedly are not safe from such a beam if they have even a single unprotected wire reaching the surface29 During Operation Iraqi Freedom many Iraqi command bunkers and suspected chemical-biological weapons bunkers were deeply buried underground and thought to be difficult to disable using conventional explosives New HPM weapons were reportedly considered for possible use in attacks against these targets because the numerous communications and power lines leading into the underground bunkers offered pathways for conducting powerful surges of electromagnetic energy that could destroy the computer equipment inside30 Because instantaneous HPM energy can reflect off the ground and possibly affect piloted aircraft above much testing currently involves HPM devices on Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs) and on the Air Force Conventional Air Launched Cruise Missile system By 2010 DOD reportedly will field several airlaunched UAVs using disposable and reusable HPM weapons designed to disrupt enemy computers31

93

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT Damage Limitation

A HEMP destroys US military capability and damage limitation

Graham 4 Dr William R- Deputy Administrator of NASA The report of the Commission to Assess the Threat to the United States From Electromagnetic Pulse Attackrdquo July 22 2004

Mr Langevin In the event that an EMP event threatened or damaged the GPS system what would happen to battlefield information and communications systems such as FBCB2 (Force XXI Battle Command Brigade-and-Below) Blue Force Tracker (BFT) and Movement Tracking System (MTS) Are there backup systems available if our situational awareness provided by GPS input is taken away Dr Graham Army battlefield information and communication systems such as FBCB2 (Force XXI Battle Command Brigade-and-Below) Blue Force Tracker (BFT) and Movement Tracking System (MTS) provide position location communication capability and force tracking-situational awareness These information and communication systems use the Global Positioning System (GPS) as a component Loss of a GPS signal would negate MTSs and BFTs ability to identify position location and to conduct force tracking While high Altitude EMP (HEMP) is not likely to directly damage the satellites that broadcast GPS signals because of the height of their orbits the ground-based systems that receive and make use of GPS information would be at risk unless protected against HEMP effects MTS and BFT transmit data via a communications satellite that would not be affected by loss of a GPS signal Certain ground platforms which use FBCB2 and BFT such as the Bradley Paladin and Ml have an inertial navigation unit (INU) which is a redundant capability for deternining position lacation Having to resort to using the INU would result in a degradation of performance and possible delay of missions due to reinitializing position data every 20-26 kilometers depending on the platform and the INU system used INUs do not rely on GPS signals The location data from the INU is transmitted via FBCB2 communications which again is not affected by loss of GPS signal The location data can then be used by FBCB2 for force tracking Situational awareness of any system on the battlefield which relies soley on GPS will no longer appear in the FBCB2 situational awareness display HEMP survivability is a requirement for the GPS receivers in MTS BFT and FBCB2 FBCB2 has been tested in many vehicles such as the HMMWV M1A2 SEP Tank STRYKER and LOSAT over the last four years There are no known HEMP survivability issues or concerns resulting from these tests BFT was tested on a HMMWV in April 04 and passed MTS evaluation on the Family of Medium Tactical Vehicles (FMTV) has been delayed due to asset availability However MTS relies on many of the same components as BFT so no major problems are anticipated It should also be noted that nuclear weapon effects other than HEMP could damage GPS or interfere with the transmission of GPS signals through the atmosphere bull In a high-altitude nuclear event loss of a GPS signal will degrade the ability of ground systems such as FBCB2 BFT and MTS to self-locate and track forces

94

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT Deterrence DA

1) Nuclear deterrent in trouble now

Kyl amp Perle 9 Jon Richard June 30 2009 ldquoOur Decaying Nuclear Deterrentrdquo Mr Kyl is a Republican senator from Arizona Mr Perle a fellow at the American Enterprise Institute was assistant secretary of defense in the Reagan administration lthttponlinewsjcomarticleSB124623202363966157htmlgt

Thus in his Prague speech Mr Obama announced that the US would immediately and aggressively pursue ratification of the comprehensive ban on the testing of nuclear weapons The administration believes without evidence that ratification of the test-ban treaty will discourage other countries from developing nuclear weapons Which countries does it have in mind Iran North Korea Syria Countries alarmed by the nuclear ambitions of their enemies Allies who may one day lose confidence in our nuclear umbrella There are good reasons why the test-ban treaty has not been ratified The attempt to do so in 1999 failed in the Senate mostly out of concerns about verification -- it simply is not verifiable It also failed because of an understandable reluctance on the part of the US Senate to forgo forever a test program that could in the future be of critical importance for our defense and the defense of our allies Robert Gates who is now Mr Obamas own secretary of defense warned in a speech last October that in the absence of a nuclear modernization program even the most modest of which

Congress has repeatedly declined to fund [a]t a certain point it will become impossible to keep extending the life of our arsenal especially in light of our testing moratorium Suppose future problems in our nuclear arsenal emerge that cannot be solved without testing Would our predicament

discourage nuclear proliferation -- or stimulate it For the foreseeable future the US and many of our allies rely on our nuclear deterrent And as long as the US possesses nuclear weapons they must be -- as Mr Obama recognized in Prague -- safe secure and effective Yet his proposed 2010 budget fails to take the necessary steps to do that Those steps have been studied extensively by the Perry-Schlesinger Commission (named for co-chairmen William Perry secretary of defense under President Bill Clinton and James R Schlesinger secretary of defense under Presidents Richard Nixon and Gerald Ford) Its consensus report released in May makes numerous recommendations to increase the funding for and improve the effectiveness of the deteriorating nuclear weapons laboratory complex (eg the Los Alamos facility in New Mexico the Pantex plant in Texas and the dangerously neglected Y-12 plant in Tennessee) that has become the soft underbelly of our deterrent force The commission also assessed the nuclear weapons infrastructure that is essential to a safe secure and effective deterrent and declared it in serious need of transformation It looked at our laboratory-based scientific and technical expertise and concluded that the intellectual

infrastructure is in serious trouble A major cause is woefully inadequate funding The commission rightly argued that we must exercise the full range of laboratory skills including nuclear weapon design skills Skills that are not exercised will atrophy The president and the Congress must heed these recommendations There are some who believe that failing to invest

adequately in our nuclear deterrent will move us closer to a nuclear free world In fact blocking crucial modernization means unilateral disarmament by unilateral obsolescence This unilateral disarmament will only encourage nuclear proliferation since our allies will see the danger and our adversaries the opportunity By neglecting -- and in some cases even opposing -- essential modernization programs arms-control proponents are actually undermining the prospect for further reductions of the US nuclear arsenal As our nuclear weapons stockpile ages and concern about its reliability increases we will have to compensate by retaining more nuclear weapons than would otherwise be the case This reality will necessarily influence future arms-control negotiations beginning with the upcoming Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty follow-on For these negotiations the Russians are insisting on a false linkage between nuclear weapons and missile defenses They are

demanding that we abandon defenses against North Korean or Iranian missiles as a condition for mutual reductions in American and Russian strategic forces As the president cuts the budget for missile defense and cedes ground to the Russians on our planned defense sites in Poland and the Czech Republic we may end up abandoning a needed defense of the US and our European allies from the looming Iranian threat There is a fashionable notion that if only we and the Russians reduced our nuclear forces other nations would reduce their existing arsenals or abandon plans to acquire nuclear weapons altogether This idea an article of faith of the soft power approach to halting nuclear proliferation assumes that the nuclear ambitions of Kim Jong Il or Mahmoud Ahmadinejad would be curtailed or abandoned in response to reductions in the American and Russian deterrent forces -- or that India Pakistan or China would respond with reductions of their own

Non Nuclear Pulse devices solve

Wilson 8 Clay- Specialist in Technology and National Security Foreign Affairs Defense and Trade Division ldquoHigh Altitude Electromagnetic Pulse (HEMP) and High Power Microwave (HPM) Devices Threat Assessmentsrdquo Congressional Research Service March 26 2008

DOD research on pulsed-power HPM electromagnetic weapons is currently being done at Kirtland Air Force Base in Albuquerque New Mexico Weapons now being developed by the US military for electronic warfare can disrupt the trajectory of missiles while in flight and can overpower or degrade enemy communications telemetry and circuitry Other HPM weapons being tested by the military are portable and re-usable through battery-power and many are effective when fired miles away from a target These weapons can also be focused like a laser beam and tuned to an appropriate frequency in order to penetrate electronics that are heavily shielded against a nuclear attack The deepest bunkers with the thickest concrete walls reportedly are not safe from such a beam if they have even a single unprotected wire reaching the surface29 During Operation Iraqi Freedom many Iraqi command bunkers and suspected chemical-biological weapons bunkers were deeply buried underground and thought to be difficult to disable using conventional explosives New HPM weapons were reportedly considered for possible use in attacks against these targets because the numerous communications and power lines leading into the underground bunkers offered pathways for conducting powerful surges of electromagnetic energy that could destroy the computer equipment inside30 Because instantaneous HPM energy can reflect off the ground and possibly affect piloted aircraft above much testing currently involves HPM devices on Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs) and on the Air Force Conventional Air Launched Cruise Missile system By 2010 DOD reportedly will field several airlaunched UAVs using disposable and reusable HPM weapons designed to disrupt enemy computers31

95

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT Deterrence DA

US EMP strikes are not used to deter EMPs

Riddle 4 Lieutenant Colonel Thomas C- United States Army ldquoNuclear High Altitude Electromagnetic Pulse ndash Implications For Homeland Security And Homeland Defenserdquo US Army War College 03 May 2004

Similarly the decision to implement an earlier deployment of an initial ground-based interceptor and improved ballistic missile tracking capabilities will support the improved passive and active defenses called for in the NSS 50 Also the convincing demonstration of the continuing efficiency and effectiveness of Americarsquos global precision strike capabilities during Operation IRAQI FREEDOM is a clear indication that multi-dimensional counterforce capabilities remain a viable element of Americarsquos counter-proliferation capabilities that may be used if required to prevent a HEMP attack on the United States Finally the United Statesrsquo demonstrated willingness to conduct preemptive strikes to neutralize WMD under the concept of imminent defense adds an unmistakable dimension to the concept of deterrence for those seeking to acquire weapons of mass destruction51

EMPs have no deterrent effect against the majority of countries because they are less reliant on electronic systems

Timmerman 2 Kenneth R- director of the Foundation for Democracy in Iran 2006 Nobel Peace Prize Nominee ldquoUS Threatened With EMP Attackrdquo Feb 1 2002

The more backward the country the more attractive EMP becomes as a weapon against the United States Bartlett explains ldquoIf North Korea were to launch a missile straight up and explode a nuclear weapon 500 kilometers over their own territory it wouldnrsquot do them a lot of damage because they have very little dependence on electronic systems But it would have a devastating impact on South Korea as well as on our 37000 troops stationed there With North Korearsquos million soldiers they could just walk all over us with impunityrdquo

Deterrence against EMP strikes fails now- lack of clear response

Spencer 4 Jack- Senior Policy Analyst for Defense and National Security in the Kathryn and Shelby Cullom Davis Institute for International Studies at The Heritage Foundation ldquoThe Electromagnetic Pulse Commission Warns of an Old Threat with a New Facerdquo Heritage Foundation Backgrounder 1784 August 3 2004

The difficulty of developing a clear response to EMP is due primarily to the unique nature of the threat It is unclear for example what would constitute a proportional response to an explosion that takes place in space without being seen or heard yet instantaneously devastates society or a military force while resulting in no initial loss of life or physical destruction Furthermore there is a dearth of academic or legal analysis by which to guide such policies because until very recently few took the threat seriously This is especially so in the context of rogue states or transnational groups

96

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT Deterrence DA

EMP attacks cannot be deterred

Wilson 8 Clay- Specialist in Technology and National Security Foreign Affairs Defense and Trade Division ldquoHigh Altitude Electromagnetic Pulse (HEMP) and High Power Microwave (HPM) Devices Threat Assessmentsrdquo Congressional Research Service March 26 2008

The threat of an EMP attack against the United States is hard to assess but some observers indicate that it is growing along with worldwide access to newer technologies and the proliferation of nuclear weapons In the past the threat of mutually assured destruction provided a lasting deterrent against the exchange of multiple high-yield nuclear warheads However now even a single specially designed low-yield nuclear explosion high above the United States or over a battlefield can produce a large-scale EMP effect that could result in a widespread loss of electronics but no direct fatalities and may not necessarily evoke a large nuclear retaliatory strike by the US military This coupled with the possible vulnerability of US commercial electronics and US military battlefield equipment to the effects of EMP may create a new incentive for other countries to develop or acquire a nuclear capability

Canrsquot deter EMP threats

EMP Commission 4 Report of the Commission to Assess the Threat to the United States from Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP) Attack Volume 1 Executive Report 2004 Dr John S Foster Jr Mr Earl Gjelde Dr William R Graham (Chairman) Dr Robert J Hermann Mr Henry (Hank) M Kluepfel GEN Richard L Lawson USAF (Ret) Dr Gordon K Soper Dr Lowell L Wood Jr Dr Joan B Woodard]

EMP effects from nuclear bursts are not new threats to our nation The Soviet Union in the past and Russia and other nations today are potentially capable of creating these effects Historically this application of nuclear weaponry was mixed with a much larger population of nuclear devices that were the primary source of destruction and thus EMP as a weapons effect was not the primary focus Throughout the Cold War the United States did not try to protect its civilian infrastructure against either the physical or EMP impact of nuclear weapons and instead depended on deterrence for its safety What is different now is that some potential sources of EMP threats are difficult to determdashthey can be terrorist groups that have no state identity have only one or a few weapons and are motivated to attack the US without regard for their own safety Rogue states such as North Korea and Iran may also be developing the capability to pose an EMP threat to the United States and may also be unpredictable and difficult to deter Certain types of relatively low-yield nuclear weapons can be employed to generate potentially catastrophic EMP effects over wide geographic areas and designs for variants of such weapons may have been illicitly trafficked for a quarter-century China and Russia have considered limited nuclear attack options that unlike their Cold War plans employ EMP as the primary or sole means of attack Indeed as recently as May 1999 during the NATO bombing of the former Yugoslavia high-ranking members of the Russian Duma meeting with a US congressional delegation to discuss the Balkans conflict raised the specter of a Russian EMP attack that would paralyze the United States

97

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT Deterrence DA

EMP Strikes will be used for catalytic wars

Lewallen 2 John- Political Science at Whitman University organizer of the Nuclear Peace Action Group Fulbright Scholarship recipient Public Ocean Access Network ldquoHigh-Altitude Nuclear Warrdquo Nuclear Press Pg36

The Soviet Union no longer exists Now many nations and even several corporations potentially have nuclear bombs in satellites In 1984 the US President knew right away where the nuclear attack was coming from Today any nuclear attack against the American homeland is almost sure to be anonymous How does one deter an adversary who can strike without attribution perhaps choosing a moment of crisis between its two nuclear adversaries to make it look like the other guy did it

98

Cornell HKHANE Aff

No US Second Strike

An EMP attack would decimate our sub deterrent- they would be unable to receive orders

Graham 4 Dr William R- Deputy Administrator of NASA The report of the Commission to Assess the Threat to the United States From Electromagnetic Pulse Attackrdquo July 22 2004

Mr Langevin Have you assessed the threat of EMP to our surface fleet and submarines Do submarines have a greater likelihood of retaining operational capabilities if they are underwater during an EMP strike Dr Graham The EMP Commission did consider the threat of EMP to surface vessels and submarines Ballistic Missile Submarines are designed and built to survive an EMP attack Care is taken when the ship is modified or equipment added or upgraded to insure that survivability is maintained Particular attention is paid to the potential vulnerability introduced when the ship is at periscope depth or trailing a wire antenna Submarines do have a greater likelihood of retaining operational capabilities if they are underwater during an EMP attack and not trailing an antenna which can couple energy into the submerged vessel However if land-based communications are impacted the ship may survive but not be capable of receiving orders and therefore accomplishing its mission because the sender cant send The survivability of the surface fleet is uncertain without testing and a submarine in port is a surface ship

An EMP strike would destroy communications

Wilson 8 Clay- Specialist in Technology and National Security Foreign Affairs Defense and Trade Division ldquoHigh Altitude Electromagnetic Pulse (HEMP) and High Power Microwave (HPM) Devices Threat Assessmentsrdquo Congressional Research Service March 26 2008

During the Cold War the US Military designed an innovative communications system to relay emergency messages between strategic military areas in the continental United States using signals that travel by means of low frequency ground waves mdash electromagnetic fields that hug the ground mdash rather than by radiating into the atmosphere The Ground Wave Emergency Network or GWEN system was intended to allow continuous communications despite EMP disruptions However the hardware was reportedly transistor based leaving the system with some level of vulnerability to EMP In addition the fixed locations of GWEN sites were known to adversaries and thus vulnerable to direct attack40

Even if military infrastructure is protected critical civilian infrastructure is not

Wilson 8 Clay- Specialist in Technology and National Security Foreign Affairs Defense and Trade Division ldquoHigh Altitude Electromagnetic Pulse (HEMP) and High Power Microwave (HPM) Devices Threat Assessmentsrdquo Congressional Research Service March 26 2008

The US military has adopted a policy where commercial electronic equipment is now used extensively in support of complex US weapons systems For example a large percentage of US military communications during Operation Iraqi Freedom was reportedly carried by commercial satellites and much military administrative information is currently routed through the civilian Internet43 Many commercial communications satellites particularly those in low earth orbit reportedly may degrade or cease to function shortly after a high altitude nuclear explosion44 However some observers believe that possible HEMP and HPM vulnerabilities of military information systems are outweighed by the benefits gained through access to innovative technology and increased communications flexibility that come from using state-of-the-art electronics and from maintaining connections to the civilian Internet and satellite systems

99

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Yes US Second Strike

EMPs cannot endanger our ability to retaliate

Critchlow 6 Robert D- National Defense Fellow Foreign Affairs Defense and Trade Division ldquoNuclear Command and Control Current Programs and Issuesrdquo CRS Report for Congress May 3 2006

Nuclear Command and Control Platforms The lead elements of the NCCS form the National Military Command System (NMCS) The NMCS is ldquothe priority component of the Global Command and Control System designed to support the Secretary of Defense and Joint Chiefs of Staff in the exercise of their responsibilitiesrdquo5 It provides the National Command Authorities (NCA)6 and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff (CJCS) with command and control of the armed forces both nuclear and conventional7 The NMCS includes the following command nodes and supporting components

National Military Command Center (NMCC) The NMCC is the primary location for national command and control on a day to day basis This center is staffed around-the-clock and each ldquowatch teamrdquo is led by a General or Admiral known as the ldquoDeputy Director for Operationsrdquo Located in a shielded room in the Pentagon the NMCC is responsible for monitoring nuclear forces and ongoing conventional military operations and can be augmented by additional response cells in the event of a crisis

National Airborne Operations Center (NAOC) If ground based command centers are destroyed the NAOC can serve as a survivable airborne backup to the NMCCrsquos command and control capabilities A NAOC aircraft is always on alert and the mobility of this airborne platform contributes to its survivability The NAOCs are a fleet of modified Boeing 747-200B aircraft each of which can include a crew of up to 114 people and are based at Offutt AFB in Nebraska Its communications which include both Extremely High Frequency (EHF) and Very Low Frequency-Low Frequency (VLFLF) links are hardened against Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP) Although the Joint Staff tasks the aircraft US Strategic Command (USSTRATCOM)9 provides personnel and day-to-day administration while the Air Forcersquos Air Combat Command serves as the programrsquos resource manager

Site-R Located at Fort Ritchie Maryland Site-R can be activated from a ldquocoldrdquo status to serve as an alternate NMCC location11

USSTRATCOM Global Operations Center (GOC) Located underneath the USSTRATCOM Headquarters at Offutt AFB Nebraska the GOC can serve as a back up element to the NMCS for essential emergency actions This center also serves as the command center for the USSTRATCOM Commander one of the four- star-general Unified Combatant Commanders for the day-to-day management of his forces and for providing situational awareness The facility is protected against EMP and has its own emergency power supply to enable extended operations This facility is staffed 24 hours a day 365 days a year with each team led by a Senior Controller who is always a full Colonel (Air Force Army or Marine Corps) or Captain (Navy)12

USSTRATCOM Airborne Command Post (ABNCP) Should the USSTRATCOM GOC be unable to fulfill its role the E-6B ABNCP can serve as a survivable airborne backup The ABNCPs are a fleet of modified Boeing 707 aircraft each of which carries a crew of 22 which includes aircrew communications operators and battlestaff personnel Historically each battle staff has been led by a General or Admiral known as the Airborne Emergency Action Officer (AEAO) This aircraft fulfills two additional key missions As the Airborne Launch Control System (ALCS) the aircraft has the ability to communicate launch codes directly to ICBM launch facilities to command launch in the event that their launch control centers are unable to perform that function Also the E-6B can serve as the Take Charge And Move Out (TACAMO) relay for Navy ballistic missile submarines The airplane can deploy a 2frac12-mile-long trailing wire antenna and communicate directives to the submarines over its VLFLF system In addition to the VLFLF the ABNCP can communicate using Ultra-High Frequency (UHF) or EHF satellite systems While USSTRATCOM provides the battlestaff personnel the aircraft aircrew and communications operators are from the Navyrsquos Strategic Communications (STRATCOMM) Wing One based at Tinker AFB Oklahoma13 USSTRATCOM Mobile Consolidated Command Center (MCCC) The MCCC is a convoy of trucks that can deploy during a crisis to serve as a survivable road-mobile backup to the USSTRATCOM GOC or ABNCP

100

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Yes US Second Strike

Strat nukes remain operable

Riddle 4 Lieutenant Colonel Thomas C- United States Army ldquoNuclear High Altitude Electromagnetic Pulse ndash Implications For Homeland Security And Homeland Defenserdquo US Army War College 03 May 2004

Additionally the military forces of the United States have been increasingly based in the continental United States (CONUS) and would also be affected Although the strategic nuclear forces (and portions of their supporting infrastructure) were designed to resist the effects of EMP the general purpose forces have not received the same focus After a successful HEMP attack the posts camps bases and stations throughout the country might not be able to provide the services necessary to function as power projection platforms Although some military programs have incorporated EMP resistance as part of the design and acquisition process increasingly the military forces have turned to commercial-off-the-shelf equipment that has little or no EMP protection

Military communication would survive

Wilson 4 Clay- Specialist in Technology and National Security Foreign Affairs Defense and Trade Division ldquoHigh Altitude Electromagnetic Pulse (HEMP) and High Power Microwave (HPM) Devices Threat Assessmentsrdquo Congressional Research Service August 20 2004

As the Cold War ended the US military took steps to reduce its nuclear arsenal and associated infrastructure32 After 1998 the USAF decommissioned GWEN assets and replaced the entire system with the Single Channel Anti-Jam Man-Portable (SCAMP) Terminal SCAMP uses extremely high frequency (EHF) technology is resistant to EMP and offers more flexibility than GWEN because the equipment is lightweight transportable and interoperable with DOD satellite networks33

101

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT Security Kritik

Russia data sharing solves the impact

Farley 9 Robert is an assistant professor at the University of Kentuckyrsquos Patterson School of Diplomacy and International Commerce ldquoNeocons Salivating Over Their Next Great Exaggerated Threat Electromagnetic Pulse Attackrdquo October 22 2009

The fact that EMP is poorly researched and not well understood works in its favor as a scare tactic Since evidence of EMPrsquos allegedly lasting impact is purely theoretical EMP awareness advocates can make outlandish claims regarding the threat that even the smallest nuclear arsenal poses They can also point to allegations made by the official EMP Commission ignoring the fact that many outside experts dispute its findings The Niagara conferencersquos emphasis on strategic and policy considerations shows that alarmist predictions about EMP attacks serve as fodder for promotion of a larger nuclear weapons stockpile for missile defense and for preventive attacks

Ignoring the threat results in disaster

Dunn 6 JR- editor of the International Military Encyclopedia ldquoThe EMP Threat ElectroMagnetic Pulse Warfarerdquo American Thinker April 21 2006

Above all we cant allow the problem to slip past without being addressed always a danger in a confusing and urgent time Threats have a way of sneaking up on democracies Back in the 70s an American president on the promise of the Soviet premier that no aerial attack would be carried out on the US decided to shut down the Aerospace Defense Command and its US Army equivalent responsible for air defense of the country The bases were closed the assets either scrapped or turned over to the National Guard Two decades later on a fine morning in September there were no alert squadrons longmdashrange interceptors or surfacemdashtomdashair missiles to defend New York and Washington The presidents name was Jimmy Carter We can do better

102

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT Kritiks

Informing the public is key to challenging the industrial military complex

Lewallen 2 John- Political Science at Whitman University organizer of the Nuclear Peace Action Group Fulbright Scholarship recipient Public Ocean Access Network ldquoHigh-Altitude Nuclear Warrdquo Nuclear Press p9-10

Certainly we are courting disaster by leaving all thought about high-altitude nuclear war to a tiny group of military-industrial-complex insiders Everyone testifying at the Congressional EMP hearings has an axe to grind weapons systems to promote a reputation to make a job to do a grim reality to deny

Engaging in the debate over high altitude nuclear weapons is crucial to curbing nuclear madness

Lewallen 2 John- Political Science at Whitman University organizer of the Nuclear Peace Action Group Fulbright Scholarship recipient Public Ocean Access Network ldquoHigh-Altitude Nuclear Warrdquo Nuclear Press p9-10

I humbly offer the following commentary as my initial thoughts on the strategic implications of high-altitude nuclear electromagnetic pulse weapons I invite peer review Today we are all peers beneath the sword of looming nuclear catastrophe I believe the global human network of love empathy and respect is ultimately superior to the forces pushing toward global nuclear war But we cannot afford to ignore nuclear weapons In the psychological darkness of reality denial they grow and grow Help cast the light which will dissipate nuclear madness

103

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT Religion K

Lewallen 2 John- Political Science at Whitman University organizer of the Nuclear Peace Action Group Fulbright Scholarship recipient Public Ocean Access Network ldquoHigh-Altitude Nuclear Warrdquo Nuclear Press Pg38

ldquoAnd David proceeded to take his staff in his hand and to choose for himself the five smoothest stones from the torrent valley and to place them in his shepherdsrsquo bag that served him as a receptacle and in his hand was his sling And he began approaching the PhilistineldquoAnd the Philistine began to come coming nearer and nearer to David and the man carrying the large shield was ahead of himhellipldquoThen David thrust his hand into his bag and took a stone from there and slung it so that he struck the Philistine in his forehead and the stone sank into his forehead and he went falling upon his face to the earth So David with a sling and a stone proved stronger than the Philistine and struck the Philistine down and put him to death and there was no sword in Davidrsquos handrdquo

- The Old Testament I Samuel 1740-50As Russia and China face the onslaught of the United States advancing militarily toward them behind a missile shield still in research and development their military position is similar to that of the young shepherd David confronting the giant and mighty Philistine warrior GoliathThe United States has overwhelming military superiority and a gargantuan vulnerability to high-altitude nuclear EMP attack Russia and China have had several decades to fill their weapons bag with specialized nuclear EMP weapons and to prepare to sling them over the American homeland by missile by satellite or in a fractional orbiting bomb flung into orbit with a Scud or other short-range missileDavid knew that Goliath had a soft spot in his forehead just as the Russians and Chinese are perfectly aware that the United States in the words of Representative Weldon is the ldquomost vulnerable nation on Earth to electronic warfarerdquo

104

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT Psychoanalysis

An EMP attack would cause serious psychological trauma

Foster et al 8 ldquoReport of the Commission to Assess the Threat to the United States from Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP) Attackrdquo April 2008 Dr John S Foster Jr Mr Earl Gjelde Dr William R Graham (Chairman) Dr Robert J Hermann Mr Henry (Hank) M Kluepfel Gen Richard L Lawson USAF (Ret) Dr Gordon K Soper Dr Lowell L Wood Jr Dr Joan B Woodard

The human consequences of such a scenario include the social and psychological reactions to a sudden loss of stability in the modern infrastructure over a large area of the country Loss of connectivity between the government and its populace would only exacerbate the consequences of such a scenario This analysis is based largely on selected case studies including major blackouts natural disasters and terrorist incidents in recent US history These incidents served as approximate analogs in order to best predict the sociological and psychological effects of an EMP attack Impact of an EMP AttackWhile no single event serves as a model for an EMP scenario with incidence of long lasting widespread power outage communications failure and other effects the combined analysis of the following case studies provides useful insight in determining human reactions following an EMP attackBlackouts

1048715 Northeast (1965)1048715 New York (1977)1048715 Hydro Quebec (1989)1048715 Western states (1996)1048715 Auckland New Zealand (1998)1048715 Northeast (2003)Natural Disasters1048715 Hurricane Hugo (1989)1048715 Hurricane Andrew (1992)1048715 Midwest floods (1993)Terrorist Incidents1048715 World Trade Center attack (2001)1048715 Anthrax attacks (2001)

BlackoutsIn 1965 a blackout occurred over the northeastern United States and parts of Canada New Hampshire Vermont Massachusetts Connecticut Rhode Island New York including metropolitan New York City and a small part of Pennsylvania were in the dark after operators at Consolidated Edison were forced to shut down its generators to avoid damage Street traffic was chaotic and some people were trapped in elevators but there were few instances of antisocial behavior while the lights were out5 It was a ldquolong night in the darkrdquo but the recovery proceeded without incident and citizens experienced relative civility TIME Magazine described New Yorkrsquos next blackout in 1977 as a ldquoNight of Terrorrdquo 6 Widespread chaos reigned in the city until power was restored mdash entire blocks were looted and set ablaze people flipped over cars and vans on the streets the city was in pandemonium That night 3776 arrests were made and certainly not all looters thieves and arsonists were apprehended or arrested7 While this is a dramatic example of antisocial behavior following a blackout sociologists point to extraordinary demographic and historical issues that contributed to the looting For instance extreme poverty and socioeconomic inequality plagued New York neighborhoods and many of the looters originated from the poorer sections of the city engaging in ldquovigilante redistributionrdquo by looting consumer goods and luxuries Racial tensions were high and a serial killer known as Son of Sam had recently terrorized New Yorkers

105

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Negative

106

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Not Topical

US doesnrsquot do EMP targeting

Citizendium 9 ldquoSingle Integrated Operational Planrdquo httpencitizendiumorgwikiSingle_Integrated_Operational_Plan

It is known that nuclear explosions produce varying intensities of electromagnetic pulse (EMP) which has the potential to damage electronic equipment Effective power coverage and frequencies of the electromagnetic pulse are dependent at a minimum on the yield of the nuclear weapon and the altitude of the burst[7] While general US planning and engineering documents specify means of EMP protection [8] no unclassified references suggest that any weapons targeted under SIOP are intended principally to produce EMP

EMP nukes have already been removed

Berry 8 Ken Research Coordinator ICNND ldquoNew Weapons Technologyrdquo International Commission on Nuclear Non-proliferation and Disarmament

Generally speaking the shorter pulse wave forms such as microwaves are far more effective against electronic equipment and more difficult to devise hardened protection against45 For maximum effect the electromagnetic burst must be in the upper atmosphere Thus such a weapon stationed in space could in theory knock out electrical systems including computers and communications across continent-wide distances With this in mind the Soviet Union developed nuclear weapons designed for detonations in the upper atmosphere The United States and the United Kingdom also carried out similar research It is believed that most of the nuclear EMP weapons were disarmed following the ReaganGorbachev arms talks in the 1980s

Kristensen 98 Hans M- Director of the Nuclear Information Project at the Federation of American Scientists ldquoNuclear Futures Proliferation of Weapons of Mass Destruction and US Nuclear Strategy British American Security Information Council Basic Research Report 982

It is still too early to predict whether these exotic designs will mature into actual nuclear weapons modifications But these and a wide range of other nuclear projects are clear indicators that US nuclear weapons are here to stay113 And the expansion of US nuclear doctrine is an increasingly prominent justification for new weapons

107

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Tix Links

Partisan issue

Weinberger 2-17 Sharon- CarnegieNewhouse School Legal Reporting Fellow International Reporting Project fellow at the Johns Hopkins University School of Advanced International Studies ldquoThe Boogeyman Bomb How afraid should we be of electromagnetic pulse weaponsrdquo Foreign Policy February 17 2010

But unlike some of the other national security threats on the horizon the e-bomb has emerged as a partisan issue with a core group of conservative supporters Gingrich has been among the most outspoken On Capitol Hill Rep Roscoe Bartlett (R-Md) has been one of the most ardent supporters of those pushing for an EMP defense establishing the investigatory commission and warning of a catastrophe on a scale far greater than Hurricane Katrina Despite EMPACTs claims of nonpartisanship liberals have largely dismissed the idea as conservative fear-mongering EMPs were even derisively labeled the Newt Bomb by New Republic senior editor Michael Crowley The real debate is not so much over whether EMP is a real phenomenon -- even critics of the commissions findings agree it exists -- but how much of a threat it poses to the nations infrastructure how likely it is that a group or country might build and use such a weapon and what should be done about it

Weinberger 2-17 Sharon- CarnegieNewhouse School Legal Reporting Fellow International Reporting Project fellow at the Johns Hopkins University School of Advanced International Studies ldquoThe Boogeyman Bomb How afraid should we be of electromagnetic pulse weaponsrdquo Foreign Policy February 17 2010

In the end advocates for EMP preparation could end up being their own worst enemy The unlikely scenarios they peddle lend themselves to caricature And though there are certainly some intellectual heavyweights among those who have warned about the effects of EMP -- like Johnny Foster the former head of Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory -- critics have derided EMP defense supporters for relying on the likes of science fiction writer William R Forstchen to help bolster their case By talking about time machines and turning the EMP bomb into something that goes bump in the night those advocating for better defenses risk pushing the issue further into the margins of science fiction

108

Cornell HKHANE Aff

GOP Link

GOP would support any measure to reduce EMP dangers

Smith 9 George ldquoNot Soiling Yourself Over an EMP Attack You mustrsquove voted for Obamardquo 62909The electromagnetic pulse attack lobby is now exclusively the property of the GOP Itrsquos a dumping ground for a rich a variety of Republican crazies a constituency which DD mapped for many years Like those who believe global warming to be a hoax the Republican right has electromagnetic pulse fear all locked up If one thinks about this paradox it has a neatly confounding internal anti-logic If something is backed up by hard science and poses a real danger for everyone on the planet the Republican party denies its existence If however the threat is something rather abstract to almost all Americans rests almost entirely on theoretical prediction is something not likely to ever occur at all and then only in the context of what would promise to be an all out nuclear war the GOP believes in it very strongly To paraphrase Paul Krugman characterizing GOP attitudes towards global warming You could call this crazy conspiracy theory but doing so would actually be unfair to crazy conspiracy theorists ldquoThe nightmare scenario of [EMP attack] is this A rogue nation like North Korea or a stateless terrorist like Bin Laden gets hold of a nuclear weapon and decides not to drive it into a large city but rather to launch it on a Scud-type missile straight into the atmosphere from a barge off the East Coastrdquo wrote one brilliant theoretician at Slate a couple years ago ldquoIn fact [a congressionally chartered commission] discovered that knowledge about EMP is widespread in such places as China Cuba Egypt India Iran Saddam Husseinrsquos Iraq North Korea Pakistan and Russiardquo wrote defense hawk and EMP crazy Frank Gaffney for the Washington Times also a couple of years ago

109

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT Terrorist EMP

Terrorists using EMPs is impossible

Butt 10 Yousaf M- Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics ldquoThe EMP threat fact fiction and response (part 2)rdquo The Space Review February 1 2010 httpwwwthespacereviewcomarticle15531

Thus it is not at all a simple matter even for countries with considerable resources and focused decades-long effort to build such weapons let alone pair them to reliable delivery systems As carefully argued by John Mueller in his new book Atomic Obsession it is virtually impossible for a terrorist cell to obtain the raw materials needed for a nuclear device and assemble it correctly themselves [Ref 22 p 172ndash198] Even a ldquocruderdquo U-type device is not all that ldquocruderdquo and requires the concerted effort of skilled scientists and engineers Any weapon produced by a terrorist cell would likely be a one of a kind and would have to remain untested For a terrorist group to then mate this weapon to a ballistic missile and successfully carry out an EMP strike beggars belief As John Pike director of GlobalSecurityorg has said ldquoIt is just very difficult to imagine how terrorists are going to be able to lay hands on a nuclear-tipped missile and launch it and reprogram it in such a way that it would be a high-altitude burst like thatrdquo Dr Philip Coyle former Pentagon director of operational test and evaluation has stated that the EMP commissionrsquos report appeared to ldquoextrapolate calculations of extreme weapons effects as if they were a proven fact and further to puff up rogue nations and terrorists with the capabilities of giantsrdquo The 2009 Strategic Posture Commission puts it more delicately by saying that ldquothe Commission is divided over how imminent a threat this ishelliprdquo If a terrorist cell miraculously built such a weapon they are likely to explode their ldquocrown jewelrdquo in a simple spectacular ground-burst that will destroy a large part of a city and not risk the complicationsmdashand likely failuremdashof a lofted EMP strike that will if all goes according to their plan cause casualties via unpredictable secondary effects upon a limited part of some of the nationrsquos infrastructure The risk versus reward calculation for both terrorists cells and so-called ldquoroguerdquo states would almost certainly force their hand to a spectacular and direct ground burst in preference to a unreliable and uncertain EMP strike A weapon of mass destruction is preferable to a weapon of mass disruption

Terrorists will use HPMs instead

Wilson 4 Clay- Specialist in Technology and National Security Foreign Affairs Defense and Trade Division ldquoHigh Altitude Electromagnetic Pulse (HEMP) and High Power Microwave (HPM) Devices Threat Assessmentsrdquo Congressional Research Service August 20 2004

In addition while HEMP weapons are large in scale and require a nuclear capability along with technology to launch high altitude missiles HPM weapons are smaller in scale involve a much lower level of technology and may be within the capability of many non-state organizations HPM can cause damage to computers similar to HEMP although the effects are limited to a much smaller area The technical accessibility lower cost and the apparent vulnerability of US civilian electronic equipment could make small-scale HPM weapons attractive for terrorist groups in the future

110

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT State EMP

States wouldnrsquot use EMPs

Butt 10 Yousaf M- Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics ldquoThe EMP threat fact fiction and response (part 2)rdquo The Space Review February 1 2010 httpwwwthespacereviewcomarticle15531

A state would be highly unlikely to launch an EMP strike from their own territory because the rocket could be traced to the country of origin and would probably result in nuclear or massive conventional retaliation by the US The EMP commission also considers adversarial nations carrying out a shipborne EMP attack that would be less traceable However even so there would some small risk of trace-back that would give the leadership in such nations pause While nuclear forensics are not well enough developed to assuredly ascribe the origin of a nuclear explosion even their current state of development would in some measure dissuade the leaders of a nation from seriously contemplating such an attack Furthermore the US certainly has data via its DSP satellites on the infrared (IR) signatures of the rocket exhausts from the missiles of various countries Though these signatures are probably virtually identical for the ScudShahabNo-dong family of missiles the nations which may entertain such attacks do not necessarily know whether eg the DSP data can discriminate between a NK Nodong versus an Iranian Shahabs perhaps due to differences in fuel andor subtle design idiosyncrasies This is data only the US has and it has an inherent deterrent value to nations thinking about launching an EMP strike via a ship-launched ballistic missile This is almost certainly the case if say Iran were to use its solid rocket motor technology to launch such a strikemdashif and when Iran obtains nuclear weapons of course In such a case the burn time-profile and solid-motor IR signatures could probably be used to tie the missile to a nation Furthermore the leaders of a nation contemplating such an attack would have to carefully consider what would happen in case the warhead was not delivered properly If it fell short andor did not explode it may be possible for US engineers and scientists to ascribe a national origin given the forensic material For the leadership of any nation to chance such an attack they must be almost suicidally optimistic they would have to presume that everything would go perfectly Even so it may still be possible to identify the country of origin which would invite massive US retribution

States wouldnrsquot give terrorists EMPs

Butt 10 Yousaf M- Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics ldquoThe EMP threat fact fiction and response (part 2)rdquo The Space Review February 1 2010 httpwwwthespacereviewcomarticle15531

What about an adversarial nation ldquosub-contractingrdquo its dirty work to a terrorist cell Again there would be substantial doubt in the nationrsquos leadership as to whether or not forensic evidence (whether the device exploded or not) could tie them to the weapon In any case as argued by Mueller [Ref 22 p 163] it is highly unlikely that a nation would give one of its crown jewels to an unpredictable terrorist cell At least in the case of Iran this view is supported by in-depth research done by authors at the National Defense University who conclude ldquo[W]e judge and nearly all experts consulted agree that Iran would not as a matter of state policy give up its control of such weapons to terrorist organizations and risk direct US or Israeli retributionrdquo

111

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT RussiaChina EMP

China and Russia would never EMP attack the US

Butt 10 Yousaf M- Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics ldquoThe EMP threat fact fiction and response (part 2)rdquo The Space Review February 1 2010 httpwwwthespacereviewcomarticle15531

Though they possess the technological know-how to fabricate a powerful EMP device the possibility of China or Russia carrying out such an attack is virtually nil Not only for the regular military deterrent reasons but also post-Cold War our economies are intimately linked which amounts to an inherent economic deterrent The latter is likely the more relevant deterrent [Ref 22 p 65] We owe China tremendous sums of money they need us as a market and both the US and China require Russian oil via intertwined world markets Although the EMP commissioners have offered a Chinese-language PowerPoint presentation outlining the effects of EMP devices as evidence that China has an interest in such weapons this presentation is actually of Taiwanese origin [ldquoElectromagnetic Pulse Attack and Defenserdquo by Dr Chien Chung] and it is not pertinent to any official Chinese military doctrine

112

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT Proliferators EMP

New nuclear states will not carry out EMP attacks

Butt 10 Yousaf M- Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics ldquoThe EMP threat fact fiction and response (part 2)rdquo The Space Review February 1 2010 httpwwwthespacereviewcomarticle15531

More importantly the DoD itself has weighed in on the issue in its ldquoMilitarily Critical Technologies Listrdquo This is a detailed compendium of the technologies the DoD assesses as critical to maintaining superior United States military capabilities Part II ldquoWeapons of Mass Destruction Technologiesrdquo addresses those technologies required for development integration or employment of biological chemical or nuclear weapons and their means of delivery against the US This document states that ldquoHEMP can pose a serious threat to US military systems when even a single high-altitude nuclear explosion occurs In principle even a new nuclear proliferator could execute such a strike In practice however it seems unlikely that such a state would use one of its scarce warheads to inflict damage which must be considered secondary to the primary effects of blast shock and thermal pulse Furthermore a HEMP attack must use a relatively large warhead to be effective (perhaps on the order of one megaton) and new proliferators are unlikely to be able to construct such a device much less make it small enough to be lofted to high altitude by a ballistic missile or space launcherrdquo Lastly General Robert T Marsh former Chairman of the Presidentrsquos Commission on Critical Infrastructure Protection concluded (in 1997) that he did not ldquosee any evidence that suggests capabilities seriously threatening our critical infrastructurehellip There are many easier less costly and more dramatic ways for terrorists to use nuclear weapons than delivery to a high altitude Such an event is so unlikely and difficult to achieve that I do not believe it warrants serious concern at this timerdquo

Attacks will be deterred now

Riddle 4 Lieutenant Colonel Thomas C- United States Army ldquoNuclear High Altitude Electromagnetic Pulse ndash Implications For Homeland Security And Homeland Defenserdquo US Army War College 03 May 2004

Similarly the decision to implement an earlier deployment of an initial ground-based interceptor and improved ballistic missile tracking capabilities will support the improved passive and active defenses called for in the NSS 50 Also the convincing demonstration of the continuing efficiency and effectiveness of Americarsquos global precision strike capabilities during Operation IRAQI FREEDOM is a clear indication that multi-dimensional counterforce capabilities remain a viable element of Americarsquos counter-proliferation capabilities that may be used if required to prevent a HEMP attack on the United States Finally the United Statesrsquo demonstrated willingness to conduct preemptive strikes to neutralize WMD under the concept of imminent defense adds an unmistakable dimension to the concept of deterrence for those seeking to acquire weapons of mass destruction51

113

Cornell HKHANE Aff

EMPacts False

Impacts of high altitude nuclear explosions are overstated

Ruppe 4 David ldquoPlausibility of EMP Threat Classified Expert Saysrdquo Global Security Newswire September 24 2004

Philip Coyle who was the assistant secretary of defense and Pentagon director of operational test and evaluation during the Clinton administration however questioned the certainty of the reportrsquos conclusion that smaller kiloton-scale nuclear weapons could be developed to produce the catastrophic consequences described by the report ldquoThe US military does not know how to do this today and has no way of demonstrating the capability in the future without returning to nuclear testingrdquo he said by e-mail ldquoThe fact is that a rogue nation or terrorists that tried this would be very unsure of the results and would risk massive retaliation from the United States for having achieved nothingrdquo he wrote Coyle who also worked at the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory for more than 30 years also said it is uncertain that even a massive nuclear weapon would cause the scale of destruction the commission predicted

Transportation would survive

Chisholm 5 Patrick ldquoProtect our electronics against EMP attackrdquo Christian Science Monitor December 19 2005

Unlike what was depicted in the 1983 movie The Day After automobiles may keep functioning after an EMP attack The electronics within automobiles enjoy robust shielding because of the harsh electromagnetic environment on existing roadways Aircraft have even stronger electromagnetic shielding so they are unlikely to fall out of the sky Some of the [aircrafts] equipment may not work but the propulsion and control system usually is pretty robust said Dr William A Radasky president of Metatech Corp a consulting firm specializing in electromagnetic environment analysis

114

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT Strait of Hormuz

The US would restore oil within days

Klare 2 Michael- Five Colleges professor of Peace and World Security Studies boards of directors of Human Rights Watch and the Arms Control Association ldquoResource Wars The New Landscape of Global Conflictrdquo p 73

Just as it would resist any new Iraqi assault on Kuwait the United States would greet any Iranian move to impede Persian Gulf shipping with an immediate and crushing military response Tomahawk cruise missiles and radar-guided bombs would most likely be used to demolish Iranian ships missile batteries airfields and communications facilities Ships and aircraft already deployed in the region would carry out most of the attacks backed up by additional units sent in from the United States and Europe And while the Iranians might succeed in damaging a number of tankers their ability to imperil the oil flow would quickly be eliminated by superior American firepower4s

115

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Alt Cause- Geomagnetic Storms

Geomagnetic storms make the impact inevitable

Butt 10 Yousaf M- Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics ldquoThe EMP threat fact fiction and response (part 2)rdquo The Space Review February 1 2010 httpwwwthespacereviewcomarticle15531

For the reasons outlined above it is highly unlikely that any adversary would choose tomdashor in the case of a terrorist cell even be remotely capable ofmdashcarrying out a nuclear EMP strike against the US However it is virtually guaranteed that a powerful geomagnetic storm capable of knocking out a significant section of the US electrical grid will occur within the next few decades In fact this may well happen even within next few years as we approach the next period of elevated solar activity known as ldquosolar maximumrdquo which is forecast to peak in 2013 Geomagnetic storms are E3-like low-intensity but long-lasting and low-frequency coupling to long-lines The first recorded evidence of space weather effects on technology was in 1847 when currents were registered in electric telegraph wires Later in 1859 a major failure of telegraph systems in New England and Europe coincided with a large solar flare called the ldquoCarrington Eventrdquo after astronomer Richard Carrington who witnessed the instigating flare However the real modern-era wakeup call to geomagnetic susceptibility of our infrastructure was the (moderate intensity) geomagnetic storm that shut down the entire Hydro Quebec grid in March 1989 There were also reports of computer failures in August of that year in Toronto Canada (which possibly indicate that the associated geomagnetic activity had considerably faster components than just E3) Geomagnetically induced currents (GICs) in long-line power delivery systems are caused by the rate-of-change of the geomagnetic field just as in an E3 pulse Thus the severity of such geomagnetic field disturbances is measured in nanotesla per minute (nTmin) Experience with modern-day infrastructure indicates failures can result even at relatively low-threat intensities For example the instigating activity associated with the Hydro Quebec collapse mentioned above only reached an intensity of ~480 nTmin Solar storms on other occasions have been known to produce geomagnetic disturbances of ~2000 nTmin and a solar storm on May 14ndash15 in 1921 may have produced a disturbance of 4800 nTmin [23] As Mr Kappenman states [23] ldquoanalysis indicates that storms withexcursions of ~2800 nTmin have been observed at geomagnetic latitudes of concern for modern day infrastructures Further anecdotal evidence suggests that ~5000 nTmin may have occurred during the Great Geomagnetic Storm of May 1921rdquo To understand the effects of such GIC on the electric grid we may examine the August 2003 Northeast Blackout which was not geomagnetically induced (It reportedly originated when high-voltage power lines came in contact with ldquoovergrown treesrdquo) This outage affected the Northeast US and parts of Canada and more than 200 power plants including several nuclear plants were shut down as a result of the electricity cutoff Other effects included loss of water pressure possible sewage contamination gridlock various other transportation problems (because of secondary effects on railways airlines and gas stations) and disruption of oil refineriesrsquo operations Phone service was stressed due to the high call volume and several radio and television stations went off the air It is estimated that the one-day blackout cost $7ndash10 billion in spoiled food lost production overtime wages and other related expenses inflicted on more than one-seventh of the US population [24] A similar vegetation-induced outage in Europe occurred on September 28 2003 when ldquoat 301 am one of the main north-south transit lines ndash the Lukmanier transmission line ndash shut down following a flash-over between a conductor cable and a treerdquo The blackout affected about 56 million people although electricity was restored gradually (about 3ndash6 hours) in most places and in most cities electricity were powered on again during the morning Rolling blackouts reportedly continued to affect about 5 of the population for the next two days as repairs were being made Although the August and September 2003 outage was not geomagnetic in origin solar outbursts during late October and early November 2003 triggered severe geomagnetic storms with wide-ranging effects that were described as follows in a 2008 National Academy of Sciences (NAS) study [25] The Sydkraft utility group in Sweden reported that strong geomagnetically induced currents (GIC) over Northern Europe caused transformer problems and even a system failure and subsequent blackout Radiation storm levels were high enough to prompt NASA officials to issue a flight directive to the [International Space Station] astronauts to take precautionary shelter Airlines took unprecedented actions in their high latitude routes to avoid the high radiation levels and communication blackout areas Rerouted flights cost airlines $10000 to $100000 per flight Numerous anomalies were reported by deep space missions and by satellites at all orbits GSFC Space Science Mission Operations Team indicated that approximately 59 of the Earth and Space science missions were impacted The storms are suspected to have caused the loss of the $640 million ADEOS-2 spacecraft On board the ADEOS-2 was the $150 million NASA SeaWinds instrument Due to the variety and intensity of this solar activity outbreak most industries vulnerable to space weather experienced some degree of impact to their operations Even more serious effects can be expected during future powerful geomagnetic storms To quote the NAS study [25] Because of the interconnectedness of critical infrastructures in modern society the impacts of severe space weather events can go beyond disruption of existing technical systems and lead to short-term as well as to long-term collateral socioeconomic disruptionshellip Collateral effects of a longer-term outage would likely includehellip disruption of the transportation communication banking and finance systems and government services the breakdown of the distribution of potable water owing to pump failure and the loss of perishable foods and medications because of lack of refrigeration The resulting loss of services for a significant period of time in even one region of the country could affect the entire nation and have international impacts as well Our electric power grid has continued to become more vulnerable to disruption from geomagnetic storms For example the power delivery system is now operating closer to margin than in the past As Kappenman states ldquomany of the things that we have done to increase operational efficiency and haul power long distances have inadvertently and unknowingly escalated the risks from geomagnetic stormsrdquo [25] The possible extent of a power system collapse from a 4800 nTmin geomagnetic storm (centered at 50deg geomagnetic latitude) is shown in Figure 2 Similar levelsmdash10 times those experienced during the March 1989 stormmdashwere reached during the great magnetic storm of May 14ndash15 1921 A nuclear weapon would need to be a ~multi-megaton size to cause the equivalent E3 damage [15] The most serious outcome of such power delivery system failures is damage to the transformers although other critical systems on the grid are also at risk As the NAS study points out transformers experience ldquoexcessive levels of internal heating brought on by stray flux when GICs cause a transformerrsquos magnetic core to saturate and to spill flux outside the normal core steel magnetic circuithellip previous well-documented cases have involved heating failures that caused melting and burn-through of large-amperage copper windings and leads in these transformers These multi-ton apparatus generally cannot be repaired in the field and if damaged in this manner they need to be replaced with new units which have manufacture lead times of 12 months or morerdquo Metatech Corp estimates that more than 300 large extra-high voltage (EHV) transformers would be exposed to levels of GIC sufficiently high to place these units at risk of failure or permanent damage requiring replacement [25] Figure 3 shows an estimate of percent loss of EHV transformer capacity by state for a 4800 nTmin threat environment such as might occur during a storm of the magnitude of the May 1921 event As a recent article in the journal Science states ldquoThe surging power-line currents induced by a severe solar storm could push the grid into uncharted territoryrdquo [26] In summary current US grid operational procedures are based largely on limited experience generally do not reduce GIC flows and are unlikely to be adequate for historically large disturbance events Historically large storms have a potential to cause power grid blackouts and transformer damage of unprecedented proportions long-term blackouts and lengthy restoration times and chronic shortages for multiple years are possible [25]

116

Cornell HKHANE Aff

China Turn

High Altitude Nuclear Explosions are key to dissuade China

Castle 6 Colonel Douglas A ldquoShaping Chinarsquos Rise Through Strategic Frictionrdquo USAWC Strategy Research Project March 2006

Continued strengthening of the US military can also decelerate Chinarsquos expanding potency Washington must not allow China to outpace Americarsquos conventional or nuclear capabilities and must maintain its clear technological advantages If the US can stay significantly ahead of China in weapons technology ndash such as advanced missile defense electromagnetic pulse (EMP) weapons and space utilization systems ndash then China would be forced to spend inordinate amounts of money to develop a costly defense infrastructure thereby further delaying its power build-up However this plan depends upon safeguarding technology from espionage corporate transmission and allied governmental transfers to prevent a free ride for China Chinarsquos military growth is disconcerting given that it faces no real regional challenge128 Its development of intercontinental nuclear missiles as well as land- and sea-launched weapons poses a significant threat to the continental US as well as forward-based land and maritime US forces Although China has publicly endorsed a ldquono first-strikerdquo strategic nuclear policy 129 its ldquocult of defenserdquo predilection increases the likelihood of a first-strike scenario130 America is especially vulnerable to the effects of a high-altitude EMP-producing detonation Such an attack would cripple Americarsquos economy and infrastructure yet the US has no publicly-stated policy of response131 An effective operational US anti-missile defense shield and credible EMP deterrence are thus essential to American security

Tellis 7 Ashley J- Senior Associate at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace ldquoChinas Military Space Strategyrdquo Survival Volume 49 Issue 3 September 2007

This has led some observers such as US Senator Jon Kyl to conclude that the solution to redressing emerging American space vulnerabilities in the context of competition with China lies in developing among other things US offensive counterspace capabilities90 These will almost certainly be required if for no other reason than to deter Beijings use of anti-space weaponry and to hold at risk its own emerging assets in space which are likely to become even more important for both economic and military purposes as China evolves into a great power91 Offensive American counterspace instruments serve the limited but critical purpose of raising the costs of Chinas evolving space-denial strategy increasing the probability that Beijing will desist from asymmetric attacks on US space assets

117

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT PGS Prolif

Conventional strike doesnrsquot lead to prolif

Guthe 2 Kurt- Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments ldquoThe Nuclear Posture Review How Is the ldquoNew Triadrdquo Newrdquo 2002

Some argue that greater US reliance on long-range precision-guided conventional weapons will increase the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction They claim that adversaries unable to match US nonnuclear strike capabilities will acquire weapons of mass destruction as an asymmetric counter This reasoning ignores the facts The first major demonstration of the operational effectiveness of US precision-guided weapons was the Gulf War of 1991 Foreign militaries were greatly impressed by the key contribution of precision weapons to the US victory Those hostile to the United States recognized the need for strategies tactics and capabilities to offset the US advantage Weapons of mass destruction have been seen as one response44 But every potential adversary of the United States had or was pursuing nuclear biological or chemical weapons well before 199145 While adversaries may see weapons of mass destruction as counters to US precision-guided weapons US nonnuclear strike capabilities have not been the cause of proliferation which results from political military and technological factors that vary with each country Abandoning this advantage would not reverse proliferation but would seriously impair the ability of the United States to defend itself and others Were certain allies and friends to lose confidence in US defense commitments those countries might seek security in nuclear weapons of their own increasing nuclear proliferation The long-range precision guided weapons of the New Triad offer options for deterring or otherwise preventing WMD use thus contributing to US efforts to deal with the existing problem of proliferation

118

Cornell HKHANE Aff

No Solvency- Conventional EMPs

No Solvency- the US has conventional EMPs that are just as powerful

Muumlller amp Schoumlrnig 1 Harald and Niklas- United Nations Institute for Disarmament Research ldquoRMA and nuclear weapons A calamitous link for arms controlrdquo Disarmament Forum 2001(4)

An alternative way to disrupt the opponentrsquos communication is the use of an Electro-Magnetic Pulse (EMP) weapon which produces a short wave of an intense electromagnetic pulse ruining basic electronic components in communication gear (and of course all electronically based equipment) Until recently a high altitude nuclear explosion was the only means to generate an EMP strong enough to seriously harm electronic devices in enemy territory Tests performed in the early 1960s confirmed that a detonation of a 14 megaton bomb 400 kilometres in orbit resulted in failures of electronic systems 1300 kilometres away13 The effects would be even more severe today as low powered electronic equipment tends to be more sensitive to voltage swings Up to now these scenarios based on nuclear weapons were banned by the Outer Space Treaty (OST) of 1967 signed by virtually all nations with certain and potential nuclear capabilities (with the exception of North Korea) However according to unconfirmed sources recent scientific progress in the United States has led to the design of workable conventional EMP weapons generating a less far reaching but similar shockwave14 With this development severe consequences for the OST are inevitable as nuclear-capable countries may feel the need to deploy nuclear EMP weapons in space as a counter-deterrent

119

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Conventional EMPs Shift

Military leaders would shift to HPM weapons ndash worse than an EMP because itrsquos just as dangerous but more usable

Global Security 5[ldquoHigh-power microwave (HPM) E-Bombrdquo httpwwwglobalsecurityorgmilitarysystemsmunitionshpmhtm]

High-power microwave (HPM) sources have been under investigation for several years as potential weapons for a variety of combat sabotage and terrorist applications Due to classification restrictions details of this work are relatively unknown outside the military community and its contractors A key point to recognize is the insidious nature of HPM Due to the gigahertz-band frequencies (4 to 20 GHz) involved HPM has the capability to penetrate not only radio front-ends but also the most minute shielding penetrations throughout the equipment At sufficiently high levels as discussed the potential exists for significant damage to devices and circuits For these reasons HPM should be of interest to the broad spectrum of EMC practitioners Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP) and High Powered Microwave (HMP) Weapons offer a significant capability against electronic equipment susceptible to damage by transient power surges This weapon generates a very short intense energy pulse producing a transient surge of thousands of volts that kills semiconductor devices The conventional EMP and HMP weapons can disable non-shielded electronic devices including practically any modern electronic device within the effective range of the weapon The effectiveness of an EMP device is determined by the power generated and the characteristic of the pulse The shorter pulse wave forms such as microwaves are far more effective against electronic equipment and more difficult to harden against Current efforts focus on converting the energy from an explosive munitions to supply the electromagnetic pulse This method produces significant levels of directionally focused electromagnetic energy Future advances may provide the compactness needed to weaponize the capability in a bomb or missile warhead Currently the radius of the weapon is not as great as nuclear EMP effects Open literature sources indicate that effective radii of ldquohundreds of meters or morerdquo are possible EMP and HPM devices can disable a large variety of military or infrastructure equipment over a relatively broad area This can be useful for dispersed targets A difficulty is determining the appropriate level of energy to achieve the desired effects This will require detailed knowledge of the target equipment and the environment (walls buildings) The obvious counter-measure is the shielding or hardening of electronic equipment Currently only critical military equipment is hardened eg strategic command and control systems Hardening of existing equipment is difficult and adds significant weight and expense As a result a large variety of commercial and military equipment will be susceptible to this type of attack The US Navy reportedly used a new class of highly secret non-nuclear electromagnetic pulse warheads during the opening hours of the Persian Gulf War to disrupt and destroy Iraqi electronics systems The warheads converted the energy of a conventional explosion into a pulse of radio energy The effect of the microwave attacks on Iraqi air defense and headquarters was difficult to determine because the effects of the HPM blasts were obscured by continuous jamming the use of stealthy F-117 aircraft and the destruction of Iraqs electrical grid The warheads used during the Gulf War were experimental warheads not standard weapons deployed with fielded forces Col William G Heckathorn commander of the Phillips Research Site and the deputy director of the Directed Energy Directorate of the Air Force Research Laboratory was presented the Legion of Merit medal during special retirement ceremonies in May 1998 In a citation accompanying the medal Col Heckathorn was praised for having provided superior vision leadership and direct guidance that resulted in the first high-power microwave weapon prototypes delivered to the warfighter The citation noted that Col Heckathorn united all directed energy development within Army Navy and Air Force which resulted in an efficient focused warfighter-oriented tri-service research program In December of 1994 he came to Kirtland to become the director of the Advanced Weapons and Survivability Directorate at the Phillips Laboratory Last year he became the commander of the Phillips Laboratory while still acting as the director of the Advanced Weapons and Survivability Directorate As with a conventional munition a microwave munition is a single shot munition that has a similar blast and fragmentation radius However while the explosion produces a blast the primary mission is to generate the energy that powers the microwave device Thus for a microwave munition the primary kill mechanism is the microwave energy which greatly increases the radius and the footprint by in some cases several orders of magnitude For example a 2000-pound microwave munition will have a minimum radius of approximately 200 meters or footprint of approximately 126000 square meters Studies have examined the incorporation of a high power microwave weapon into the weapons bay of a conceptual uninhabited combat aerial vehicle The CONOPS electromagnetic compatibility and hardening (to avoid a self-kill) power requirements and potential power supplies and antenna characteristics have been analyzed Extensive simulations of potential antennas have been performed The simulations examined the influence of the aircraft structure on the antenna patterns and the levels of leakage through apertures in the weapons bay Other investigations examined issues concerning the electromagnetic shielding effectiveness of composite aircraft structures Collateral damage from E-bombs is dependent on the size and design of the specific bomb An E-bomb that utilizes explosive power to obtain its damaging microwaves will result in typical blast and shrapnel damage Ideally an E-Bomb would be designed to minimize and dissipate most of the mechanical collateral damage Human exposure to microwave radiation is hazardous within several meters of the epicenter However there is a relatively low risk of bodily damage at further distances Any non-military electronics within range of the E-bomb that have not been protected have a high probability of being damaged or destroyed The best way to defend against E-bomb attack is to destroy the platform or delivery vehicle in which the E-bomb resides Another method of protection is to keep all essential electronics within an electrically conductive enclosure called a Faraday cage This prevents the damaging electromagentic field from interacting with vital equipment The problem with Faraday cages is that most vital equipment needs to be in contact with the outside world This contact point can allow the electromagentic field to enter the cage which ultimately renders the enclosure useless There are ways to protect against these Faraday cage flaws but the fact remains that this is a dangerous weakpoint In most circumstances E-bombs are categorized as non-lethal weapons because of the minimal collateral damage they create The E-bombs non-lethal categorization gives military commanders more politically-friendly options to choose from

120

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Conventional EMPs Shift

HPM triggers all your impacts

Danchev 6 Dancho Independent Security Consultancy Threat Intelligence Analysis (OSINTCyber Counter Intelligence) and Competitive Intelligence researcher ldquoEMP Attacks - Electronic Domination in Reverserdquo httpddanchevblogspotcom200605emp-attacks-electronic-domination-inhtml]

Why wouldnt a reported sponsor of terrorist nations wage EMP warfare or even try to over the US Because they would have the US in their backyard in less than a day but the opportunity to balance the powers or achieve temporary military advantage given the attack remains undetected is a tempting factor for future developments -- the ongoing miniaturization and the fact that intense energy effects can be can be produced without an A-Bomb makes it even worse Surgical HPM and EMP attacks without fear of retaliation is what possible adversaries could be aiming at and of course portability Other HPM weapons being tested by the military are portable and re-usable through battery-power and are effective when fired miles away from a target These weapons can also be focused like a laser beam and tuned to an appropriate frequency in order to penetrate electronics that are heavily shielded against a nuclear attack The deepest bunkers with the thickest concrete walls reportedly are not safe from such a beam if they have even a single unprotected wire reaching the surface

HPM or conventional EMP will be substituted

Krepinevich 1 Andrew- defense policy analyst executive director of the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments ldquoBeyond the Two-MTW Posturerdquo Testimony before the House Committee on Armed Services on June 20 2001

Strategic Strike The United States military is capable of moving beyond near-total reliance on nuclear weapons for prompt effective strategic strike operations Precision munitions have a significant substitution potential with respect to nuclear weapons Various forms of electronic attack (ie IW strikes conventionally generated EMP and HPM strikes) may also possess a significant substitution potential Such weapons are far more ldquouseablerdquo than nuclear weapons and may better deter an enemyrsquos attempts at coercion or aggression They can enable us to reduce the size of our nuclear arsenal (while encouraging others to follow suit)

121

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT Warfighting Advantage

Their warfighting advantage is logically flawed

Burnham 83 David- co-director of the Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse (TRAC) ldquoUS Fears One Bomb Could Cripple The Nationrdquo The New York Times

Many experts question the likelihood that any nuclear war would be limited to the exchange of a handful of nuclear explosions My personal feeling is that if an attack ever came it would be a massive one on our cities and military bases and the effect of EMP on the civilian economy would be irrelevant said Dr Gordon K Soper a senior scientist in the Defense Nuclear Agency But there has been a good deal of talk about the possibility of a protracted nuclear war Mr Latham the Pentagon official expressed the same kind of ambivalence I dont think a cheap shot is likely but there is no way we can know for sure The possibility of using EMP as a oneshot weapon is not considered likely because of impossibility of predicting the exact response

122

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Nuclear Winter Imagery Good

Forecasts of nuclear winter spur change to abandon nuclear madness

Robock amp Toon 10 Alan- Department of Environmental Sciences Rutgers University and Owen Brian- Director and Professor Department of Atmospheric and Oceanic Sciences University of Colorado ldquoLocal Nuclear War Global Sufferingrdquo Scientific American January 2010

Twenty-five years ago international teams of scientists showed that a nuclear war between the US and the Soviet Union could produce a ldquonuclear winterrdquo The smoke from vast fires started by bombs dropped on cities and industrial areas would envelop the planet and absorb so much sunlight that the earthrsquos surface would get cold dark and dry killing plants worldwide and eliminating our food supply Surface temperatures would reach winter values in the summer International discussion about this prediction fueled largely by astronomer Carl Sagan forced the leaders of the two superpowers to confront the possibility that their arms race endangered not just themselves but the entire human race Countries large and small demanded disarmament Nuclear winter became an important factor in ending the nuclear arms race Looking back later in 2000 former Soviet Union leader Mikhail S Gorbachev observed ldquoModels made by Russian and American scientists showed that a nuclear war would result in a nuclear winter that would be extremely destructive to all life on earth the knowledge of that was a great stimulus to us to people of honor and morality to actrdquo Why discuss this topic now that the cold war has ended Because as other nations continue to acquire nuclear weapons smaller regional nuclear wars could create a similar global catastrophe New analyses reveal that a conflict between India and Pakistan for example in which 100 nuclear bombs were dropped on cities and industrial areasmdashonly 04 percent of the worldrsquos more than 25000 warheadsmdashwould produce enough smoke to cripple global agriculture A regional war could cause widespread loss of life even in countries far away from the conflict

123

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Regional Nuclear War

Newest studies indicate small scale nuclear wars would lead to extinction

Robock amp Toon 10 Alan- Department of Environmental Sciences Rutgers University and Owen Brian- Director and Professor Department of Atmospheric and Oceanic Sciences University of Colorado ldquoLocal Nuclear War Global Sufferingrdquo Scientific American January 2010

By deploying modern computers and modern climate models the two of us and our colleagues have shown that not only were the ideas of the 1980s correct but the effects would last for at least 10 years much longer than previously thought And by doing calculations that assess decades of time only now possible with fast current computers and by including in our calculations the oceans and the entire atmosphere mdash also only now possiblemdashwe have found that the smoke from even a regional war would be heated and lofted by the sun and remain suspended in the upper atmosphere for years continuing to block sunlight and to cool the earth India and Pakistan which together have more than 100 nuclear weapons may be the most worrisome adversaries capable of a regional nuclear conflict today But other countries besides the US and Russia (which have thousands) are well endowed China France and the UK have hundreds of nuclear warheads Israel has more than 80 North Korea has about 10 and Iran may well be trying to make its own In 2004 this situation prompted one of us (Toon) and later Rich Turco of the University of California Los Angeles both veterans of the 1980s investigations to begin evaluating what the global environmental effects of a regional nuclear war would be and to take as our test case an engagement between India and Pakistan The latest estimates by David Albright of the Institute for Science and International Security and by Robert S Norris of the Natural Resources Defense Council are that India has 50 to 60 assembled weapons (with enough plutonium for 100) and that Pakistan has 60 weapons Both countries continue to increase their arsenals Indian and Pakistani nuclear weapons tests indicate that the yield of the warheads would be similar to the 15-kiloton explosive yield (equivalent to 15000 tons of TNT) of the bomb the US used on Hiroshima Toon and Turco along with Charles Bardeen now at the National Center for Atmospheric Research modeled what would happen if 50 Hiroshimasize bombs were dropped across the highest population-density targets in Pakistan and if 50 similar bombs were also dropped across India Some people maintain that nuclear weapons would be used in only a measured way But in the wake of chaos fear and broken communications that would occur once a nuclear war began we doubt leaders would limit attacks in any rational manner This likelihood is particularly true for Pakistan which is small and could be quickly overrun in a conventional conflict Peter R Lavoy of the Naval Postgraduate School for example has analyzed the ways in which a conflict between India and Pakistan might occur and argues that Pakistan could face a decision to use all its nuclear arsenal quickly before India swamps its military bases with traditional forces Obviously we hope the number of nuclear targets in any future war will be zero but policy makers and voters should know what is possible Toon and Turco found that more than 20 million people in the two countries could die from the blasts fires and radioactivitymdasha horrible slaughter But the investigators were shocked to discover that a tremendous amount of smoke would be generated given the megacities in the two countries assuming each fire would burn the same area that actually did burn in Hiroshima and assuming an amount of burnable material per person based on various studies They calculated that the 50 bombs exploded in Pakistan would produce three teragrams of smoke and the 50 bombs hitting India would generate four (one teragram equals a million metric tons) Satellite observations of actual forest fires have shown that smoke can be lofted up through the troposphere (the bottom layer of the atmosphere) and sometimes then into the lower stratosphere (the layer just above extending to about 30 miles) Toon and Turco also did some ldquoback of the enveloperdquo calculations of the possible climate impact of the smoke should it enter the stratosphere The large magnitude of such effects made them realize they needed help from a climate modeler It turned out that one of us (Robock) was already working with Luke Oman now at the NASA Goddard Space Flight Center who was finishing his PhD at Rutgers University on the climatic effects of volcanic eruptions and with Georgiy L Stenchikov also at Rutgers and an author of the first Russian work on nuclear winter They developed a climate model that could be used fairly easily for the nuclear blast calculations Robock and his colleagues being conservative put five teragrams of smoke into their modeled upper troposphere over India and Pakistan on an imaginary May 15 The model calculated how winds would blow the smoke around the world and how the smoke particles would settle out from the atmosphere The smoke covered all the continents within two weeks The black sooty smoke absorbed sunlight warmed and rose into the stratosphere Rain never falls there so the air is never cleansed by precipitation particles very slowly settle out by falling with air resisting them Soot particles are small with an average diameter of only 01 micron (μm) and so drift down very slowly They also rise during the daytime as they are heated by the sun repeatedly delaying their elimination The calculations showed that the smoke would reach far higher into the upper stratosphere than the sulfate particles that are produced by episodic volcanic eruptions Sulfate particles are transparent and absorb much less sunlight than soot and are also bigger typically 05 μm The volcanic particles remain airborne for about two years but smoke from nuclear fires would last a decade Killing Frosts in Summer The climatic response to the smoke was surprising Sunlight was immediately reduced cooling the planet to temperatures lower than any experienced for the past 1000 years The global average cooling of about 125 degrees Celsius (23 degrees Fahrenheit) lasted for several years and even after 10 years the temperature was still 05 degree C colder than normal The models also showed a 10 percent reduction in precipitation worldwide Precipitation river flow and soil moisture all decreased because blocking sunlight reduces evaporation and weakens the hydrologic cycle Drought was largely

124

Cornell HKHANE Aff

concentrated in the lower latitudes however because global cooling would retard the Hadley air circulation pattern in the tropics which produces a large fraction of global precipitation In critical areas such as the Asian monsoon regions rainfall dropped by as much as 40 percent The cooling might not seem like much but even a small dip can cause severe consequences Cooling and diminished sunlight would for example shorten growing seasons in the midlatitudes More insight into the effects of cooling came from analyses of the aftermaths of massive volcanic eruptions Every once in a while such eruptions produce temporary cooling for a year or two The largest of the past 500 years the 1815 Tambora eruption in Indonesia blotted the sun and produced global cooling of about 05 degree C for a year 1816 became known as ldquoThe Year without a Summerrdquo or ldquoEighteen Hundred and Froze to Deathrdquo In New England although the average summer temperature was lowered only a few degrees crop-killing frosts occurred in every month After the first frost farmers replanted crops only to see them killed by the next frost The price of grain skyrocketed the price of livestock plummeted as farmers sold the animals they could not feed and a mass migration began from New England to the Midwest as people followed reports of fertile land there In Europe the weather was so cold and gloomy that the stock market collapsed widespread famines occurred and 18-year-old Mary Shelley was inspired to write Frankenstein Certain strains of crops such as winter wheat can withstand lower temperatures but a lack of sunlight inhibits their ability to grow In our scenario daylight would filter through the high smoky haze but on the ground every day would seem to be fully overcast Agronomists and farmers could not develop the necessary seeds or adjust agricultural practices for the radically different conditions unless they knew ahead of time what to expect In addition to the cooling drying and darkness extensive ozone depletion would result as the smoke heated the stratosphere reactions that create and destroy ozone are temperature-dependent Michael J Mills of the University of Colorado at Boulder ran a completely separate climate model from Robockrsquos but found similar results for smoke lofting and stratospheric temperature changes He concluded that although surface temperatures would cool by a small amount the stratosphere would be heated by more than 50 degrees C because the black smoke particles absorb sunlight This heating in turn would modify winds in the stratosphere which would carry ozone-destroying nitrogen oxides into its upper reaches Together the high temperatures and nitrogen oxides would reduce ozone to the same dangerous levels we now experience below the ozone hole above Antarctica every spring Ultraviolet radiation on the ground would increase significantly because of the diminished ozone Less sunlight and precipitation cold spells shorter growing seasons and more ultraviolet radiation would all reduce or eliminate agricultural production Notably cooling and ozone loss would be most profound in middle and high latitudes in both hemispheres whereas precipitation declines would be greatest in the tropics The specific damage inflicted by each of these environmental changes would depend on particular crops soils agricultural practices and regional weather patterns and no researchers have completed detailed analyses of such agricultural responses Even in normal times however feeding the growing human population depends on transferring food across the globe to make up for regional farming deficiencies caused by drought and seasonal weather changes The total amount of grain stored on the planet today would feed the earthrsquos population for only about two months [see ldquoCould Food Shortages Bring Down Civilizationrdquo by Lester R Brown Scientific American May] Most cities and countries have stockpiled food supplies for just a very short period and food shortages (as well as rising prices) have increased in recent years A nuclear war could trigger declines in yield nearly everywhere at once and a worldwide panic could bring the global agricultural trading system to a halt with severe shortages in many places Around one billion people worldwide who now live on marginal food supplies would be directly threatened with starvation by a nuclear war between India and Pakistan or between other regional nuclear powers Typically scientists test models and theories by doing experiments but we obviously cannot experiment in this case Thus we look for analogues that can verify our models Burned cities Unfortunately firestorms created by intense releases of energy have pumped vast quantities of smoke into the upper atmosphere San Francisco burned as a result of the 1906 earthquake and whole cities were incinerated during World War II including Dresden Hamburg Tokyo Hiroshima and Nagasaki These events confirm that smoke from intense urban fires rises into the upper atmosphere The seasonal cycle In actual winter the climate is cooler because the days are shorter and sunlight is less intense the simple change of seasons helps us quantify the effects of less solar radiation Our climate models re-create the seasonal cycle well confirming that they properly reflect changes in sunlight Eruptions Explosive volcanic eruptions such as those of Tambora in 1815 Krakatau in 1883 and Pinatubo in 1991 provide several lessons The resulting sulfate aerosol clouds that formed in the stratosphere were transported around the world by winds The surface temperature plummeted after each eruption in proportion to the thickness of the particulate cloud After the Pinatubo eruption the global average surface temperature dropped by about 025 degree C Global precipitation river flow and soil moisture all decreased Our models reproduce these effects Forest fires Smoke from large forest fires sometimes is injected into the troposphere and lower stratosphere and is transported great distances producing cooling Our models perform well against these effects too Extinction of the dinosaurs An asteroid smashed into Mexicorsquos Yucataacuten Peninsula 65 million years ago The resulting dust cloud mixed with smoke from fires blocked the Sun killing the dinosaurs Massive volcanism in India at the same time may have exacerbated the effects The events teach us that large amounts of aerosols in the earthrsquos atmosphere can change climate drastically enough to kill robust species

125

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Regional Nuclear War

Prefer our evidence- only current research

Robock amp Toon 10 Alan- Department of Environmental Sciences Rutgers University and Owen Brian- Director and Professor Department of Atmospheric and Oceanic Sciences University of Colorado ldquoLocal Nuclear War Global Sufferingrdquo Scientific American January 2010

Some people think that the nuclear winter theory developed in the 1980s was discredited And they may therefore raise their eyebrows at our new assertion that a regional nuclear war like one between India and Pakistan could also devastate agriculture worldwide But the original theory was thoroughly validated The science behind it was supported by investigations from the National Academy of Sciences by studies sponsored within the US military and by the International Council of Scientific Unions which included representatives from 74 national academies of science and other scientific bodies Our current work has appeared in leading peer-reviewed journals Still we seem to be the only ones pursuing research into the global environmental risks of nuclear exchanges We urge others to evaluate and repeat the calculations both for the effects of a superpower conflagration and for more regional nuclear wars

126

Cornell HKHANE Aff

No EMP- Norms Now

Berry 8 Ken Research Coordinator ICNND ldquoNew Weapons Technologyrdquo International Commission on Nuclear Non-proliferation and Disarmament

However it is unlikelymdashthough unfortunately not impossiblemdashthat any nuclear armed state these days would use EMP generated by nuclear weapons Using an atmospheric nuclear blast would attract international opprobrium both for its proliferation implications and also increasingly important for its effects on the environment As has been discussed above the same widespread effects of shutting down a nationrsquos power grid production lines water utilities chemical plants financial institutions telecommunications and transportation routes could be achieved by cyber attack Moreover given the difficulty of tracing the perpetrators of cyberwarfare responsibility for such an attack would be deniable44

No risk of EMP use now

Arquilla and Ronfeldt 2k[John and David RAND ldquoSwarming and the Future of Conflictrdquo]

One of the most effective means of breaking down communications is by an airburst of a nuclear weapon at a high altitude This generation of a highly disruptive electromagnetic pulse (EMP) would temporarily disable most communications in the battlespace it would also damage the many embedded information systems that make modern weapons systems able to fire with accuracy (eg the optical sights of a main battle tank) The fact that the EMP is generated by a nuclear detonationmdashagainst which there are strong normative inhibitionsmdashsuggests that there are few actors who might actually be able to undertake such an action Yet we note the frequent discussion of EMP as a likely threat in cold warndashera ruminations on nuclear strategy44 Further the high-altitude nature of the burst means that there would be virtually no collateral damage Finally it should be noted that the Russian militaryrsquos declaratory stance with respect to nuclear weapons has moved in recent years from ldquono first userdquo to a willingness to engage in ldquofirst userdquo It may be that their inability to match American advances in conventional warfighting will impel the Russians to try to make up for any deficiencies in this manner Indeed the recently announced new Russian military doctrine is clearly more permissive of the use of nuclear weapons from the tactical to the strategic level

127

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Russia CMR Link

Russian military doctrine supports the potential use of EMP

Arquilla and Ronfeldt 2k[John and David RAND ldquoSwarming and the Future of Conflictrdquo]

One of the most effective means of breaking down communications is by an airburst of a nuclear weapon at a high altitude This generation of a highly disruptive electromagnetic pulse (EMP) would temporarily disable most communications in the battlespace it would also damage the many embedded information systems that make modern weapons systems able to fire with accuracy (eg the optical sights of a main battle tank) The fact that the EMP is generated by a nuclear detonationmdashagainst which there are strong normative inhibitionsmdashsuggests that there are few actors who might actually be able to undertake such an action Yet we note the frequent discussion of EMP as a likely threat in cold warndashera ruminations on nuclear strategy44 Further the high-altitude nature of the burst means that there would be virtually no collateral damage Finally it should be noted that the Russian militaryrsquos declaratory stance with respect to nuclear weapons has moved in recent years from ldquono first userdquo to a willingness to engage in ldquofirst userdquo It may be that their inability to match American advances in conventional warfighting will impel the Russians to try to make up for any deficiencies in this manner Indeed the recently announced new Russian military doctrine is clearly more permissive of the use of nuclear weapons from the tactical to the strategic level

128

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Infrastructure CP

The United States federal government should implement the findings of the EMP Commission

Solvency ndash

EMP Commissionrsquos findings havenrsquot yet been implemented

Treadwell and Thompson 9[Mead Treadwell is a Senior Fellow in Security and Defense and Jeremy Thompson is a Research Associate in Security and Defense both at the Institute of the North ldquoEMP Attacks Infrastructure amp Public Policy Concernsrdquo Inside ALEC NovDec]

Yet the dots are not being connected The Department of Homeland Security has made no official move to implement or even accept the recommendations of the EMP Commission report on critical national infrastructures While some members of Congress understand the threat and wish to do something about it most of the ire has been directed at power industry figures as a Congressional hearing earlier this summer illustrates

Solves vulnerability to EMP

EMP Commission 4[ Report of the Commission to Assess the Threat to the United States from Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP) Attack Volume 1 Executive Report 2004 Dr John S Foster Jr Mr Earl Gjelde Dr William R Graham (Chairman) Dr Robert J Hermann Mr Henry (Hank) M Kluepfel GEN Richard L Lawson USAF (Ret) Dr Gordon K Soper Dr Lowell L Wood Jr Dr Joan B Woodard]

The Nationrsquos vulnerability to EMP that gives rise to potentially large-scale long-term consequences can be reasonably and readily reduced below the level of a potentially catastrophic national problem by coordinated and focused effort between the private and public sectors of our country The cost for such improved security in the next 3 to 5 years is modest by any standardmdashand extremely so in relation to both the war on terror and the value of the national infrastructures involved The appropriate response to this threatening situation is a balance of prevention protection planning and preparations for recovery Such actions are both rational and feasible A number of these actions also reduce vulnerabilities to other serious threats to our infrastructures thus giving multiple benefits

129

Cornell HKHANE Aff

NMD CP

McNeill amp Weitz 8 Jena Baker- homeland security policy analyst at The Heritage Foundation and Richard- Senior Fellow and Director of the Center for Political-Military Analysis at Hudson Institute ldquoElectromagnetic Pulse (EMP) Attack A Preventable Homeland Security Catastropherdquo Heritage Foundation Backgrounder 2199 httpwwwheritageorgresearchhomelandsecuritybg2199cfm_ftn19

Build a Comprehensive Missile Defense System The most likely method of EMP attack would be a ballistic missile armed with a nuclear warhead Building a comprehensive missile defense system would allow the US to intercept and destroy a missile bound for the United States The mere implementation of such a system would go a long way to prevent an attack by dissuading those who wish to carry out such actions and sending a clear message that the US takes this threat seriously

Those opposed to missile defense in Congress and elsewhere have attempted to paint such an endeavor as a waste of resources that does nothing to further American security 33 Minutes Protecting America in the New Missile Age A Reader a collection of essays by pre-eminent defense scholars emphasized the need for such measures and recent missile testing by Iran demonstrates that other countries are actively involved in developing missile programsmdashwhich could be used against the US[21]

130

Cornell HKHANE Aff

LoW key to Stability

Hair trigger alert serves as a warning light not to push conflicts too far Plan leads to dangerous confrontations

Perry amp Millot 98 Walter L- Senior Information Scientist and Marc Dean ldquoChapter Three Issues from the Winter Wargamerdquo Issues from the 1997 Army After Next Winter Wargame RAND Corporation 9

The possible exception to the above statement is strategic nuclear war In this instance the technology supporting military operations outstrips the timelines of political decision During the Cold War a Soviet SLBM launched off the eastern seaboard of the United States would have given a President less than 10 minutes to decide whether to order a limited number of response options contained in the Single Integrated Operational Plan or leave that decision to a successor The flight time of Soviet ICBMs allowed the United States less than 45 minutes to execute what might well turn out to be a single retaliatory response The damage done by Soviet nuclear strikes might conceivably deny the United States the capacity to retaliate with weapons other than SLBMs if national leaders chose to decide on a response only after ldquoriding outrdquo the attack and would probably lead to an incoherent response But the damage done by even an incoherent US retaliation would have decimated the Soviet Union and destroyed large portions of its structures for controlling war A Soviet nuclear attack would have left the fate of the United States indeed the world solely in the hands of the President He wouldmdashat bestmdashhave perhaps minutes to confer with his closest advisors and literally no time for consultation or even communication with the Congress the people allies or even the Soviets The requirement to ldquouse it or lose itrdquo would have left no room for a political leaderrsquos wellhoned techniques of crisis management The Soviet leadership faced the same problem and the symmetry provided a powerful incentive for the two superpowers to avoid direct confrontation engage in measures designed to control the risks and consequences of nuclear war and enter into vastly expensive efforts to buy their NCAs and successors some ability to control the conduct of war including limited nuclear options effective means of nuclear attack assessment as well as tactical warning continuity of operations and ultimately strategic defenses

131

• EMP AFF Index
• 1AC Plan
• Solvency
• Future Wars Adv
• Future Wars Adv
• Accidents Adv
• Accidents Adv
• Accidents Adv
• Rogue EMP Adv
• Rogue EMP Adv
• Rogue EMP Adv
• Rogue EMP Adv
• Rogue EMP Adv
• China Advantage
• China Advantage
• General Topicality 12
• General Topicality 22
• General Topicality 1AR 12
• General Topicality 1AR 22
• More Topicality
• Future Wars Conflicts Likely
• Future Wars Ext
• AT Limited War Winter
• Accidents- LoW Bad
• AT FS Remains - Russia
• AT FS Remains - China
• AT FS Remains - Subs
• Rogue- Seeking
• China Solves NoKo
• Rogue Satelites
• Rogue- AT No Tech
• Rogue- AT No Long Range Missiles
• Rogue- AT Uncertain Effects
• Rogue- AT Attribution
• Iran Ev
• NoKo Ev
• Terrorism Adv
• Terrorism Adv
• Terrorism Ext
• China- AT Attribution
• Space Militarization Adv 1
• Space Militarization Adv 2
• Space Militarization Adv 3
• Space Ext
• Data Sharing Adv
• Data Sharing Adv
• Data Sharing Adv
• Data Sharing- Uniqueness
• Data Sharing- Data Needed
• Russia Data Sharing (Testing)
• Russian ARMS control
• Modeling Advantage 1
• Modeling Advantage- Israel
• Modeling Advantage- Israel
• Modeling Advantage- China
• Modeling Advantage- Solvency
• Israeli Strikes Bad
• Testing Advantage
• EMPacts Econ
• EMPacts Heg
• EMPacts Earthquake
• EMPacts GPS
• EMPacts Satelites
• EMPacts Healthcare
• Morality Advantage
• AT Verifiability
• AT Verifiability
• Verifiability Extensions
• AT CMR
• Politics Link Answers
• Politics Link Answers
• Politics Link Turn
• AT Geomagnetic Storms
• AT Geomagnetic Storms
• AT Blackout Alt Causes
• AT Alternative EMP forms
• AT Protective Measures
• AT Protective Measures
• AT Low Altitude Nuclear Explosions
• CP Theories
• AT Hardening CP
• AT Hardening CP
• AT NMD CP
• AT PAROS CP
• AT Asteroids PIC
• AT Japan Rearm
• AT Consult Japan
• AT Primacy DA
• AT Primacy DA
• AT Damage Limitation
• AT Damage Limitation
• AT Damage Limitation
• AT Deterrence DA
• AT Deterrence DA
• AT Deterrence DA
• AT Deterrence DA
• No US Second Strike
• Yes US Second Strike
• Yes US Second Strike
• AT Security Kritik
• AT Kritiks
• AT Religion K
• AT Psychoanalysis
• Negative
• Not Topical
• Tix Links
• GOP Link
• AT Terrorist EMP
• AT State EMP
• AT RussiaChina EMP
• AT Proliferators EMP
• EMPacts False
• AT Strait of Hormuz
• Alt Cause- Geomagnetic Storms
• China Turn
• AT PGS Prolif
• No Solvency- Conventional EMPs
• Conventional EMPs Shift
• Conventional EMPs Shift
• AT Warfighting Advantage
• Nuclear Winter Imagery Good
• Regional Nuclear War
• Regional Nuclear War
• No EMP- Norms Now
• Russia CMR Link
• Infrastructure CP
• NMD CP
• LoW key to Stability

Cornell HKHANE Aff

No US Second Strike98Yes US Second Strike99Yes US Second Strike100AT Security Kritik101AT Kritiks102AT Religion K103AT Psychoanalysis104Negative105Not Topical106Tix Links107GOP Link108AT Terrorist EMP109AT State EMP110AT RussiaChina EMP111AT Proliferators EMP112EMPacts False113AT Strait of Hormuz114Alt Cause- Geomagnetic Storms115China Turn116AT PGS Prolif117No Solvency- Conventional EMPs118Conventional EMPs Shift119Conventional EMPs Shift120AT Warfighting Advantage121Nuclear Winter Imagery Good122Regional Nuclear War123Regional Nuclear War125No EMP- Norms Now126Russia CMR Link127Infrastructure CP128NMD CP129LoW key to Stability130

3

Cornell HKHANE Aff

1AC Plan

Plan The United States federal government should ban high-altitude nuclear explosions

4

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Solvency

Plan eliminates electromagnetic pulse warfare

Johnston 9 Robert Wm- PhD in physics from UT-Dallas ldquoHigh-altitude nuclear explosionsrdquo 28 January 2009

Several effects are relatively unique to high altitude bursts Electromagnetic pulse (EMP) is important only for high altitude bursts For such detonations ionization

of the upper atmosphere can produce a brief intense pulse of radio frequency radiation which can damage or disrupt electronic devices For explosions above most of the atmosphere EMP can affect large areas

Ionization of the atmosphere from explosions in the atmosphere can interfere with radar and radio communications for short periods

Charged particles produced by explosions above the Earths atmosphere can be captured by the Earths magnetic field temporarily creating artificial radiation belts that can damage spacecraft and injure astronautscosmonauts in orbit

5

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Future Wars Adv

Future great power wars will be initiated with EMP strikes

Lewallen 2 John- Political Science at Whitman University organizer of the Nuclear Peace Action Group Fulbright Scholarship recipient Public Ocean Access Network ldquoHigh-Altitude Nuclear Warrdquo Nuclear Press p30

ldquoIn all the war games in which I have been present and all the ones which I have studied when I have not been present the attack the red attack always begins with an EMP laydown on blue that is a Soviet laydown on the continental United States by multiple megaton high-altitude burstsrdquo-Dr Lowell Wood Nuclear EMP Hearings p173Any major nuclear war these days seems sure to be a two-stage affair First one or several high-altitude nuclear explosions will occur wiping out all unprotected and imperfectly- protected military and civilian electronics within line of sight of the burst If Dr Lowell Wood and Mr William Graham are correct in their 1999 assessment of US nuclear strategic EMP hardening there might not be much left of the US nuclear retaliatory system after the initial EMP attack 35 The second stage low-altitude nuclear war might or might not coincide with or follow the initial high-altitude nuclear EMP strike Certainly all national leaders should have an EMP-hardened communication system to compare notes after the first high-altitude nuclear bomb goes off

In the absence of EMP strikes mutual interest would de-escalation nuclear war

Quinlan 9 Michael- Director of the Ditchley Foundation former British defence strategist and former Permanent Under-Secretary of State ldquoThinking about nuclear weapons principles problems prospectsrdquo p63

There are good reasons for fearing escalation These include the confusion of war its stresses anger hatred and the desire for revenge reluctance to accept the humiliation of backing down the desire to get further blows in first Given all this the risks of escalation are grave in any conflict between advanced powers and Western leaders during the cold war were rightly wont to emphasize them in the interests of deterrence But this is not to say that they are virtually certain or even necessarily odds-on still less that they are so for all the assorted circumstances in which the situation might arise in a nuclear world to which past experience is only a limited guide It is entirely possible for example that the initial use of nuclear weapons breaching a barrier that has held since 1945 might so horrify both sides in a conflict that they recognized an overwhelming common interest in composing their differences The human pressures in that direction would be very great Even if initial nuclear use did not quickly end the fighting the supposition of inexorable momentum in a developing exchange with each side rushing to overreaction amid confusion and uncertainty is implausible It fails to consider what the situation of the decision-makers would really be Neither side could want escalation Both would be appalled at what was going on Both would be desperately looking for signs that the other was ready to call a halt Both given the capacity for evasion or concealment which modern delivery platforms and vehicles can possess could have in reserve significant forces invulnerable enough not to entail use-or-lose pressures (It may be more open to question as noted earlier whether newer nuclear-weapon possessors can be immediately in that position but it is within reach of any substantial state with advanced technological capabilities and attaining it is certain to be a high priority in the development of forces) As a result neither side can have any predisposition to suppose in an ambiguous situation of fearful risk that the right course when in doubt is to go on copiously launching weapons And none of this analysis rests on any presumption of highly subtle or pre-concerted rationality The rationality required is plain

6

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Future Wars Adv

Nuclear planners know that EMP strikes make limited war impossible and are therefore forced to launch a full out nuclear strike at the onset of conflict

CDI 2 Center for Defense Information ldquoRethinking the Unthinkablerdquo The Washington Post July 28 2002 httpwwwcdiorgnuclearrethinking-prcfm

Yet counterforce theories to Blair were equally removed from operational reality The notion that a nuclear war might be rationally fought over an extended periodmdashthat it might involve a number of nuclear exchanges yet result in negotiations before things really got out of handmdashwas never more than pie-in-the-sky academic nonsense The main reason Blair saysmdashas military leaders have always understood in spadesmdashwas that in the early stages of a nuclear war command and control systems on both sides would be extremely vulnerable to what was called decapitation The pilots and battle staff responsible for the airborne SAC command post known at the time as Looking Glass were acutely aware of the decapitation problem Blair says Once the bombs start falling they used to tell him were totally screwed To make matters worse in the early 70s it was discovered that a single high-altitude nuclear explosion would release an intense pulse of electromagnetic energy that would massively disrupt communications and avionics Planes would be falling out of the sky Some aspects of the command and control system could bemdashand subsequently weremdashhardened against attack But some could not And the systems overall vulnerability Blair says meant that no matter how much concrete was packed around a Minuteman missile riding out a first strike was not a viable basis for strategy So what were the military planners to do The answer was to gear the whole war plan to launch on warning This was not acknowledged publiclymdashit was too controversial Blair saysmdashbut insiders knew that the system was designed to force a quick decision and get the missiles out of their silos as soon as possible after learning of an enemy attack Both sides were prepared to do this though the Soviets didnt put their launch-on-warning system in place Blair learned until that scary period in the early Reagan years Call this deterrence if you want Youve certainly got two sides facing off with each armed so heavily as to give the other pause Or call it counterforce All those missiles can be aimed at military targets and fired preemptively at any time But to Blair the label is beside the point What matters is the decision to place thousands upon thousands of potential Hiroshimas on hair-trigger alert in systems within which even a minor error carries the potential for unimaginable horror With a missile taking only 30 minutes to travel from the Soviet Union to the United Statesmdashand far less if delivered from an offshore submarinemdashthe launch-on-warning timetable is impossibly tight In the North American Aerospace Defense Commands bombproof bunker beneath Colorados Cheyenne Mountain they have three minutes from the time the first sensor report comes in to the time they have to say Were under attack Blair says Three minutes Then comes an emergency conference and an officer in Omaha briefs the president And do you know how much time hes allowed to give that briefing Thirty seconds

Plan solves EMP first-strike paranoia and nullifies the benefits of an all out nuclear war

Lewallen 99 John- Public Ocean Access Network ldquoThe Blackout Bomb What It Means To Yourdquo httpnonuclearnettheblackoutbombhtm

Major Stokes did not connect this statement to high-altitude EMP nuclear weaponry In fact his study of Chinarsquos real and imagined electronic weaponry has only cursory mention of EMP Is the Blackout Bomb so secret and potentially panic-causing that even many military strategists are in the dark about its true significance Dr Lowell Wood noted in verbal testimony at the 1997 EMP hearing in Congress that nuclear strategists in the United States do war simulations based on the presumption that a capable enemy would begin hostilities with high-altitude EMP weaponry Since the Russians and Chinese know that we are ready to lay heavy EMP on them at the outset of hostilities they try to be prepared to do the same to us preferably first Therefore if we careen closer to nuclear conflict with Russia or China the advantage of first-strike EMP escalates rapidly

7

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Accidents Adv

EMP warplans force adversaries to adopt a launch on warning policy creating intense time pressure

Schnurr 9 Avi- Executive Director of Israels Missile Defense Association reviewed US technology policy for the the Department of Defense the White House Homeland Security Council Congress and the National Academy of Sciences ldquoThe EMP Threat A Strategic Review of Geopolitical Risk Scenariosrdquo 27th July 2009 httpwwwhenryjacksonsocietyorgstoriesaspid=1227

When scientists saw this it began a new race in the Cold War in which a nuclear exchange would start with an attack intended to disable or destroy infrastructure During the Cold War the U nited S tates had engineers whose entire professions were simply to do EMP testing either in laboratories or with underground nuclear blasts They also protected hardware and command and control systems from these kinds of effects An example of EMP as a Cold War tactic actually came after the Cold War In 19 95 Norway decided it wanted to do an upper atmosphere weather test so they asked NASA to use one of its decommissioned nuclear boosters Norway notified the countries in the area including Russia that they were going to launch this weather test but the person in Russia responsible for taking this information to the defence authorities was sick and his replacement did not understand the protocol In Russia there are three individuals who can recommend a nuclear attack to the president the Prime Minister the Defense Minister and the Interior Minister each of whom could do so independently On this occasion all three were together meeting with the Russian president when someone ran into the room interrupting that they saw a launch coming from the North Sea The Defense Minister turned to Boris Yeltsin and said ldquoDo it Do it now This is it this is the attack Launch all of our missilesrdquo Yeltsin opened his little black box but did nothing When I first heard this story it made no sense to me Why would all of the warheads be launched with one missile coming in before itrsquos even clear that itrsquos heading toward Russia Obviously if they had waited a little bit longer they would have seen that it was only heading in the general direction but this harkens back to the Cold War mindset Both sides were so worried about the possibility of their infrastructures being destroyed by EMP and that they would not be able to launch a counter strike that the protocol said that if there was one missile coming in and it looked as if it could be an attack a response must be made very early This is the reason there is so little time Fear of an EMP attack in 19 95 almost launched World War III The EMP threat is the reason the US president still walks around with someone following him everyday carrying what they call the presidential ldquofootballrdquo The EMP was a primary focus of the US military during the Cold War Thereafter with a sense that the nuclear threat was diminishing the focus on EMP also diminished However in more recent times the Pentagon is beginning again to take it seriously by hardening infrastructure and adopting all of the EMP Commissionrsquos recommendations

8

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Accidents Adv

Launch on warning coupled with the intense time pressure results in massive nuclear war

Cirincione 9 Joseph- President of the Ploughshares Fund ldquoThe Continuing Threat of Nuclear Warrdquo in Global Catastrophic Risks by Nick Bostrom Milan M Ćirković p 383-4

Although much was made of the 1994 joint decision by Presidents Bill Clinton and Boris Yeltsin to no longer target each other with their weapons this announcement had little practical consequences Target coordinates can be uploaded into a warheads guidance systems within minutes The warheads remain on missiles on a high alert status similar to that they maintained during the tensest moments of the Cold War This greatly increases the risk of an unauthorized or accidental launch Because there is no time buffer built into each states decision-making process this extreme level of readiness enhances the possibility that either sides president could prematurely order a nuclear strike based on flawed intelligence Bruce Blair a former Minuteman launch officer now president of the World Security Institute says If both sides sent the launch order right now without any warning or preparation thousands of nuclear weapons ndash the equivalent in explosive firepower of about 70000 Hiroshima bombs ndash could be unleashed within a few minutes4 Blair describes the scenario in dry but chilling detail If early warning satellites or ground radar detected missiles in flight both sides would attempt to assess whether a real nuclear attack was under way within a strict and short deadline Under Cold War procedures that are still in practice today early warning crews manning their consoles 247 have only three minutes to reach a preliminary conclusion Such occurrences happen on a daily basis sometimes more than once per day if an apparent nuclear missile threat is perceived then an emergency teleconference would be convened between the president and his top nuclear advisers On the US side the top officer on duty at Strategic Command in Omaha Neb would brief the president on his nuclear options and their consequences That officer is allowed all of 30 seconds to deliver the briefing Then the US or Russian president would have to decide whether to retaliate and since the command systems on both sides have long been geared for launch-on-warning the presidents would have little spare time if they desired to get retaliatory nuclear missiles off the ground before they and possibly the presidents themselves were vaporized On the US side the time allowed to decide would range between zero and 12 minutes depending on the scenario Russia operates under even tighter deadlines because of the short flight time of US Trident submarine missiles on forward patrol in the North Atlantic Russias early warning systems remain in a serious state of erosion and disrepair making it all the more likely that a Russian president could panic and reach a different conclusion than Yeltsin did in 19956 As Russian capabilities continue to deteriorate the chances of accidents only increase Limited spending on the conventional Russian military has led to greater reliance on an ageing nuclear arsenal whose survivability would make any deterrence theorist nervous Yet the missiles remain on a launch status begun during the worst days of the Cold War and never turned off As Blair concludes Such rapid implementation of war plans leaves no room for real deliberation rational thought or national leadership Former chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee Sam Nunn agrees We are running the irrational risk of an Armageddon of our own making The more time the United States and Russia build into our process for ordering a nuclear strike the more time is available to gather data to exchange information to gain perspective to discover an error to avoid an accidental or unauthorized launch

9

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Accidents Adv

This causes extinction

Helfand amp Pastore 9 Ira- President of Physicians for Social Responsibility and John- Former President of Physicians for Social Responsibility ldquoUS-Russia nuclear war still a threatrdquo

President Obama and Russian President Dimitri Medvedev are scheduled to Wednesday in London during the G-20 summit They must not let the current economic crisis keep them from focusing on one of the greatest threats confronting humanity the danger of nuclear war Since the end of the Cold War many have acted as though the danger of nuclear war has ended It has not There remain in the world more than 20000 nuclear weapons Alarmingly more than 2000 of these weapons in the US and Russian arsenals remain on ready-alert status commonly known as hair-trigger alert They can be fired within five minutes and reach targets in the other country 30 minutes later Just one of these weapons can destroy a city A war involving a substantial number would cause devastation on a scale unprecedented in human history A study conducted by Physicians for Social Responsibility in 2002 showed that if only 500 of the Russian weapons on high alert exploded over our cities 100 million Americans would die in the first 30 minutes An attack of this magnitude also would destroy the entire economic communications and transportation infrastructure on which we all depend Those who survived the initial attack would inhabit a nightmare landscape with huge swaths of the country blanketed with radioactive fallout and epidemic diseases rampant They would have no food no fuel no electricity no medicine and certainly no organized health care In the following months it is likely the vast majority of the US population would die Recent studies by the eminent climatologists Toon and Robock have shown that such a war would have a huge and immediate impact on climate world wide If all of the warheads in the US and Russian strategic arsenals were drawn into the conflict the firestorms they caused would loft 180 million tons of soot and debris into the upper atmosphere mdash blotting out the sun Temperatures across the globe would fall an average of 18 degrees Fahrenheit to levels not seen on earth since the depth of the last ice age 18000 years ago Agriculture would stop eco-systems would collapse and many species including perhaps our own would become extinct

10

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Rogue EMP Adv

Iran is on the brink of achieving EMP capability to be used against the US

Timmerman 8 Kenneth R- director of the Foundation for Democracy in Iran 2006 Nobel Peace Prize Nominee ldquoUS Intel Iran Plans Nuclear Strike on USrdquo News Max 29 Jul 2008

Iran has carried out missile tests for what could be a plan for a nuclear strike on the United States the head of a national security panel has warned In testimony before the House Armed Services Committee and in remarks to a private conference on missile defense over the weekend hosted by the Claremont Institute Dr William Graham warned that the US intelligence community ldquodoesnrsquot have a storyrdquo to explain the recent Iranian tests One group of tests that troubled Graham the former White House science adviser under President Ronald Reagan were successful efforts to launch a Scud missile from a platform in the Caspian Sea ldquoTheyrsquove got [test] ranges in Iran which are more than long enough to handle Scud launches and even Shahab-3 launchesrdquo Dr Graham said ldquoWhy would they be launching from the surface of the Caspian Sea They obviously have not explained that to usrdquo Another troubling group of tests involved Shahab-3 launches where the Iranians detonated the warhead near apogee not over the target area where the thing would eventually land but at altituderdquo Graham said ldquoWhy would they do thatrdquo Graham chairs the Commission to Assess the Threat to the United States from Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP) Attack a blue-ribbon panel established by Congress in 2001 The commission examined the Iranian tests ldquoand without too much effort connected the dotsrdquo even though the US intelligence community previously had failed to do so Graham said ldquoThe only plausible explanation we can find is that the Iranians are figuring out how to launch a missile from a ship and get it up to altitude and then detonate itrdquo he said ldquoAnd thatrsquos exactly what you would do if you had a nuclear weapon on a Scud or a Shahab-3 or other missile and you wanted to explode it over the United Statesrdquo Several participants in last weekendrsquos conference in Dearborn Mich hosted by the conservative Claremont Institute argued that Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was thinking about an EMP attack when he opined that ldquoa world without America is conceivablerdquo

So is North Korea

Wilson 8 Clay- Specialist in Technology and National Security Foreign Affairs Defense and Trade Division ldquoHigh Altitude Electromagnetic Pulse (HEMP) and High Power Microwave (HPM) Devices Threat Assessmentsrdquo Congressional Research Service March 26 2008

Reportedly several potential US adversaries such as Russia or China are now capable of launching a crippling HEMP strike against the United States with a nuclear-tipped ballistic missile and other nations such as North Korea could possibly have the capability by 201532 Other nations that could possibly develop a capability for HEMP operations over the next few years include United Kingdom France India Israel and Pakistan

11

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Rogue EMP Adv

US First strike capabilities prevent China from curbing Iranian and North Korean nuclear ambitions

Wu 8 Anne- Managing the Atom Project at the Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs at Harvard University ldquoEngage China in Nuclear-Proliferation Issuerdquo Providence Journal October 27

Chinas crucial role has not been diminished since the North Korean denuclearization process started in 2003 even if the United States later started direct dialogue with Pyongyang Indeed it was just reported that Washington expects Pyongyang to submit to China a list of verification steps it would allow in return for being removed from the US terrorism-sponsor list Yet the North Korean issue only represents one piece of international non-proliferation efforts At a time when the global non-proliferation regime is weakened in the absence of consensus on priority and process China and the US share a common interest and responsibility to strengthen measures that prevent the proliferation of nuclear weapons The two countries both agree and disagree on nuclear non-proliferation Internationally the two countries are committed to promoting non-proliferation within frameworks such as the United Nations the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG) Regionally they maintain consultations on the nuclear issue on the Korean Peninsula and in Iran Bilaterally they have intensified dialogues and cooperation on export control and intelligence sharing as well as in other areas Yet differences ranging from strategic to practical issues remain The next president together with the Chinese leadership must lead by example through more effective cooperation The United States and China should be the strongest advocates for reducing the currency of nuclear weapons One thing in the way of their partnership is their differing views on their own nuclear weapons Since going nuclear in 1964 China has been committed to a policy of no-first-use of nuclear weapons and no use of nuclear weapons against non-nuclear states or in nuclear-free zones The United States on the other hand reserves its right as part of its nuclear doctrine to strike others in a pre-emptive manner Many Chinese believe that it is unfair for the US to ask other countries to not develop nuclear weapons while it maintains a huge nuclear stockpile And its policies are counterproductive because they continue to provide legitimacy to nuclear weapons in international affairs The United States and China must bridge their respective perceptions of potential nuclear threat and approaches to non-proliferation in order to work together to tackle the most urgent nuclear problems The United States could engage China more effectively on concerns such as the North Korean and Iranian nuclear issues by recognizing Chinas own interests Denuclearization efforts will not succeed without Chinas support and the perception that the United States is only using Chinas influence to reduce a nuclear threat to itself is detrimental to bilateral relations Regarding North Korea and Iran China envisions nuclear non-proliferation as a broad security concept that encompasses all-around solutions China believes that the fundamental purpose of non-proliferation is to safeguard and promote regional and international peace and security To achieve these goals non-proliferation should be pursued in a diplomatic manner that eschews coercion and other hostile measures China also advocates equilibrium between non-proliferation peaceful uses of nuclear energy and disarmament Because of its perceived balanced stance on North Korea and Iran China occupies the formidable middle ground and could play a constructive role in facilitating a solution that avoids full-scale crisis The United States should encourage China to continue its constructive intervention no nuclear-weapons program no escalating confrontations but continued flexible dialogue Otherwise should any of the parties up the ante the international community will lose a valuable avenue to mitigate the crisis

12

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Rogue EMP Adv

Plan prevents rogue acquisition of EMP weapons by garnering Russian and Chinese support

Lewallen 2 John- Political Science at Whitman University organizer of the Nuclear Peace Action Group Fulbright Scholarship recipient Public Ocean Access Network ldquoHigh-Altitude Nuclear Warrdquo Nuclear Press p26-27

That is not to say that there is no danger of missile attack against the US from ldquorogue statesrdquo which may be defined as ldquopoor nations who do not accept the military dominations of the United Statesrdquo More than thirty nations have Scud missiles capable of flinging a nuclear weapon into orbit over Earth and several nations are known to have nuclear weapons 25 In addition arms in general and nuclear weapons in particular are commodities on the world market Despite many treaties and restrictions deigned to staunch the proliferation of nuclear weapons and missiles among nations there is abundant evidence that nuclear missiles are spreading around 26 The pace and scope of nuclear missile proliferation is largely determined by China Russia and the United States If relations are peaceful in the Nuclear Triangle the three nations are inclined to serve their mutual interests in keeping nuclear missiles out of the hands of other powers If the atmosphere of nuclear confrontation heats up in the Nuclear Triangle nuclear missile proliferation accelerates as the three adversaries are driven to arm allies Russia President Vladimir Putin an adroit player of US fears that ldquorogue nationsrdquo might obtain long-range nuclear missiles has positioned himself so that he can threaten to instantly supply long-range nuclear missiles to Americarsquos worst nightmare du jour be it North Korea Ira Iran Libya Cuba or Syria27

EMP strikes are the most likely scenario for rogue lashout

Schneider 7 Mark- National Institute for Public Policy The Emerging EMP Threat to the United States United States Nuclear Strategy Forum No 6 November 2007

Weapons of mass destruction are potentially attractive to rogue states because these weapons can provide an asymmetric response to US conventional superiority International arms control treaties have made chemical and biological weapons the nearly exclusive prerogative of rogue states However the ability of rogue states to inflict effective attacks even with WMD payloads requires certain technical capabilities in the delivery systems Good accuracy is minimally necessary for WMD attacks on major urban industrial centers and for EMP attacks43 According to Dr Lowell Wood ldquoBecause a very small number ndash potentially one ndash nuclear weapon exploded at high altitude over an American expeditionary force attempting forced entry against a major regional power could potentially tip the balance against our efforts all such powers who contemplate confronting us will be incentivized to develop acquire or retain nuclear weaponryrdquo44 A key conclusion of the EMP commission report was that ldquoA determined adversary can achieve an EMP attack capability without having a high level of [technical] sophisticationrdquo45 From a political standpoint including alliance cohesion the most damaging form of attack by a rogue state would be WMD attacks or EMP attacks launched against the capitals or the major cities of the United States its friends or allies The US National Strategy for Combating the Proliferation of Weapons of Mass Destruction recognized that we must respond to any WMD attack rapidly and that ldquothe primary objective of a response is to disrupt an imminent attack or an attack in progress and eliminate the threat of future attacksrdquo46 The objective of rogue state WMD attacks could possibly be to shock the attacked populations into demanding that the war be ended promptly It would be the intent of such adversaries that such attacks would be so destructive that they would break up coalitions and cause our allies to deny the US critical basing rights Attacks might even be directed against nations that were not active participants in the conflict much as in the way Saddam Hussein attacked Israeli cities during Operation Desert Storm Catastrophic attacks using modern weapons of mass destruction can inflict casualties at levels that have not been experienced since World War II Nuclear EMP attack could be attractive to the less technically sophisticated rogue states because of the extensive damage that could be inflicted on a technologically superior adversary with a relatively crude ballistic missile In order to be able to employ high altitude EMP strikes the rogue state would not have to develop reentry vehicles or ballistic missiles with precision accuracy

13

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Rogue EMP Adv

A rogue EMP strike would collapse the economy

Timmerman 8 Kenneth R- director of the Foundation for Democracy in Iran 2006 Nobel Peace Prize Nominee ldquoUS Intel Iran Plans Nuclear Strike on USrdquo News Max 29 Jul 2008

The commission warned in a report issued in April that the United States was at risk of a sneak nuclear attack by a rogue nation or a terrorist group designed to take out our nationrsquos critical infrastructure If even a crude nuclear weapon were detonated anywhere between 40 kilometers to 400 kilometers above the earth in a split-second it would generate an electro-magnetic pulse [EMP] that would cripple military and civilian communications power transportation water food and other infrastructure the report warned While not causing immediate civilian casualties the near-term impact on US society would dwarf the damage of a direct nuclear strike on a US city ldquoThe first indication [of such an attack] would be that the power would go out and some but not all the telecommunications would go out We would not physically feel anything in our bodiesrdquo Graham said As electric power water and gas delivery systems failed there would be ldquotruly massive traffic jamsrdquo Graham added since modern automobiles and signaling systems all depend on sophisticated electronics that would be disabled by the EMP wave ldquoSo you would be walking You wouldnrsquot be driving at that pointrdquo Graham said ldquoAnd it wouldnrsquot do any good to call the maintenance or repair people because they wouldnrsquot be able to get there even if you could get through to themrdquo The food distribution system also would grind to a halt as cold-storage warehouses stockpiling perishables went offline Even warehouses equipped with backup diesel generators would fail because ldquowe wouldnrsquot be able to pump the fuel into the trucks and get the trucks to the warehousesrdquo Graham said The United States ldquowould quickly revert to an early 19th century type of countryrdquo except that we would have 10 times as many people with ten times fewer resources he said ldquoMost of the things we depend upon would be gone and we would literally be depending on our own assets and those we could reach by walking to themrdquo Graham said America would begin to resemble the 2002 TV series ldquoJeremiahrdquo which depicts a world bereft of law infrastructure and memory In the TV series an unspecified virus wipes out the entire adult population of the planet In an EMP attack the casualties would be caused by our almost total dependence on technology for everything from food and water to hospital care Within a week or two of the attack people would start dying Graham says ldquoPeople in hospitals would be dying faster than that because they depend on power to stay alive But then it would go to water food civil authority emergency services And we would end up with a country with many many people not surviving the eventrdquo Asked just how many Americans would die if Iran were to launch the EMP attack it appears to be preparing Graham gave a chilling reply ldquoYou have to go back into the 1800s to look at the size of populationrdquo that could survive in a nation deprived of mechanized agriculture transportation power water and communication ldquoIrsquod have to say that 70 to 90 percent of the population would not be sustainable after this kind of attackrdquo he said America would be reduced to a core of around 30 million people mdash about the number that existed in the decades after Americarsquos independence from Great Britain The modern electronic economy would shut down and America would most likely revert to ldquoan earlier economy based on barterrdquo the EMP commissionrsquos report on Critical National Infrastructure concluded earlier this year

14

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Rogue EMP Adv

This means Global War

Mead 9 [Walter Russell Senior Fellow in US Foreign Policy at the Council on Foreign Relations New Republic February 4 2009]

So far such half-hearted experiments not only have failed to work they have left the societies that have tried them in a progressively worse position farther behind the front-runners as time goes by Argentina has lost ground to Chile Russian development has fallen farther behind that of the Baltic states and Central Europe Frequently the crisis has weakened the power of the merchants industrialists financiers and professionals who want to develop a liberal capitalist society integrated into the world Crisis can also strengthen the hand of religious extremists populist radicals or authoritarian traditionalists who are determined to resist liberal capitalist society for a variety of reasons Meanwhile the companies and banks based in these societies are often less established and more vulnerable to the consequences of a financial crisis than more established firms in wealthier societies As a result developing countries and countries where capitalism has relatively recent and shallow roots tend to suffer greater economic and political damage when crisis strikes--as inevitably it does And consequently financial crises often reinforce rather than challenge the global distribution of power and wealth This may be happening yet again None of which means that we can just sit back and enjoy the recession History may suggest that financial crises actually help capitalist great powers maintain their leads--but it has other less reassuring messages as well If financial crises have been a normal part of life during the 300-year rise of the liberal capitalist system under the Anglophone powers so has war The wars of the League of Augsburg and the Spanish Succession the Seven Years War the American Revolution the Napoleonic Wars the two World Wars the cold war The list of wars is almost as long as the list of financial crises Bad economic times can breed wars Europe was a pretty peaceful place in 1928 but the Depression poisoned German public opinion and helped bring Adolf Hitler to power If the current crisis turns into a depression what rough beasts might start slouching toward Moscow Karachi Beijing or New Delhi to be born The United States may not yet decline but if we cant get the world economy back on track we may still have to fight

15

Cornell HKHANE Aff

China Advantage

China believes the US will use nuclear EMP attacks in future wars

Pry 5 Dr Peter Vincent- EMP Commission Staff ldquoForeign Views Of Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP) Attackrdquo Before The United States Senate Subcommittee On Terrorism Technology And Homeland Security March 8 2005 httpwwwendtimesreportcomEMP_attackhtml

Many foreign analysts perceive nuclear EMP attack as falling within the category of electronic warfare or information warfare not nuclear warfare Indeed the military doctrines of at least China and Russia appear to define information warfare as embracing a spectrum ranging from computer viruses to nuclear EMP attack For example consider the following quote from one of Chinarsquos most senior military theoristsndashwho is credited by the PRC with inventing information warfarendash appearing in his book World War the Third World WarndashTotal Information Warfare ldquoWith their massive destructiveness longrange nuclear weapons have combined with highly sophisticated information technology and computer technology today and warfare of the looming 21st century information war under nuclearInformation war and traditional war have one thing in common namely that the country which possesses the critical weapons such as atomic bombs will have lsquofirst strikersquo and lsquosecond strike retaliationrsquo capabilities As soon as its computer networks come under attack and are destroyed the country will slip into a state of paralysis and the lives of its people will ground to a halt Therefore China should focus on measures to counter computer viruses nuclear electromagnetic pulse and quickly achieve breakthroughs in those technologies in order to equip China without delay with equivalent deterrence that will enable it to stand up to the military powers in the information age and neutralize and check the deterrence of Western powers including the United Statesrdquo (2001)

This forces China to pursue EMP warfare and space militarization

Kueter 7 Jeff- president of the George C Marshall Institute ldquoChinarsquos Space Ambitions ndash And Oursrdquo The New Atlantis Number 16 Spring 2007 pp 7-22

A more important motivation for Chinarsquos investment in civil and military space is of course the countryrsquos perception of its security environment and its understanding of the evolution of modern warfare The Chinese have concluded from observing recent warsmdashincluding Operation Desert Storm NATO operations in the Balkans and the present wars in Afghanistan and Iraqmdashthat ldquothe PLArsquos past approach to wars which relied heavily on mass mobilization and preparation for all-out warfare are frankly no longer appropriaterdquo according to China scholar Dean Cheng of the Center for Naval Analyses Chinese analysts have reached several conclusions about the characteristics of future wars They will extend from operations on the land at sea and in the air to the electromagnetic spectrum and into outer space They will demand widely spread forces operating over large geographic areas demonstrating precise operational coordination and timing and requiring multiple military services working together Future wars will be characterized by long-range operations involve the decisive use of precision-strike weapons and require much higher rates of expenditure of munitions Operations will occur more rapidly and conflicts will conclude more quickly American strategists have reached similar conclusions as is reflected in the doctrines of the US military services embodied in the annual US defense budgets and written into recent Quadrennial Defense Reviews These conclusions have shaped Chinarsquos overall military modernization efforts as well as its outer-space ambitions

16

Cornell HKHANE Aff

China Advantage

Chinarsquos fears are reflected in their acquisition of space warfare and EMP capabilities

Wilson 8 Clay- Specialist in Technology and National Security Foreign Affairs Defense and Trade Division ldquoHigh Altitude Electromagnetic Pulse (HEMP) and High Power Microwave (HPM) Devices Threat Assessmentsrdquo Congressional Research Service March 26 2008

According to a 1999 DOD report China has been actively pursuing the development of electromagnetic pulse weapons and has devoted significant resources to development of other electronic warfare systems and laser weapons The report also noted that Chinarsquos leaders view offensive counter space weapons and other space-based defense systems as part of inevitable scenarios for future warfare The report noted that China could have as many as 60 ICBMs capable of striking the United States by 2010 Also China may replace 20 of its current ICBMs with a longer-range missile by the end of this decade or sooner36

Space weaponization leads to extinction

Mitchell 1 Gordon R- member of CSIS Working Group on Theater Missile Defenses in the Asia-Pacific Region Fletcher Forum On World Affairs Winter 2001

Deployment of space weapons with pre-delegated authority to fire death rays or unleash killer projectiles would likely make war itself inevitable given the susceptibility of such systems to ldquonormal accidentsrdquo It is chilling to contemplate the possible effects of a space war According to Bowman ldquoeven a tiny projectile reentering from space strikes the earth with such high velocity that it can do enormous damagemdasheven more than would be done by a nuclear weapon of the same size In the same laser technology touted by President Reagan as the quintessential tool of peace David Langford sees one of the most wicked offensive weapons ever conceived ldquoOne imagines dead cities of microwave-grilled peoplerdquo Given this unique potential for destruction it is not hard to imagine that any nation subjected to a space weapon attack would escalate by retaliating with maximum force including use of nuclear biological andor chemical weapons An accidental war sparked by a computer glitch in space could plunge the world into the most destructive military conflict ever seen

Plan solves space weaponization by breaking the feedback loop

Lewallen 2 John- Political Science at Whitman University organizer of the Nuclear Peace Action Group Fulbright Scholarship recipient Public Ocean Access Network ldquoHigh-Altitude Nuclear Warrdquo Nuclear Press Pg34

A strategic feedback loop would seem to make it at least ldquostrongly possiblerdquo that the United States China and Russia have high-powered EMP bombs in Earth orbit today The ability to wipe out an adversaryrsquos electronics continent-wide pretty much any time with a maneuverable EMP satellite bomb would confer major if not overwhelming advantage to the aggressor So if the other guy probably has EMP satellite bombs we need them too

17

Cornell HKHANE Aff

General Topicality 12

We reduce missions

Kristensen 98 Hans M- Director of the Nuclear Information Project at the Federation of American Scientists ldquoNuclear Futures Proliferation of Weapons of Mass Destruction and US Nuclear Strategy British American Security Information Council Basic Research Report 982

Other exotic design concepts stem from the emphasis on underground and deeply buried targets and the concern to limit the collateral damage from the use of nuclear weapons These are all prime features of the counterproliferation effort Research contracts for 1997 outlined by the Defense Special Weapons Agency (DSWA) formerly the Defense Nuclear Agency include adjusting Electromagnetic Pulse ( EMP) data for nuclear weapons to allow war planners to assess wide-area distributed target damages ldquoinflicted by nuclear weaponsrsquo EMP effectsrdquo The project aims to lower the burst height of nuclear weapons EMP by two-thirds from the existing boundary of 100 km altitude to 30 km and to revamp the capability to compute air and ground bursts EMP fields as well as shallow buried bursts The project will also investigate alternatives to potential design modification and weapon delivery with the aim to ldquolimit or minimize collateral damagerdquo from the use of nuclear weapons Models for using EMP to knock out blast and shock-hardened buried targets will be developed in order to ldquodevise a new tool for PC-based weapon lethality prediction and target damage assessment [hellipfor use by] USSTRATCOM and other regional commandshellip for their specific missions applications rdquo112

And the mission is current- strike plans prove

Kristensen 9 Hans M Reply to Response to ldquoPentagon Misses Warhead Retirement Deadlinerdquo October 13 2009 httpwwwfasorgblogssp200910w62php

In theory yes and EMP or High-Altitude EMP (HEMP) has been part of US and Russian nuclear strike planning for decades Some also believe China might also use it in a war But in recent years some people have warned about scenarios ranging from DPRK Iran or terrorist organizations using EMP against the United States or its allies to disrupt critical electronic infrastructure An EMP Commission has even been established by Congress in 2001

We reduce size

Lewallen 2k John- Public Ocean Access Network ldquoThe Blackout Bombrdquo North Coast Express Spring 2000 httpsonicnet~doretkIssues00-03-SPRtheblackhtml

Any future global war is likely to begin with a few Blackout Bombs China Russia the U nited S tates and other nuclear powers have several nuclear missiles and perhaps weaponized satellites designed to lay down EMP over continent-size areas instantaneously While every nation on Earth is vulnerable to attack from the United States the United States is vulnerable indeed defenseless to a secret class of nuclear weapons which has captured the attention of the major nuclear powers--China Russia Britain France and the United States itself--for the past thirty-eight years

18

Cornell HKHANE Aff

General Topicality 22

Plan reduces roles

Buchan et al 3 Glenn C David Matonick Calvin Shipbaugh Richard Mesic ldquoFuture Roles Of US Nuclear Forces Implications For US Strategyrdquo RAND sponsored by the United States Air Force

In addressing the role nuclear weapons might play in contemporary US national security policy the first step is a ldquoback to basicsrdquo review of nuclear weapons mdashwhat they do what makes them unique and how they have served US security interests in the past WHAT NUCLEAR WEAPONS DO The most fundamental characteristic of nuclear weapons is their almost unlimited destructive power That destructiveness manifests itself in two ways First is the potentially apocalyptic effects of a large-scale war fought with nuclear weapons That obviously has been the driving force behind movements to reduce or eliminate nuclear weapons since the dawn of the nuclear age Second is the enormous destructive power that can be put into a small package which can then be delivered by any one of a number of means A single nuclear detonation can destroy virtually any individual target or lay waste to large areas (eg destroy a city) That characteristic changed the nature of war dramatically It appeared to make defense in the traditional sense virtually impossible because of the damage that even a single nuclear weapon that leaked through defenses could cause Also when coupled with long-range delivery systems (particularly long-range bombers and ballistic missiles) nuclear weapons allowed those possessing them to destroy an enemyrsquos homeland without necessarily having to defeat its military forces first Thus nuclear weapons if used effectively could prevent an enemyrsquos military from achieving the most fundamental objective of any military establishment protecting its homeland That changed the traditional concepts of warEven in strictly military terms nuclear weapons are simply more effective than other weapons in destroying targets Table 21 shows some classes of targets against which nuclear weapons are particularly effective As experience with the weapons grew so did the range of potential applications Some took advantage of special effects of nuclear weapons other than just heat and blast Electromagnetic pulse (EMP) and radar and communications blackout are examples These characteristics of nuclear weapons offered attractive strategic advantages to those who owned them bull Coercion of enemies by threat or use of nuclear weapons (eg the US nuclear attacks on Japan to coerce Japan to surrender unconditionally and end World War II)bull Deterrence of a range of actions by threat of nuclear use bull A means of offsetting an imbalance of conventional forces (eg the US rationale for its nuclear posture in Europe the original motivation for the Swedish nuclear weapons program which never came to fruition)

19

Cornell HKHANE Aff

General Topicality 1AR 12

Extend that we reduce the missions of the nuclear weapons arsenal Kristensen indicates STRATCOM has specific missions employing EMPs Additionally Dunn indicates that high-altitude nuclear explosions have been in our strike plans since the early stages of the Cold War

Additionally war games prove we have EMP missions in early stages of nuclear warfare

Berry 8 Ken Research Coordinator ICNND ldquoNew Weapons Technologyrdquo International Commission on Nuclear Non-proliferation and Disarmament

An aggressor state deploying such weapons could destroy the vast majority of a target countryrsquos electronics including computers cars phones and the power grid All nuclear armed states have the capacity to achieve this and it has been estimated that as little as three high altitude nuclear explosions could blanket an area the size of continental US40 Western Europe Australia or Brazil Open source material has indicated that the US China France and Russia have all used the tactic of an EMP as a surprise first strike in war games 41 Chinese military writings have described scenarios where EMPmdashpresumably non-nuclearmdashis used against US aircraft carriers in a conflict over Taiwan42 A survey of worldwide military and scientific literature found widespread knowledge about EMP and its potential military utility in countries including Taiwan Israel Egypt India Pakistan Iran and North Korea Moreover some terrorist organizations have apparently sought information relating to EMP produced by nuclear weapons as well as on the technology of directed energy weapons These are small non-nuclear weapons that produce an EMP-like effect but over a very much more restricted area43

Extend that we reduce size- Lewallen says we have nuclear missiles designed for HANEs

And missiles are part of the nuclear weapons arsenal

Los Alamos National Laboratory 9 httpwwwlanlgovnatlsecuritynuclearstockpile Accessed 08-05-09The stockpile also called the nuclear arsenal refers to a countrys supply of readily available nuclear weapons The term nuclear weapons refers to the explosive warheads and the bombs and missiles that can deliver them to enemy targets

Extend that we reduce roles Buchan says that EMP attacks perform vital roles of the nuclear arsenal because of their unique effect including coercion deterrence and asymmetric warfare

Here is evidence that high altitude EMP strikes are key tools in asymmetric warfare

Weston 9 Maj Scott A USAF ldquoExamining Space Warfare Scenarios Risks and US Policy Implicationsrdquo Air amp Space Power Journal - Spring 2009

The United States has just one counterspace weaponmdashan electronic counter communication system specifically designed and fielded with the intent of disrupting enemy satellite communications23 Recently however we successfully utilized the Standard Missile 3 in a dual-use role as a kinetic ASAT weapon24 Although the political repercussions from creating additional space debris will likely prohibit further tests the missile and supporting systems are already fielded in an antiballistic missile (ABM) role therefore we consider it an ASAT system that we could field in the near term The U nited S tates can also conduct asymmetric space attacks (eg an EMP produced by exploding a US nuclear-tipped ballistic missile in space ) Since the United States possesses nearly half of all orbiting satellites such an indiscriminate attack would do more harm to US interests than to those of the enemy But what about our opponentsrsquo capability Does a space weapon ldquogaprdquo exist

20

Cornell HKHANE Aff

General Topicality 1AR 22

Lean aff on topicality the information is highly classified making it impossible for us to definitively prove US nuclear EMP posture

Ruppe 4 David ldquoPlausibility of EMP Threat Classified Expert Saysrdquo Global Security Newswire September 24 2004

When asked following his presentation whether US scientists have developed and tested a kilotons-scale weapon to demonstrate its EMP capability Wood said he could not comment The commission conducted assessments of what the United States and others know about such weapons and questions about such matters were addressed in a classified session with members of Congress following a public presentation of the commissionrsquos report he said ldquoWe presented in open session then we went up and spent another few more hours and presented in closed session where they asked and were given answersrdquo to such questions he said ldquoBut they are members and it was a tightly closed environment a doom roomrdquo he said ldquoIrsquod be willing to take the chance to inform the American people about what the situation is but Irsquom forbidden by law to do sordquo

EMP strikes play a prominent mission in the 2001 NPRrsquos tailored deterrence

Stearns-Boles 7 Sherry L- Air Force Space Command (AFSPC) Chair to Air University (AU) ldquoThe Future Role And Need For Nuclear Weapons In The 21st Centuryrdquo US Air Force 2007

The first official reference to tailored deterrence occurred in the 2001 NPR Spring and Gudgel assessed the tailored deterrence doctrine for nuclear weapons in accordance with the latest NPR [a prescription for] a flexible nuclear weapons policy This is necessary in todaylsquos environment of multiple players with different strengths which has replaced the two-player model of the Cold War [N]ew military requirements should be developed to address this changed environment and to ensure a modern strategic force that is capable of dealing with different missions- Leadership and command and control targets which operate from heavily fortified underground locations- Hostile nuclear coalitions which may include rogue states failed or failing states and powerful terrorist groups based in sanctuary states- New nuclear-armed allies which may or may not have confidence in the United Stateslsquo deterrent ability and- Electromagnetic pulse (EMP) weapons an effective deterrent that adversaries may not be able to wield 129

The New Triad includes EMP strikes

Guthe 2 Kurt- Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments ldquoThe Nuclear Posture Review How Is the ldquoNew Triadrdquo Newrdquo 2002

Differences in the damage mechanisms of New Triad strike capabilities should promote effects based targeting Effects-based targeting is intended not simply to destroy targets but to do so in a way that produces broader military political economic and social effects that further operational and strategic objectives106 The damage mechanisms for nuclear weapons include blast thermal radiation nuclear radiation and electromagnetic phenomena (electromagnetic pulse for example ) Those for nonnuclear munitions are blast fragmentation penetration and fire Damage mechanisms for offensive information operations include software tools (such as malicious code) that manipulate or destroy computer networks within military economic or telecommunications infrastructures and directed energy from high-power microwave weapons that can knock out military or commercial electronic systems Because their damage mechanisms have disparate direct (or first-order) physical effects on targets nuclear weapons nonnuclear munitions and information operations must be compared and traded off in terms of their capabilities for achieving indirect (or higher-order) effects that impair the ability or weaken the will of the enemy to fight The problem is not one of calculating how many more high-explosive weapons are needed in lieu of a single nuclear weapon to produce sufficient blast to destroy a given target Instead the problems will lie in acquiring more detailed intelligence and better understanding of critical vulnerabilities in targets and target systems predicting the effects when different strike capabilities are applied against these vulnerabilities assessing actual effects under wartime conditions (the consequences of offensive information operations may be especially hard to ascertain)

determining the linkages among effects outcomes and objectives and deciding how best to employ the various means of attack

21

Cornell HKHANE Aff

More Topicality

Kristensen 97 Hans M- Director of the Nuclear Information Project at the Federation of American Scientists ldquoTargets of Opportunityrdquo Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists SeptemberOctober 1997

The Defense Special Weapons Agencys 1997 projects include adjusting electromagnetic pulse (EMP) data for nuclear weapons to allow war planners to assess the damage that would be inflicted by nuclear weapons EMP effects The project will also investigate possible design modification and delivery methods that could ldquolimit or minimize collateral damagerdquo Models for using EMP to knock out hardened targets will be developed to devise a new tool for PC-based weapon lethality prediction and target damage assessmentsrdquo28

Dunn 6 JR- editor of the International Military Encyclopedia ldquoThe EMP Threat ElectroMagnetic Pulse Warfarerdquo American Thinker April 21 2006

EMP was discovered as a byproduct of the Starfish Prime nuclear test on July 9 1962 A 15 megaton bomb set off 240 miles over the Central Pacific blew up street lights and TV sets in Hawaii 1000 miles away created a mock aurora visible even further and destroyed a number of orbiting satellites including the Telstar I the pioneering telecommunications satellite In short order nuclear attack plans were modified to commence with an EMP strike over enemy territory Military electronics underwent a hardening process with the development of chips and other components resistant to EMP Today even military jets and missiles are constructed to withstand the effect (The same processes would work for civilian application as well but in most cases would be prohibitively expensive)

The US is continuing to develop nuclear EMP weapons

Merkle 97 Major Scott W- Air Command and General Staff College Maxwell Air Force Base ldquoNon-Nuclear EMP Automating the Military May Prove a Real Threatrdquo Military Intelligence Professional Bulletin

So to this extent the plot of Goldeneye is plausible Any of several nations with nuclear weapons and the capacity to launch them into space including the United States Russia China and even Israel could conceivably pulse us back to shall we say a simpler time when operations orders were done orally with a sandtable instead of with the high-speed graphics and charts that turn into an encyclopedia that few people care to read Even more unsettling however is the fact that the US Defense Technology Plan confirms that development of advanced EMP weapons continues to this day and not just by the Americans According to a report drafted by conservative members of the French National Assembly in 1992 EMP weapons testing was a recommended goal during Frances 1995 underground nuclear tests6

22

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Future Wars Conflicts Likely

There probability of great power nuclear war in the next 50 years is 40 percent (1 - 9950)

Hellman 8 Dr Martin- Stanford Professor of Engineering 2008 ldquoRisk Analysis of Nuclear Deterrencerdquo httpwwwnuclearriskorgpaperpdf

Since conditional probabilities were used they can be multiplied yielding an estimated range of (2E-4 5E-3) for lCMTC the failure rate of deterrence based on just this one failure mechanism The upper limit 5E-3 is within a factor of two of my estimate that the failure rate of deterrence from all sources is on the order of one percent per year and even the lower limit is well above the level that any engineering design review would find acceptable Because this estimate is based on a simplified time invariant model it does not apply to the current point in time when relations between the US and Russia are significantly better than they were on average during the last 50 years However that does not invalidate its conclusions Russian-American relations are deteriorating and new trigger mechanisms are coming into playmdashnotably nuclear proliferation terrorism and the expansion of NATO right up to the Russian bordermdashmaking it possible that the next 50 years could be even more dangerous than the last Furthermore atypical times have a disproportionate effect on risk A significant fraction of the total risk during the last 50 years occurred during the 13 days of the Cuban missile crisismdasha period that constituted just 007 of that time period Because crises produce so much of the overall risk it is important to look beyond todayrsquos relatively benign world and also consider the rare disruptive times when events

The past conflicts our Hellman analysis investigates arose for a variety of reasons They cannot access solvency for all possible scenarios of conflict

Hellman 8 Dr Martin- Stanford Professor of Engineering 2008 ldquoRisk Analysis of Nuclear Deterrencerdquo httpwwwnuclearriskorgpaperpdf

As noted above there have been at least three possible initiating events in the first 50 years of nuclear deterrence the Cuban missiles in 1962 President Reaganrsquos threat to reimpose a naval blockade of Cuba in the 1980s and the current deployment of an American missile defense system in Eastern Europe Taking the average rate of occurrence of these possible initiating events three in 50 years results in an estimate lIE = 006 A higher estimate would result if other crises were included as possible initiating events Examples include the Berlin crisis of 1961 the Six-Day War of 1967 and the Yom Kippur War of 1973 all of which involved at least implied nuclear threats To temper the possibility of this article being seen as alarmist it only considers the first three possible initiating events and therefore uses lIE = 006

23

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Future Wars Ext

Unfortunately future great power wars will be initiated with EMP strikes

Lewallen 2k John- Public Ocean Access Network ldquoThe Blackout Bombrdquo North Coast Express Spring 2000 httpsonicnet~doretkIssues00-03-SPRtheblackhtml

Any future global war is likely to begin with a few Blackout Bombs China Russia the United States and other nuclear powers have several nuclear missiles and perhaps weaponized satellites designed to lay down EMP over continent-size areas instantaneously While every nation on Earth is vulnerable to attack from the United States the United States is vulnerable indeed defenseless to a secret class of nuclear weapons which has captured the attention of the major nuclear powers--China Russia Britain France and the United States itself--for the past thirty-eight years

EMP-gtwar

Lewallen 2 John- Political Science at Whitman University organizer of the Nuclear Peace Action Group Fulbright Scholarship recipient Public Ocean Access Network ldquoHigh-Altitude Nuclear Warrdquo Nuclear Press Pg43

If it comes the next global war almost certainly will begin with high-altitude nuclear EMP Anything done or refrained from to reduce international conflict and promote international cooperation will help humanity avoid the awesome setback of global war The nation-state system itself is perhaps the most dangerous factor auguring high-altitude nuclear war It is perhaps amazing that we humans have gone the past fifty-five years without anyone blowing up a nuclear bomb How much longer can we tickle the dragonrsquos tail before the fundamental flaw of competing armies with nuclear weapons finishes us off The United States fond of calling itself the worldrsquos only superpower has the same tendency as past military empires (although not a self-acknowledged empire) a strong and perhaps inevitable drive to move from world preeminence to world domination The US military-industrial complex is set up to endlessly conceive design produce and deploy new strategic weaponry

24

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT Limited War Winter

a) Quinlin indicates that nuclear war would deescalate after the first detonation War wouldnrsquot escalate to even 100 nukes

b) Nuclear testing disproves their theory

Sublette 1 Carey ldquoGallery of US Nuclear Testsrdquo 6 August 2001 httpnuclearweaponarchiveorgUsaTestsBetween 16 July 1945 and 23 September 1992 the United States of America conducted (by official count) 1054 nuclear tests and two nuclear attacks The number of actual nuclear devices (aka bombs) tested and nuclear explosions is larger than this but harder to establish precisely Some devices that were tested failed to produce any noticeable explosion (some by design some not) other tests (by official definition) were actually multiple device detonations It is not clear whether all multiple device tests have yet been identified and enumerated

c) Their study assumes countervalue targeting which is important because only cities are ignited into firestorms Great powers use counterforce targeting which targets silos in the middle of the desert or Siberia

Madrigal 9 Alexis ldquolsquoRegionalrsquo Nuclear War Would Cause Worldwide Destructionrdquo WIRED Science April 7Millsrsquo work which appears online today in the Proceedings of the National Academies of Science used a model from National Center for Atmospheric Research to look at the impact of throwing 5 million metric tons of black carbon or soot into the atmosphere He found that when a cluster of cities are burning together they end up creating their own weather pumping soot 20000 feet into the atmosphere Once there sunlight would heat the smoke and drive it up 260000 feet above the earthrsquos surface

d) Robock admits limited nuclear war would not cause winter Our Helfand evidence indicates 1000 nukes are needed to cause winter

Harrell 9 Eben ldquoRegional Nuclear War and the Environmentrdquo TIME Jan 22 2009Alan Robock a Professor in the Department of Environmental Sciences at Rutgers University who participated in the original nuclear winter research recently completed a study on the results of a nuclear war between India and Pakistan He spoke with TIME from his office in New Brunswick New Jersey CONTINUED Your study predicts mass cooling With all the heat and radioactivity of the explosions why wouldnt nuclear war warm the planet It has nothing to do with the radioactivity of the explosions mdash although that would be devastating to nearby populations The explosions would set off massive fires which would produce plumes of black smoke The sun would heat the smoke and lift it into the stratosphere mdash thats the layer above the troposphere where we live mdash where there is no rain to clear it out It would be blown across the globe and block the sun The effect would not be a nuclear winter but it would be colder than the little ice age [in the 17th and 18th centuries] and the change would happen very rapidly mdash over the course of a few weeks

25

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Accidents- LoW Bad

Hair trigger alert creates a high risk of extinction

Blair 8 Bruce G- president of the Center for Defense Information and World Security Institute former senior fellow in foreign policy for the Brookings Institution and former Minuteman officer ldquoDe-alerting Strategic Forcesrdquo Reykjavik Revisited Steps Toward a World Free of Nuclear Weapons published by the Hoover Institute httpmediahooverorgdocuments9780817949211_ch2pdf

There are a host of reasons why removing forces from launch ready alert and abandoning archaic nuclear war-fighting strategies are urgent priorities Beyond the familiar arguments about the danger of accidental nuclear attack triggered by false alarms and unauthorized launches by unreliable personnel lurk shadowy new threats stemming from terrorist scenarios and growing cybernetic threats to the nuclear command and warning systems In an era of terrorism and information warfare staking the survival of humanity on the assumption that imperfect human and technical systems of nuclear command and control will forever prevent a disastrous breakdown of safeguards against mistaken or unauthorized use of nuclear weapons is simply imprudent in the extreme An in-depth discussion of the potential exploitable weaknesses in nuclear command systems is beyond the scope of this analysis but a few general observations are pertinent First many of the deficiencies are unknown some will never be found and others will not be discovered until it is too late The complexity of command systems prevents a full reckoning of the risks run by hair-trigger postures Periodic investigations routinely discover glaring weaknesses however For instance a Pentagon investigation conducted by an independent commission in the 1990s at the behest of then Sen Sam Nunn to evaluate the effectiveness of US nuclear safeguards against unauthorized launch found dozens of major deficiencies14 This commission recommended a multitude of remedies including installing a special new safeguard on Trident subsmdashthe inner safe described earliermdashto create a technical barrier to unauthorized launch Second many of the deficiencies that are identified and addressed turn out not to have been corrected The introduction of ldquoenable coderdquo devices into Minuteman launch centers in the 1960s is a case in point In theory the devices required launch crews to receive an eight-digit code from higher authority in order to arm their missilesrsquo warheads prior to launch In practice the Strategic Air Command unbeknownst to higher authority (such as former Defense Secretary Robert McNamara who initiated and pressed for this safeguard) configured the devices so that they were always set to all zerosmdashthat was the secret password known to all launch crews This circumvention persisted until 1976 when actual codes were finally introduced In the interim the posture ran a higher risk of unauthorized launch by crew members or others who might have gained access to the launch centers including terrorists15 Third the nuclear command systems today operate in an intense information battleground on which more than 20 nations including Russia China and North Korea have developed dedicated computer attack programs16 These programs deploy viruses to disable confuse and delay nuclear command and warning processes in other nations The US Strategic Command is no exception Information warfare is now one of its core missions At the brink of conflict nuclear command and warning networks around the world may be besieged by electronic intruders whose onslaught degrades the coherence and rationality of nuclear decision making The potential for perverse consequences with computer-launched weapons on hair-trigger is clear Other information warfare programs are designed to infiltrate and collect information on for example the schedule of the movement of nuclear warheads during peacetime Hacking operations of these sorts are increasing exponentially as the militaries of the world increasingly depend on computer and communications networks The number of attempts by outside hostile actors to break into Defense Department networks has surged by tenfold in the past couple of years Hostile intrusion attempts against Pentagon computer systems now run in the neighborhood of 1000 per day (China is especially active) What is worse some of this expanding illicit penetration involves insiders creating a whole new dimension to the ldquoinsiderrdquo threat to nuclear systems If insiders with knowledge of special passwords or other sensitive information related to nuclear weapons activities collude with outsiders the integrity of nuclear command and control systems and safeguards against the unauthorized launch of nuclear weapons on launch-trigger alert may well be compromised The guiding principle of nuclear safeguards during the past 50 yearsmdashthe twoman rulemdashmay be obsolete in the age of information warfare The notion that having a second person present during any sensitive nuclear operation would prevent an accidental or intentional nuclear incident may have been sound during the labor-intensive and analog dominated era of nuclear command and control but in the modern age of information warfare new safeguards may be needed to prevent the electronic compromise of missiles on hair-trigger alert Adding terrorists to this equation gives further reason to believe that the Cold War nuclear postures are counterproductivemdashthey exacerbate rather than alleviate nuclear problems and they are an accident waiting to happen There is a possibility that terrorists could spoof early warning sensors and thereby engender false alarms that precipitate nuclear overreactions The possibility also exists that terrorists possibly with insider help may get inside the command and communications networks controlling nuclear forces They might gain information useful to interdicting and capturing weapons or unauthorized actors might discover ways to inject messages into the circuits 17 Again the wisdom of keeping nuclear forces ready to fly instantaneously upon receipt of a short stream of computer signals is dubious

26

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT FS Remains - Russia

Without EMP hundreds of strategic weapons would have to be armed- Russia would notice and disperse

Yarynich amp Starr 7 Valery- Professor of the Academy for Military Sciences and Steven- Engineers and Scientists Against Proliferation ldquoNuclear Primacy is a Fallacyrdquo Global Research March 4 2007

Third in order to conduct a first strike it is necessary to implement a number of organizational and technical procedures within the strategic nuclear forces This is because in peacetime there are numerous procedural and technological blocks in place which are designed to protect nuclear weapons against human error accidents and sabotage In order to remove such barriers as a preliminary step towards launching a nuclear first strike it would require the participation of a significant number of crews on duty working at different operational levels The implementation of all the above mentioned circumstances as preparations for a ldquosurpriserdquo first strike would be technically impossible to hide Therefore the opposite side would have a certain amount of time to raise the combat readiness of its strategic nuclear forces If Russia did that then as Lieber and Press recognize themselves nuclear retaliation is inevitable

Mobile missiles make first strike impossible without EMPs

Podvig 6 Pavel- Research Associate at the Center for International Security and Cooperation at Stanford University ldquoNuclear Exchange Does Washington Really Have (or Want) Nuclear Primacyrdquo Foreign Affairs SeptemberOctober 2006

Lieber and Press are right to state that Russia may end up having as few as 150 land-based missiles by the end of the decade But about half of those ICBMs would probably be road-mobile Topols and Topol-Ms which if operated properly would have a good chance of surviving a first strike Lieber and Press dismiss Russias mobile missiles by saying that they rarely patrol In reality very little is known about Russias mobile-missile patrol rates and although it is quite plausible that they are low it is a stretch to assume that they are zero

EMP first strike capability is uniquely dangerous because it requires only a few warheads making the threshold for responding to false warnings much lower

Non EMP first strike requires thousands of warheads which will show up on EWS

Yarynich amp Starr 7 Valery- Professor of the Academy for Military Sciences and Steven- Engineers and Scientists Against Proliferation ldquoNuclear Primacy is a Fallacyrdquo Global Research March 4 2007

Lieber and Press also assume that the Russian Early Warning System will be completely unable to reveal a massed American attack capable of destroying all Russian nuclear forces ldquoA critical issue for the outcome of a US attack [they say] is the ability of Russia to launch on warning (ie quickly launch a retaliatory strike before its forces are destroyed) It is unlikely that Russia could do thisrdquo We believe this important conclusion demands more serious calculations than the mere statement that ldquoit is unlikelyrdquo Its necessary to prove that the Russian EWS will be completely incapable of revealing such massed American attack which is capable of destroying all Russian nuclear forces

27

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT FS Remains - China

Lack of perfect Intel makes a first strike on China impossible post plan

Aby 7 The Liberal 7142007 non-profit internationalist site committed to the dissipiation of information pertaining toworld politics social issues cultures travel tips local customs et el ldquoChinarsquos MAD Nuclear Deterrence Against USArdquo lthttpwwwabytheliberalcomworld-politicschinas-mad-nuclear-deterrance-usagt

Chinarsquos nuclear force is based on a lsquoNo First Uselsquo policy formulated by its erstwhile President Mao Zedong This makes sense as China could not launch a first strike against US without facing obliteration in a strike-back by US The small quantity of nuclear warheads and strategic missiles that China possesses would make a Chinese attack on US nuclear facilities futile as China has neither the accuracy of missiles nor the number of warheads required to destroy the all the US facilities On the other hand United States with its improvised and highly accurate strategic missiles (Trident and Minuteman) could strike and destroy over 75 of Chinarsquos nuclear facilities with just about 2-4 of its nuclear and missile arsenal spent But even in the event of a war a successful destruction of 75-80 of Chinarsquos nuclear facilities leaves at least 20-25 surviving which can be used as a retaliatory attack against the United States A 100 destruction of Chinarsquos nuclear facilities would be highly unlikely considering the logistical impossibility of targeting and destroying all of Chinarsquos mobile and SILO launched nuclear ICBMs Since China canrsquot destroy US nuclear facilities as a retaliatory resort it would strike what hurts USA most - its people This is primarily the reason why US cities have been targets of Chinese ICBMs for the last few decades A DF 5A (Dong Feng) missile launched from hardened or mobile SILOs in Chinarsquos Hunan province will have most of West and Central US in its reach A 12000 km DF 5 Mod 2 goes even further including east coast cities like New York and Atlanta in its range if a polar trajectory is followed A DF 5A ICBM can carry a 35 MT (Megaton) thermonuclear warhead The 35 MT warhead detonated at a height of 2500 meters would have a blast radius of 7 km exposing 154 km2 of the ground surface to a blast overpressure of 10 psi or higher In addition to the immediate energy shockwaves of the blast such a high yield H-Bomb would also cause widespread radiation fallouts and heated firestorms due to the rapid changes in the atmospheric pressure which follow such an explosion If a single such warhead is detonated over a busy megapolis like New York Chicago or Los Angeles at least 15 million people would be eliminated immediately during the explosion and a further million within another 72 hours due to radiation burns sickness and firestorms If only 5 of the DF 5As are launched against 5 US cities and 4 of them successfully strike the US mainland more than 10 million people would face extermination According to US DoD Reports to the Congress in 2006 a DF5A Mod2 can be MIRVed with 6 warheads of 250 KT each In such a case if each warhead detonates 1500 metres above the ground the total blast radius (10 psi) of all the six warheads would exceed 21 kms bringing over 1386 km2 under coverage The fatalities from a single such strike on a city like New York or Chicago would exceed 5 million at the bare minimum In such a scenario if 4 of these missiles with 24 warheads strike 4-10 US cities with an accuracy of 83 at least 14 million people would be annihilated in these cities This still leaves out the DF 31A ICBMs and JL-1 SLBMs which could strike US targets and further the damage From both the cases it can be understood than even a retaliatory second strike by China can inflict severe devastation on the continental US These are just bare conservative estimates reality could be much more deadly and devastating with 40-100 million casualties Chinese military strategists can easily do this calculation themselves and as such it becomes apparent why China is so sure that its relatively small number of ICBMs act as an adequate deterrent against the United States or even India and Russia for that matter The threat of even a few surviving nuclear missiles hitting the United States serves as a robust deterrent for the United States China would not consider a first strike either as it would face total annihilation due to the massive US nuclear and missile stockpile Thus the MAD balance is maintained between these two countries one wary of the other despite their significant disparity in nuclear weapons stockpile and delivery systems

28

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT FS Remains - Subs

China has subs

Stephen Herzog British American Security Information Council August 2008 ldquoThe Dilemma between Deterrence and Disarmament Moving beyond the Perception of China as a Nuclear Threatrdquo Basic Papers lthttpwwwbasicintorgpubsPapersBP57pdfgt

The Jin-class is Beijingrsquos replacement for the defunct Type 092-class (NATO designation Xiaclass) SSBN The Xia-class was Chinarsquos first nuclear-powered ballistic missile-capable submarine and was a resounding failure The PRC only produced two of these SSBNs and they did not conduct patrols outside of Chinese territorial waters27 The Jin-class is silentmdashdue to its nuclear power sourcemdashand is virtually invulnerable to a potential first-strike it ensures that the PRC has a sea-based deterrent to complement its land-based strategic nuclear forces Since China finds itself in a position of significant numerical warhead inferiority to the United Statesmdash possibly facing a first-strike in the event of a confrontationmdashthe Jin-class SSBN could give the Sino leadership confidence in their second-strike capability If this is the case rather than being viewed as a threat Chinese deployment of SSBNs could be seen as a confidence-building stabilizing factor in Chinarsquos relationship with the West While the PRC is known to have three commissioned Jin-class SSBNs the United States United Kingdom and France have a total of 22 SSBNs many of which are armed with MIRV-equipped SLBMs28

Russia has them too

NTI 9ldquoRussia Restores Nuclear-Armed Submarine Patrolsrdquo Global Security Wednesday Feb 18 2009Russia might be maintaining continuous nuclear-armed submarine patrols for the first time in 10 years the Federation of American Scientists announced yesterday (see GSN Feb 13) The number of patrols by ballistic missile submarines declined steadily after reaching a high of more than 100 in 1984 and dropped more steeply after the collapse of the Soviet Union In 2002 there were zero Russian missile submarine patrols Russia last year however conducted 10 patrols the most since 1998 That raises the possibility that Russia is always keeping at least one boat at sea for nuclear deterrence said FAS nuclear expert Hans Kristensen

EMPs threaten sub survivability

Graham 4 Dr William R- Deputy Administrator of NASA The report of the Commission to Assess the Threat to the United States From Electromagnetic Pulse Attackrdquo July 22 2004

Mr Langevin Have you assessed the threat of EMP to our surface fleet and submarines Do submarines have a greater likelihood of retaining operational capabilities if they are underwater during an EMP strike Dr Graham The EMP Commission did consider the threat of EMP to surface vessels and submarines Ballistic Missile Submarines are designed and built to survive an EMP attack Care is taken when the ship is modified or equipment added or upgraded to insure that survivability is maintained Particular attention is paid to the potential vulnerability introduced when the ship is at periscope depth or trailing a wire antenna Submarines do have a greater likelihood of retaining operational capabilities if they are underwater during an EMP attack and not trailing an antenna which can couple energy into the submerged vessel However if land-based communications are impacted the ship may survive but not be capable of receiving orders and therefore accomplishing its mission because the sender cant send The survivability of the surface fleet is uncertain without testing and a submarine in port is a surface ship

29

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Rogue- Seeking

Rogue states are seeking EMP capability

McNeill amp Weitz 8 Jena Baker- homeland security policy analyst at The Heritage Foundation and Richard- Senior Fellow and Director of the Center for Political-Military Analysis at Hudson Institute ldquoElectromagnetic Pulse (EMP) Attack A Preventable Homeland Security Catastropherdquo Heritage Foundation Backgrounder 2199 httpwwwheritageorgresearchhomelandsecuritybg2199cfm_ftn19

The range of actors that might attempt an EMP attack against the United States is obviouslymdashand distressinglymdashlarge and includes conventional military regimes rogue states with limited conventional military capabilities and terrorist groups that seek to inflict catastrophic damage on America Both Russia and China have dabbled in EMP technology for decades There is evidence that suggests that certain Russian nuclear weapons have already been optimized to generate enhanced EMP effects[16] Just this year Russian scientists claimed to have developed a compact apparatus that can fit on a dining table The electromagnetic pulse associated with this device could amount to billions of watts of power in a single platform[17] Analysts have also identified Chinese military writings that discuss using EMP weapons in international conflicts[18] For countries less dependent on modern technologies and electronics including both rogue states like Iran and North Korea as well as stateless terrorist groups EMP provides a potential way to attack the United States through asymmetric means EMPs could be used to circumvent Americas superior conventional military power while reducing vulnerability to retaliation in kind It would certainly not be impossible for a terrorist organization especially if state-sponsored to acquire or construct an unsophisticated ballistic missile (non-working Scuds are reportedly available on the open market for $100000) and use it in an EMP attack against America[19] Such a missile could be launched from a freighter in international waters and detonated in the atmosphere over the United States without warning

30

Cornell HKHANE Aff

China Solves NoKo

China can solve North Korea ndash the alternative is US Strikes which escalate to War ndash US action to influence China is key

Doug Bandow 2009 is a senior fellow at the Cato Institute A former special assistant to President Reagan he is the author of Tripwire Korea and US Foreign Policy in a Changed World (Cato Institute) and co-author of The Korean Conundrum Americas Troubled Relations with North and South Korea (PalgraveMacmillan) July 2 2009 (Real Clear World Time to Play China Card on North Korea)

North Korea appears to have moved from intermittent to constant provocation The only nation with real influence in Pyongyang is China South Koreas President Lee Myung-bak visited Washington two weeks ago but a solution is no closer American diplomacy should focus on encouraging Beijing to do its utmost to solve the problem of the Norths criminal regime The challenge posed by the so-called Democratic Peoples Republic of Korea (DPRK) is obvious to all Probably the most murderous government on earth Kim Jong-ils regime has presided over the death by famine of at least a half million people His regimes brutality is both tragic and legendary While impoverishing his people he has maintained an oversize military including an active nuclear-weapons program And he has created a unique marriage of communism and monarchy apparently designating his youngest son now called the brilliant comrade to be his successor just as he succeeded his father Kim Il-sung Although evil he is not suicidal Kim Jong-il enjoys his virgins in this life rather than desiring them in the next one Nevertheless eliminating his regime would be an obvious humanitarian and security plus Bottom of Form Unfortunately no easy solution presents itself Kims latest confrontational tactics do not prevent a negotiated settlement-US special envoy Stephen Bosworth has emphasized the administrations desire to engage Pyongyang-but the likelihood of diplomacy resulting in a demilitarized peninsula grows ever smaller Even if the DPRK proves willing to halt any new nuclear activities it is very unlikely to turn over existing nuclear materials And while Washington should continue to pursue both bilateral and multilateral negotiations the process may yield little other than frustration Tighter sanctions also offer but a forlorn hope Amid reports that the North is planning a new nuclear test the UN Security Council voted to tighten sanctions Americas UN ambassador Susan Rice said the measure provided a strong very credible very appropriate response But it in fact offered little in the way of increased enforcement North Korea already is the worlds most isolated state Moreover the regime has never let the suffering of its people affect its policies A government which allowed a half million people to starve is not likely to be moved by increased hardship for those who remain alive So is a North Korean nuclear arsenal inevitable Maybe not Only Beijing has the clout necessary to influence the DPRK The former provides the bulk of the Norths food fuel and consumer goods trade between the two nations has been rising Severing that lifeline could bring the North Korean economy to a standstill However so far the Peoples Republic of China (PRC) has demurred Indeed before passage of the latest Security Council resolution the PRC called for an appropriate and balanced measure and emphasized calmness and restraint Even now Chinas government appears to fear a North Korean collapse more than a North Korean nuclear weapon The last option is war-either a limited strike on Pyongyangs atomic bases or a more general attack Washington obviously could destroy nuclear facilities above ground and perhaps underground Whether doing so would permanently block the Norths nuclear efforts and eliminate its existing atomic capabilities are less clear Moreover an attack probably would result in war The Kim regime likely would see a strike as the first step in an attempt at coercive regime change Moreover to do nothing would wreck its credibility at home and stature abroad While it is not likely to foolishly start a losing war the DPRK government isnt likely to passively accept a conflict begun by the United States Although the North would lose any conflict it could cause massive damage to the South whose capital Seoul lies close to the Demilitarized Zone and thus within range of both artillery and Scud missiles Other possible consequences include the dispersion of nuclear debris and creation of mass refugee flows So is a North Korean nuclear arsenal inevitable Maybe not The China card has yet to be played Cynicism about Beijings role in the North Korean crisis abounds Some analysts believe that the PRC can do little to move Pyongyang which has steered an independent course for decades Others accuse China of consciously orchestrating the Norths destabilizing course And the mainstream view is that the PRC is unwilling to risk its relationship with Pyongyang or accept the costs of the regimes potential collapse Indeed Beijing has treated North Korean refugees who face prison and even death when repatriated with unconscionable brutality However Washington might be able to change Chinas calculus Its certainly worth attempting to do so The PRC could cut off aid and commerce Beijing also might be able to undertake covert action to transform the North Korean system

31

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Rogue Satelites

Rogue EMP collapses satellite communications

Haimes 9 Yacov Y- Lawrence Quarles Professor of Engineering and Applied Science Director of the Center for Risk Management of Engineering Systems University of Virginia ldquoRisk Modeling Assessment and Managementrdquo Edition 3 - 2009 p780

The vulnerability of satellites to a high-altitude nuclear detonation and the resulting electromagnetic pulse has been widely documented For example a report by the Defense Threat Reduction Agency [DTRA 2001] states LEO [low earth orbit] satellites will be of growing importance to government commercial and military users in coming years Proliferation of nuclear weapons and longer-range ballistic missile capabilities is likely to continue One low-yield (1 th-12 kt) high-altitude (125-300 km) nuclear explosion could disablemdashin weeks to monthsmdashall LEO satellites not specifically hardened to withstand radiation generated by that explosion The report states that a deliberate effort to cause economic damage with a lower likelihood of nuclear radiation fallout can he initiated by a rogue state facing economic strangulation or imminent military threat and pose economic threat to the industrial world without causing human casualties or visible damage to economic infrastructure An article in Scientific American by Dupont [2004] further highlights the risks to the global satellite system from nuclear explosions in orbit Dupont asserts that ldquoThe launch and detonation of a nuclear-tipped missile in low orbit could disrupt the critical system of commercial and civil satellites for years potentially paralyzing the global high-tech economy More nations (and maybe non-state entities) will gain this capability as nuclear-weapon and ballistic-missile technology spread around the world The possibility of an attack is relatively remote but the consequences are too severe to be ignoredrdquo A study conducted for the Commission to Assess the Threat to the United States from High-Altitude Electromagnetic Pulse Attack [Haimes et al 2005] highlights the risks to interdependent infrastructures and to the US economy due to such attacks and reiterates that the benefits of automation have brought an increased vulnerability Finally according to Dupont [2004] ldquoThe Pentagon has been working for decades to safeguard its orbital assets against the effects of nuclear explosionsHardening satellites is costly however Greater protection means more expense and more massive protective materials And heavier satellites cost significantly more to launchDespite the risks to civil orbiters however the Defense Department has failed to persuade US satellite builders to harden their spacecraft voluntarilyrdquo

32

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Rogue- AT No Tech

Tech is attainable

Schnurr 9 Avi- Executive Director of Israels Missile Defense Association reviewed US technology policy for the the Department of Defense the White House Homeland Security Council Congress and the National Academy of Sciences ldquoThe EMP Threat A Strategic Review of Geopolitical Risk Scenariosrdquo 27th July 2009 httpwwwhenryjacksonsocietyorgstoriesaspid=1227

One misunderstanding is the belief that those willing to use an EMP are not going to have the technology to create an EMP weapon However any small nuclear fission bomb would have this effect In fact without going into details there are ways to enhance the effect that would use a very small bomb Certainly a Hiroshima-sized bomb would be adequate a thermonuclear bomb a fusion bomb would not make it any larger That means the capability to do this is in the hands of anyone who can find a boat for example ndash were they to use a short-range missile ndash so it doesnrsquot have to be an ICBM Hezbollah has 300km missiles that carry half-ton warheads which would be more than adequate and al Qaeda is also well-situated in this regard And launching from a ship minimizes the fingerprints

33

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Rogue- AT No Long Range Missiles

Even if they cannot reach the middle of the US the consequences would be enormous

Birdnow 6 Timothy ldquoEMP and the Unfought Victoryrdquo American Thinker July 01 2006Even if an EMP strike should only hit the West Coast the disaster would be catastrophic the United States electric grid is divided into three segments and this strike will more than likely take the entire western power grid completely out Its going to be very hard to maintain order with no running water in the arid western United States Farmers will lose their crops the sick and elderly will die without air conditioning and other electricitymdashdependent services Of course Silicon Valley will be toast as well as such important places as Lawrence Livermore Labs our days as the highmdashtech leader could be numbered What will this do to our economy supposing the country makes it through in decent shape

Even if rogue states cannot build a big EMP they could use a small one on the battlefield

Wilson 8 Clay- Specialist in Technology and National Security Foreign Affairs Defense and Trade Division ldquoHigh Altitude Electromagnetic Pulse (HEMP) and High Power Microwave (HPM) Devices Threat Assessmentsrdquo Congressional Research Service March 26 2008

A HEMP attack directed against the Unites States continent might involve a one-megaton nuclear warhead or a smaller one that is specially-designed using a burst several hundred miles above the mid-western states to affect computers on both coasts20 However creating a HEMP effect over an area 250 miles in diameter an example size for a battlefield might only require a rocket with a modest altitude and payload capability that could loft a relatively small nuclear device If a medium or higher range missile with a nuclear payload were launched from the deck of a freighter at sea the resulting HEMP could reportedly disable computers over a wide area of the coastal United States

34

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Rogue- AT Uncertain Effects

Extend Schneider that rogues prefer EMP strikes to ground bursts because they are easier to produce Ground bursts require too much precision and rogue states will only engage in asymmetric warfare with a lower chance of retaliation

EMPs are well suited for rogue regimesrsquo goals

Timmerman 2 Kenneth R- director of the Foundation for Democracy in Iran 2006 Nobel Peace Prize Nominee ldquoUS Threatened With EMP Attackrdquo Feb 1 2002

The more backward the country the more attractive EMP becomes as a weapon against the United States Bartlett explains ldquoIf North Korea were to launch a missile straight up and explode a nuclear weapon 500 kilometers over their own territory it wouldnrsquot do them a lot of damage because they have very little dependence on electronic systems But it would have a devastating impact on South Korea as well as on our 37000 troops stationed there With North Korearsquos million soldiers they could just walk all over us with impunityrdquo

35

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Rogue- AT Attribution

Easy to get around attribution

Timmerman 8 Kenneth R- director of the Foundation for Democracy in Iran 2006 Nobel Peace Prize Nominee ldquoUS Intel Iran Plans Nuclear Strike on USrdquo News Max 29 Jul 2008

In his recent congressional testimony Graham revealed that Iranian military journals translated by the CIA at his commissionrsquos request ldquoexplicitly discuss a nuclear EMP attack that would gravely harm the United Statesrdquo Furthermore if Iran launched its attack from a cargo ship plying the commercial sea lanes off the East coast mdash a scenario that appears to have been tested during the Caspian Sea tests mdash US investigators might never determine who was behind the attack Because of the limits of nuclear forensic technology it could take months And to disguise their traces the Iranians could simply decide to sink the ship that had been used to launch it Graham said

Rogues do not fear retaliation

Wilson 8 Clay- Specialist in Technology and National Security Foreign Affairs Defense and Trade Division ldquoHigh Altitude Electromagnetic Pulse (HEMP) and High Power Microwave (HPM) Devices Threat Assessmentsrdquo Congressional Research Service March 26 2008

The threat of an EMP attack against the United States is hard to assess but some observers indicate that it is growing along with worldwide access to newer technologies and the proliferation of nuclear weapons In the past the threat of mutually assured destruction provided a lasting deterrent against the exchange of multiple high-yield nuclear warheads However now even a single specially designed low-yield nuclear explosion high above the United States or over a battlefield can produce a large-scale EMP effect that could result in a widespread loss of electronics but no direct fatalities and may not necessarily evoke a large nuclear retaliatory strike by the US military This coupled with the possible vulnerability of US commercial electronics and US military battlefield equipment to the effects of EMP may create a new incentive for other countries to develop or acquire a nuclear capability

Rogues can use terrorists

Schneider 7 [Dr Mark National Institute for Public Policy ldquoThe Emerging EMP Threat to the United Statesrdquo A Publication of the United States Nuclear Strategy Forum November httpwwwnipporgNational20Institute20PressCurrent20PublicationsPDFEMP20Paper20Final20November07pdf]

The possibility of a terrorist group obtaining a nuclear weapon particularly from a rogue state and launching an EMP attack with a crude ballistic missile such as a Scud missile is certainly within the realm of possibility Cooperation with terrorists may be attractive to nuclear-armed rogue states because of the lesser risk of attribution Indeed in March 2001 an Iranian journal stated that ldquoterrorist information warfare [includes] using the technology of directed energy weapons (DEW) or electromagnetic pulse (EMP)rdquo65

36

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Iran Ev

Iran military writings prove reliance on EMP strikes

Pry 5 Dr Peter Vincent- EMP Commission Staff ldquoForeign Views Of Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP) Attackrdquo Before The United States Senate Subcommittee On Terrorism Technology And Homeland Security March 8 2005 httpwwwendtimesreportcomEMP_attackhtml

Iran though not yet a nuclear weapon state has produced some analysis weighing the use of nuclear weapons to destroy cities as ldquoagainst Japan in World War IIrdquo compared to ldquoinformation warfarerdquo that includes ldquoelectromagnetic pulse for the destruction of unprotected circuitsrdquo An Iranian analyst describes ldquoterrorist information warfarerdquo as involving not just computer viruses but attacks using ldquoelectromagnetic pulse (EMP)rdquo (Tehran Siyasat-e Defa-I 1 March 2001) An Iranian political-military journal in an article entitled ldquoElectronics To Determine Fate Of Future Warsrdquo suggests that the key to defeating the United States is EMP attack ldquoAdvanced information technology equipment exists which has a very high degree of efficiency in warfare Among these we can refer to communication and information gathering satellites pilotless planes and the digital system Once you confuse the enemy communication network you can also disrupt the work of the enemy command and decision-making center Even worse today when you disable a countryrsquos military high command through disruption of communications you will in effect disrupt all the affairs of that country If the worldrsquos industrial countries fail to devise effective ways to defend themselves against dangerous electronic assaults then they will disintegrate within a few years American soldiers would not be able to find food to eat nor would they be able to fire a single shotrdquo (Tehran Nashriyeh-e Siasi Nezami December 1998 -January 1999)Iranian flight-tests of their Shahab-3 medium-range missile that can reach Israel and U S forces in the Persian Gulf have in recent years involved several explosions at high altitude reportedly triggered by a self-destruct mechanism on the missile The Western press has described these flight-tests as failures because the missiles did not complete their ballistic trajectories Iran has officially described all of these same tests as successful The flight-tests would be successful if Iran were practicing the execution of an EMP attack Iran as noted earlier has also successfully tested firing a missile from a vessel in the Caspian Sea A nuclear missile concealed in the hold of a freighter would give Iran or terrorists the capability to perform an EMP attack against the United States homeland without developing an ICBM and with some prospect of remaining anonymous Iranrsquos Shahab-3 medium-range missile mentioned earlier is a mobile missile and small enough to be transported in the hold of a freighter We cannot rule out that Iran the worldrsquos leading sponsor of international terrorism might provide terrorists with the means to execute an EMP attack against the United States

Iran is on the brink of gaining EMP capability

Timmerman 8 Kenneth R- director of the Foundation for Democracy in Iran 2006 Nobel Peace Prize Nominee ldquoUS Intel Iran Plans Nuclear Strike on USrdquo News Max 29 Jul 2008

In May 2007 then Undersecretary of State John Rood told Congress that the US intelligence community estimates that Iran could develop an ICBM capable of hitting the continental United States by 2015 But Iran could put a Scud missile on board a cargo ship and launch from the commercial sea lanes off Americarsquos coasts well before then The only thing Iran is lacking for an effective EMP attack is a nuclear warhead and no one knows with any certainty when that will occur The latest US intelligence estimate states that Iran could acquire the fissile material for a nuclear weapon as early as 2009 or as late as 2015 or possibly later Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld first detailed the ldquoScud-in-a-bucketrdquo threat during a briefing in Huntsville Ala on Aug 18 2004 While not explicitly naming Iran Rumsfeld revealed that ldquoone of the nations in the Middle East had launched a ballistic missile from a cargo vessel They had taken a short-range probably Scud missile put it on a transporter-erector launcher lowered it in taken the vessel out into the water peeled back the top erected it fired it lowered it and covered it up And the ship that they used was using a radar and electronic equipment that was no different than 50 60 100 other ships operating in the immediate areardquo Iranrsquos first test of a ship-launched Scud missile occurred in spring 1998 and was mentioned several months later in veiled terms by the Commission to Assess the Ballistic Missile Threat to the United States a blue-ribbon panel also known as the Rumsfeld Commission I was the first reporter to mention the Iran sea-launched missile test in an article appearing in the Washington Times in May 1999 Intelligence reports on the launch were ldquowell known to the White House but have not been disseminated to the appropriate congressional committeesrdquo I wrote Such a missile ldquocould be used in a devastating stealth attack against the United States or Israel for which the United States has no known or planned defenserdquo Few experts believe that Iran can be deterred from launching such an attack by the threat of massive retaliation against Iran They point to a December 2001 statement by former Iranian President Ali Akbar Hashemi-Rafsanjani who mulled the possibility of Israeli retaliation after an Iranian nuclear strike ldquoThe use of an atomic bomb against Israel would destroy Israel completely while [the same] against the Islamic only would cause damages Such a scenario is not inconceivablerdquo Rafsanjani said at the time

37

Cornell HKHANE Aff

NoKo Ev

North Korea is seeking and would use an EMP

Pry 5 Dr Peter Vincent- EMP Commission Staff ldquoForeign Views Of Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP) Attackrdquo Before The United States Senate Subcommittee On Terrorism Technology And Homeland Security March 8 2005 httpwwwendtimesreportcomEMP_attackhtml

In closing a few observations about the potential EMP threat from North Korea North Korean academic writings subscribe to the view voiced in Chinese Russian and Iranian writings that computers and advanced communications have inaugurated an ldquoinformation agerdquo during which the greatest strength and greatest vulnerability of societies will be their electronic infrastructures According to North Korean press Chairman Kim Chong-il is himself supposedly an avid proponent of this view (M A Kim Sang-hak ldquodevelopment of Information Industry and Construction of Powerful Socialist Staterdquo Pyongyang Kyongje Yongu 20 May 2002)The highest ranking official ever to defect from North Korea Hwang Chang-yop claimed in 1998 that North Korea has nuclear weapons and explained his defection as an attempt to prevent nuclear war According to Hwang in the event of war North Korea would use nuclear weapons ldquoto devastate Japan to prevent the United States from participating Would it still participate even after Japan is devastated That is how they thinkrdquo Although Hwang did not mention EMP it is interesting that he described North Korean thinking about nuclear weapons employment as having strategic purposesndash nuclear use against Japanndashand not tactical purposesndashnuclear employment on the battlefield in South Korea It is also interesting that according to Hwang North Korea thinks it can somehow ldquodevastaterdquo Japan with its tiny nuclear inventory although how precisely this is to be accomplished with one or two nuclear weapons is unknownPerhaps most importantly note that the alleged purpose of a North Korean nuclear strike on Japan would be to deter the United States At the time of Hwangrsquos defection in 1998 North Korearsquos longest-range missile then operational the No Dong limited North Korearsquos strategic reach to a strike on Japan Today North Korea is reportedly on the verge of achieving an ICBM capability with its Taepo Dong-2 missile estimated to be capable of delivering a nuclear weapon to the United States In 2004 the EMP Commission met with very senior Russian military officers who are experts on EMP weapons They warned that Russian scientists had been recruited by Pyongyang to work on the North Korean nuclear weapons program They further warned that the knowledge and technology to develop ldquoSuper-EMPrdquo weapons had been transferred to North Korea and that North Korea could probably develop these weapons in the near future within a few years The Russian officers said that the threat to global security that would be posed by a North Korea armed with ldquoSuper-EMPrdquo weapons is unacceptable The senior Russian military officers who claimed to be expressing their personal views to the EMP Commission said that while the Kremlin could not publicly endorse U S preemptive action Moscow would privately understand the strategic necessity of a preemptive strike by the United States against North Korearsquos nuclear complex

38

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Terrorism Adv

Plan is necessary to prevent multiple scenarios of terrorism

Lewallen 2 John- Political Science at Whitman University organizer of the Nuclear Peace Action Group Fulbright Scholarship recipient Public Ocean Access Network ldquoHigh-Altitude Nuclear Warrdquo Nuclear Press p31

Nuclear Weapons in the War of Terror A Modest Prediction on November 8 2001 Terrorist attacks against the United States will not end until the nuclear strategic balance the ldquobalance of terrorrdquo is restored among Russia China and the United StatesToday geopolitics moves at cyberspeed The War of Terror is spreading and deepening throughout the world Clear analysis of the many dimensions of the War of Terror may lead the world toward widespread peace and prosperity rather than toward the global war and depression which is being created today Rational strategic analysis of terrorism begins with the fact that international governmental cooperation is required to defeat terrorists The complete global defeat of terrorism implies international enforcement a world governmentThe nuclear confrontation of terror among Russia China and the United States is a major source of the feeling of terror sweeping the United States and much of the rest of the world With the nuclear strategic balance now disrupted and a United States having declared war on any nation it chooses with any weapons at hand actual nuclear war in the nuclear triangle is an increasingly imminent possibilityThe Russian and Chinese people are intensely and viscerally terrorized by US nuclear aggression as expressed by the US drive to achieve unilateral domination over them with national missile defense and weapons in spaceWithout the complete and wholehearted cooperation of the Chinese and Russian governments the United States will never defeat terrorismIf United States nuclear aggression continues and escalates we must expect terrorist attacks against the American homeland also to continue and escalateSeeking to avoid nuclear war with the United States Russia and China keep leading international efforts to ban weapons in space uphold the arms control treaty structure and move toward nuclear disarmament However the hands of George W Bush have torn up the treaties and loosed a US push for complete nuclear domination over Russia and ChinaThe Chinese and Russians have good reasons to publicly support the US war against international terrorism while secretly encouraging concealing or even sponsoring terrorism against the United States So much the better if the terrorists chased by the United States are also big problems to China and Russia It seems quite within either Russian or Chinese capability to sponsor acts of terrorism against the United States and to set evidence leading gullible US investigators to any terrorist networkAs I write this the Bush administration is pushing full-bore for national missile defense space weapons and intensified nuclear confrontation with Russia and ChinaThis means that terrorist attacks against the United States will continue and probably increase until the United States joins the world community of peace law and order

39

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Terrorism Adv

Future terrorist attacks threaten to collapse world order

Alexander 3 Yonah Director of Inter-University for Terrorism Studies Washington Times August 28Last weeks 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 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 [eg 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 strategy can be developed [eg 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 [eg 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 Israels 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 US military operation in Iraq eliminated Saddam Husseins 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 terror victory however long and hard the road may be For without victory there is no survival

40

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Terrorism Ext

Terrorists arenrsquot interested in non nuclear HPVs

Wilson 8 Clay- Specialist in Technology and National Security Foreign Affairs Defense and Trade Division ldquoHigh Altitude Electromagnetic Pulse (HEMP) and High Power Microwave (HPM) Devices Threat Assessmentsrdquo Congressional Research Service March 26 2008

It is difficult to assess the threat of a terrorist organization possibly using a smaller-scale HPM weapon against the United States critical infrastructure It could be argued that an HPM bomb by itself may not be attractive to terrorists because its smaller explosion would not be violent enough and the visible effect would not be as dramatic as a larger conventional bomb

41

Cornell HKHANE Aff

China- AT Attribution

China can smuggle the EMP nuke

Buff 6 Joe ldquoChina Myth Gets Dangerousrdquo Today in the Military December 04 2006Launching an ICBM and detonating its warhead in outer space as a ldquonon-lethalrdquo EMP generator above the Pacific would be awfully risky because the launch signature could be mistaken for a first strike against the US homeland inviting massive nuclear retaliation More shrewd would be to smuggle a nuclear weapon into space disguised as one of the PRCrsquos frequent launches of satellites (that this violates international treaties doesnrsquot mean Beijing wouldnrsquot do it) The nuke could then be set off at the appropriate place and time as part of the dreaded ldquoPearl Harbor in spacerdquo that could open outright conflict for hegemony It would be problematic for the US to launch any sort of retaliatory nuclear strike against China after such a surprise info-warfare attack -- discussion board fans of the macho ldquoglassing Chinardquo approach left aside With neither Beijing nor Washington being run by madmen or so we hope a conventional war could be fought beneath an unused umbrella of thermonuclear mutually assured destruction And us having to fight a big war is already a form of defeat We got dragged into World War II because our conventional deterrence failed and that victory cost 400000+ American lives

42

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Space Militarization Adv 1

The world in on the brink of massive space weaponization US space weaponization has contributed to states seeking latent space weapons capability

Hitchens 9 Theresa- Director UN Institute for Disarmament Research ldquoSaving Space Threat Proliferation and Mitigationrdquo International Commission on Nuclear Non-proliferation and Disarmament May 19 2009

During the Cold War the United States and the Soviet Union were the only real space powers The situation today is dramatically different Currently some 47 nations own andor operate satellites with nearly 900 working satellites in orbitmdashmostly for civilcommercial purposes The bulk of todayrsquos satellites are in Geostationary orbit (GEO 36000 kilometers in altitude) for civil and military communications purposes telephony internet services and broadcast television However an increasing number of satellites are being built in Low Earth Orbit (LEO up to 2000 kilometers) for Earth imaging with ever greater resolutions that can provide traditional data such as crop and ocean monitoring as well as data for tracking (and perhaps targeting) of military infrastructure There are approximately 389 working satellites in LEO including Earth observation (both civil and militaryintelligence gathering) weather and mobile communications satellites Of that number about 130 are Earth observation sats owned andor operated by 33 countries plus the European Space Agency Vietnam was the most recent nation to orbit an Earth observation satellite launching it in April 2008 In the military arena India most recently (in April 2009) launched a high-resolution (down to 1 meter) all-weather radar imaging satellite with the explicit purpose of monitoring military activities and terrorist movements primarily in rival Pakistan Indeed some ldquoreal estaterdquo in space is getting crowded particularly the GEO belt and the area over the poles where many satellites cross over each otherrsquos path This fact has created emerging concerns about simple ldquohighway safetyrdquo in space and the need to avoid accidental interference or collisions (see below)Further many other nations have recently been putting more emphasis on obtaining military advantages from spacemdashalthough China is the only other nation that has tested an ASAT and just two other nations India and Israel are currently suspected of pursuing such capabilities China France Germany Italy Israel Spain and the United Kingdom all have dedicated military space assets for communications andor imaging A number of other nations have or are building dual-use satellites that can provide both civil and military functions including India and Japan Iran and North Korea are pursuing space launch and satellite capabilities that also would be assumed to have dual-use functions The increasing interest in military uses of space has been fostered by two major factors The first is the easier access to space capabilities over the past 20 years and improvements in capabilities provided by the information revolution of the 1990s The second is the 1990s ldquorevolution in military affairsrdquo led by the United States which has resulted in the shift of national security space applications from strategic missions such as spying and early warning of missile launches to tactical applications which include perhaps most importantly weapons targeting using global navigation and positioning satellites The United States and Russia have long maintained navigation and positioning satellites for multiple purposes (besides targeting these satellites are important for logistics management and own-force tracking) their respective Global Positioning System (GPS) network and the GLONASS constellation Meanwhile the European Union hopes to deploy its Galileo system by 2013 and China intends to deploy a similar world-wide navigation satellite network dubbed COMPASS by 2015mdashalthough both systems are claimed to have primarily civilian functions The new emphasis on tactical applications of space power while greatly increasing military effectiveness on the ground also has spurred military thinking in many nations about how to negate enemy space assetsmdashthus the renewed interest in ASAT capabilities

43

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Space Militarization Adv 2

EMP war plans fuel space militarization

Danchev 6 Dancho- Bulgarian Association for Security ISECA ldquoWho needs nuclear weapons anymorerdquo Security Knowledge February 09 2006

In 2004 the EMP Commission met with very senior Russian officers and we showed that on the sign They warned that the knowledge and technology to develop what they called super EMP weapons had been transferred to North Korea and that North Korea could probably develop these weapons in the near future within a few years The Russian officers said that the threat that would be posed to global security by a North Korean armed with super EMP weapons was in their view and I am sure Mr Speaker in your view and mine unacceptable Foreign views of Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP) Attack reveals further details on other nations ambitions etc Perhaps one of the most famous commitments towards EMP is the The Trestle Electromagnetic Pulse Simulator that can also be seen at Google Maps still in my opinion its a defensive initiative for an offensive purpose Extending the topic even further The Space Warfare arms race has been an active policy of key worlds leaders for decades and thats not good The US Russia and China as the main players are fuelling the growth in one way or other due to believing in perhaps- that the other sides are actively developing such capabilities and they are because they think the opposite =gt arms race- growing trend towards asymmetric warfare

The US is the last obstacle to banning space weapons

Lewallen 2 John- Political Science at Whitman University organizer of the Nuclear Peace Action Group Fulbright Scholarship recipient Public Ocean Access Network ldquoHigh-Altitude Nuclear Warrdquo Nuclear Press p25

Russian and China are urgently asking the worldrsquos nations to begin talks to ban the militarization of space Chinarsquos ambassador to the United Nations Conference on Disarmament in January 2000 called for international talks to ban testing deployment and use of weapons in outer space 23 In March 2000 Russiarsquos ambassador to the UN Conference on Disarmament echoed this urgent plea for UN negotiations for an international treaty to ban testing stationing and use of weapons systems in outer space Of the 66 member nations of the UN negotiations to ban weapons in space the United States24 To avoid the rapidly approaching nuclear conflict with Russia andor China the United States must abandon its efforts to make a national missile defense system and join international talks to ban weapons in space If cornered the Russians and Chinese will fight the United States and both nations are prepared with high-altitude nuclear EMP weapons to attack US electronic civilization

44

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Space Militarization Adv 3

Space militarization leads to extinction

Mitchell Ayotte amp Helwich 1 Associate Professor of Communication and Director of Debate at the University of Pittsburgh Teaching Fellows in the Department of Communication at the University of Pittsburgh Missile Defence Trans-Atlantic Diplomacy at a Crossroads ISIS Briefing on Ballistic Missile Defence No 6 July

A buildup of space weapons might begin with noble intentions of lsquopeace through strength deterrence but this rationale glosses over the tendency that I the presence of space weapons will result in the increased likelihood of their use33 This drift toward usage is strengthened by a strategic fact elucidated by Frank Barnabv when it comes to arming the heavens anti-ballistic missiles and anti-satellite warfare technologies go hand-in- hand134 The interlocking nature of offense and defense in military space technology stems from the inherent dual capability of space borne weapon components As Marc Vidricaire Delegation of Canada to the UN Conference on Disarmament explains If you want to intercept something in space you could use the same capability to target something on land 35 To the extent that ballistic missile interceptors based in space can knock out enemy missiles in mid-flight such interceptors can also be used as orbiting Death Stars capable of sending munitions hurtling through the Earths atmosphere The dizzying speed of space warfare would introduce intense use or losersquo pressure into strategic calculations with the specter of split-second attacks creating incentives to rig orbiting Death Stars with automated hair trigger devices In theory automation would enhance survivability of vulnerable space weapon platforms However by taking the decision to commit violence out of human hands and endowing computers with authority to make war military planners could sow insidious seeds of accidental conflict Yale sociologist Charles Perrow has analyzed complexly interactive tightly coupled industrial systems such as space weapons which have many sophisticated components that all depend on each others flawless performance According to Perrow this interlocking complexity makes it impossible to foresee all the different ways such systems could fail As Perrow explains [the odd term normal accident is meant to signal that given the system characteristics multiple and unexpected interactions of failures are inevitable36 Deployment of space weapons with we-delegated authority to fire death rays or unleash killer projectiles would likely make war itself inevitable given the susceptibility of such systems to normal accidents according to retired Lt Col Robert M Bowman even a tiny projectile reentering from space strikes the earth with such high velocity that it can do enormous damage - even more than would be done by a nuclear weapon of the same size 37 In the same Star Wars technology touted as a quintessential tool of peace defense analyst David Langford sees one of the most - destabilizing offensive weapons ever conceived One imagines dead cities of microwave-grilled people138 Given this unique potential for destruction it is not hard to imagine that any nation subjected to space weapon attack would retaliate with maximum force including use of nuclear biological andor chemical weapons An accidental war sparked by a computer glitch in space could plunge the world into the most destructive military conflict ever seen

45

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Space Ext

Lewallen 2 John- Political Science at Whitman University organizer of the Nuclear Peace Action Group Fulbright Scholarship recipient Public Ocean Access Network ldquoHigh-Altitude Nuclear Warrdquo Nuclear Press Pg37Every nation in the world wants to join Russia and China in their urgent insistence that space weaponry should be legally prohibited every nation except one the United StatesIronically the United States is the most vulnerable nation on Earth to high-altitude nuclear electromagnetic pulse war One or a few nuclear detonations high above the United States could catastrophically devastate information civilization wiping out computer chips nationwide and also destroying satellites without harming people directlyThe most basic military strategic logic dictates that the United States should avoid war in space at all costs Space is simply a disastrously unfavorable field of battle for the United States The Russians and Chinese would prefer to avoid World War Three but should they deem it inevitable they have prepared the greatest ambush in military history a nuclear electromagnetic pulse surprise attack against the United States

Space AdvLewallen 2 John- Political Science at Whitman University organizer of the Nuclear Peace Action Group Fulbright Scholarship recipient Public Ocean Access Network ldquoHigh-Altitude Nuclear Warrdquo Nuclear Press Pg36The United States military is stumbling blindly into the greatest ambush in history Determined to dominate space the United States has tens of billions of dollars of space weaponry with many more space weapons systems in research and development

Space Sat EMPLewallen 2 John- Political Science at Whitman University organizer of the Nuclear Peace Action Group Fulbright Scholarship recipient Public Ocean Access Network ldquoHigh-Altitude Nuclear Warrdquo Nuclear Press Pg34Any rational person must accept the possibility that all three nations in the Nuclear Triangle have EMP bombs in Earth-orbiting satellites today ready to wipe out an adversaryrsquos electronics on very short notice Everyone knows that classified or secret weapons systems exist It is plain crazy to believe that China Russia and the United States are not prepared with high-altitude EMP and low-altitude nuclear weapons in satellites either ready to launch or in orbit alreadyA strategic feedback loop would seem to make it at least ldquostrongly possiblerdquo that the United States China and Russia have high-powered EMP bombs in Earth orbit today The ability to wipe out an adversaryrsquos electronics continent-wide pretty much any time with a maneuverable EMP satellite bomb would confer major if not overwhelming advantage to the aggressor So if the other guy probably has EMP satellite bombs we need them too

Lewallen 2 John- Political Science at Whitman University organizer of the Nuclear Peace Action Group Fulbright Scholarship recipient Public Ocean Access Network ldquoHigh-Altitude Nuclear Warrdquo Nuclear Press Pg25

Russia and China are urgently asking the worldrsquos nations to begin talks to ban the militarization of space Chinarsquos ambassador to the United Nations Converence on Disarmament in January 2000 called for international talks to ban testing deployment and use of weapons in outer space23 In March 2000 Russiarsquos ambassador to the UN Congerence on Disarmament echoid this ugent plea for UN negations for an international treaty to ban testing stationing and use of weapons systems in outer space CONT

46

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Data Sharing Adv

Potential exists for EMP intelligence sharing with Russia which is key to combat rogue or terrorist EMP attacks

Wood 4 Lowell L- member of the Technical Advisory Group US Senate Select Committee on Intelligence a member of the Undersea Warfare Experts Group US House of Representatives Committee on Armed Services a visiting fellow at the Hoover Institution and Stanford University The report of the Commission to Assess the Threat to the United States From Electromagnetic Pulse Attackrdquo July 22 2004

This is particularly strong in the circumstance of the Soviet Union where they detonated most of their high-altitude explosions over their own territory and thus had an opportunity to make extensive measurements That large body of physical data has come forth in a somewhat fragmentary fashion idiosyncratic fashion really over the years But since the end of the Cold War in particular in the context of cooperation against large-scale terrorism Russian workers and indeed the Russian government has indicated a willingness to collaborate with the United States against the common threat that EMP poses to both the Russian Federation and the United States in the hands of both state-substate-scale actors to Russian and American civilizations So there is the prospect for substantially improved understanding in the United States as far as what was actually observed but the large program that the government supported from the early 1960s up into the early 1990s to understand nuclear weaponry effects has run a very consistent thread through the limited body of experimental data that exists to the end of atmospheric testing

However Russia fears US nuclear EMP strikes

Pry 5 Dr Peter Vincent- EMP Commission Staff ldquoForeign Views Of Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP) Attackrdquo Before The United States Senate Subcommittee On Terrorism Technology And Homeland Security March 8 2005 httpwwwendtimesreportcomEMP_attackhtml

Many foreign analystsndashparticularly in Iran North Korea China and Russiandashview the United States as a potential aggressor that would be willing to use its entire panoply of weapons including nuclear weapons in a first strike They perceive the United States as having contingency plans to make a nuclear EMP attack and as being willing to execute those plans under a broad range of circumstances

Russiarsquos scientific community is especially aware of this EMP threat

Zak 6 Anatoly ldquoTHE K PROJECT Soviet Nuclear Tests In Spacerdquo The Nonproliferation Review Volume 13 Issue 1 March 2006

At the same time scientists realized that along with their higher efficiency nuclear-tipped ABMs would generate highly dangerous blast effects and electromagnetic pulse radiation (EMP) in the surrounding atmosphere and on the very territory they were designed to protect Among the affected infrastructure could be radar installations strategic communications networks and other command-and-control assets To further complicate the situation the Soviet military planners envisioned a scenario in which a nuclear attack on the USSR would likely be preceded by a US high-altitude nuclear explosion designed to ldquoblindrdquo the Soviet ABM tracking network1

47

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Data Sharing Adv

Russiarsquos fears prevent them pursuing cooperative programs and intelligence sharing

Robichaud 7 Carl- Program Officer at The Century Foundation and co-editor of Breaking the Nuclear Impasse New Prospects for Security against Weapons Threats ldquoThe Perils of Primacyrdquo The Century Foundation 9-5-2007 httpwwwtcforgprintasptype=NCamppubid=1673

Moreover primacy has costs The first is reduced conflict stability which heightens risks even for the dominant nation If Russia knows that it is at risk of being disarmed by a bolt from the blue it is likely to disperse its weapons shorten launch times and devolve control to sub-commanders Such a posture would exacerbate the risk of accidental or unauthorized launch in the context of a crisis Depending on how Russia responded to American primacy these risks could well outweigh whatever modest bargaining benefits it offered Already Russia is taking some provocative steps to mitigate its vulnerabilitymdashincluding the announcement last month that its nuclear bombers will for the first time since 1992 resume long-range patrols ldquoon a permanent basisrdquo Second the search for primacy directly undermines the Nunn-Lugar Cooperative Threat Reduction Program which remains our best defense against nuclear terrorism One of the reasons that progress on these programs has slowed to a crawl is Russiarsquos suspicion that the initiative is a cover for espionage into its nuclear installations

Russiarsquos important- they have the leading physicists

Wilson 8 Clay- Specialist in Technology and National Security Foreign Affairs Defense and Trade Division ldquoHigh Altitude Electromagnetic Pulse (HEMP) and High Power Microwave (HPM) Devices Threat Assessmentsrdquo Congressional Research Service March 26 2008

Vladimir Lukin the former Soviet Ambassador to the United States and former Chairman of the International Affairs Committee for the Russian Parliament reportedly has stated that Russia currently has a capability to create a HEMP effect over the United States37 During 1962 the then Soviet Union conducted a series of atmospheric nuclear tests and observed HEMP effects that included surge protector burnouts power supply breakdowns and damage to overhead and underground buried cables at distances of 600 kilometers Since then Russia has reportedly made extensive preparations to protect their infrastructure against HEMP by hardening both civilian and military electronic equipment and by providing continuous training for personnel operating these protected systems38 Other sources have reportedly stated that Russia may also have some of the leading physicists in the world currently doing research on electronic warfare weapons and electromagnetic pulse effects39

The US needs Russiarsquos data- we lack the capability

Riddle 4 Lieutenant Colonel Thomas C- United States Army ldquoNuclear High Altitude Electromagnetic Pulse ndash Implications For Homeland Security And Homeland Defenserdquo US Army War College 03 May 2004

Another area of concern is that many of the remaining nuclear physicist personnel specifically those associated with EMP are retiring without a next generation to follow their lead76 Similarly the physical plant to conduct EMP testing and simulation has atrophied almost to the point of non-existence77 Building upon a suggestion originally proposed by Doctor Wood Congress should mandate and oversee the creation of an interagency DoD-DHS led organization to champion the revitalization of both of these resources78

48

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Data Sharing Adv

Increased EMP knowledge is key to effectively hardening our infrastructure

McNeill amp Weitz 8 Jena Baker- homeland security policy analyst at The Heritage Foundation and Richard- Senior Fellow and Director of the Center for Political-Military Analysis at Hudson Institute ldquoElectromagnetic Pulse (EMP) Attack A Preventable Homeland Security Catastropherdquo Heritage Foundation Backgrounder 2199 httpwwwheritageorgresearchhomelandsecuritybg2199cfm_ftn19

The US cannot continue to ignore the EMP threat While some progress has been made in hardening potential US targets against attack including critical military and government systems the vast majority of electrical systems are unshielded and unprotected especially in the civilian sector If properly shielded electrical devices and systems can generally survive even the strongest EMPs[20] Congress and the new Administration must 1 Perform More Research on the Threat Further research is needed in order to ensure that America can respond to the EMP threat appropriately without wasting government resources on flimsy or useless security measures Although there are numerous methods to harness EMPs capable of affecting electronic systems there is still a theoretical limit to what damage they can produce in terms of both geographic size and intensity Some EMP weapons release just enough energy to disable small electrical devices while others can destroy all the electronic devices and systems within a city block Altitude plays a major role in whether an EMP attack will be successful lower heights typically expose a smaller surface area to EMP damage Some systems are simply more vulnerable to EMP attack than others such as devices plugged into power grids and commercial computer equipment The US government must gain knowledge of the attributes and capabilities of EMP and understand the amount of money time and effort that will be required for meaningful prevention EMP research should also include actions by Congress to simulate the effects of an EMP attack on Washington and other high-value targets and re-examine the Graham Report recommendations

Protections drastically reduce the dangers of EMP strikes

Chisholm 5 Patrick ldquoProtect our electronics against EMP attackrdquo Christian Science Monitor December 19 2005

Fortunately protecting electronics and critical infrastructure against an EMP is doable It involves enclosing every electronic component with a metallic cage that blocks out electromagnetic waves Sound impossible Actually electronic components already enjoy some form of shielding against electromagnetic interference Federal Communications Commission standards require it Such shielding is designed to prevent everyday electromagnetic radiation from entering andor exiting the device Your computer contains this shielding from metal housings down to the little metal coverings soldered to your motherboard There even are housings the size of rooms or buildings that protect sensitive equipment inside Without electromagnetic shielding many electronic devices would not work properly However most existing shielding may not be enough to protect against an EMP While US military standards often require electronic components to be protected against an EMP commercial standards do not And while our power grid is shielded against things such as lightning strikes it is not tested for protection against an EMP Upgrading to shield against an EMP would entail using more robust shielding materials especially for the cords cables andor wires that connect devices to external entities such as power supplies or networks Cables and wires act as antennas through which an EMP travels directly into a device

49

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Data Sharing- Uniqueness

Potential exists for collaboration between Russia and the US to reduce EMP dangers

Weldon 4 Curt- vice-chair of the Armed Services Committee and the House Homeland Security Committee The report of the Commission to Assess the Threat to the United States From Electromagnetic Pulse Attack Committee on Armed Services House of Representatives One Hundred Eighth Congress second session hearing held July 22 2004

Let me get into the area of the joint US -Russian initiative that Dr Wood mentioned It just so happens that last year in our defense bill we created the establishment of the Teller-Kurchatov Alliance for Peace Edward Teller and Igor Kurchatov were the two fathers of the nuclear weapons in both the US and Russia Now the head of Kurchatov Institute Dr Evgeny Velikhov is very eager to establish a more proactive relationship for the peaceful purposes of dealing with nuclear energy Is that Dr Wood potentially a forum since Livermore is involved with that effort to begin a formal process of engaging the Russians They just changed their chief of military operations this past week General Baluevskii has now been put in the head position I had a chance to meet with him one month ago in Moscow He has now taken General Kvashnins place as the top military general and I think he has a different outlook on perhaps US American relations and the military So Dr Wood would that be perhaps a vehicle that we could begin to move aggressively into what you alluded to Dr Wood Yes Mr Weldon I believe that that is indeed the case The recent events in the Russian military to which you referred of course appear at least on the surface to be somewhat hopeful in respect to the progress of more collegial relationships between the American and Russian military establishments the potential collaboration with leaders civilian leaders then Soviet now Russian military technologists such as academicians Evgeny Velikhov the head of the Kurchatov Institute personifies I believe at least has prospects So I very much applaud the committees initiatives along these lines both with respect to the Teller-Kurchatov fellowships and the nuclear strategy forum initiative These are directions in which US policy and practice surely should go

50

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Data Sharing- Data Needed

Past US tests failed to record the necessary data

Emanuelson 9 Jerry ldquoNotes about nuclear EMPrdquo Futurescience LLC Jan 26 2009There have only been a few high altitude nuclear explosions There have been none since November 1962 At that time scientists were just beginning to understand the phenomenon well enough to even know what to try to measure This means that there is a very limited amount of data available and only a part of that data is unclassified The largest nuclear EMPs probably occurred with the Hardtack-Teak and Hardtack-Orange tests over Johnston Island in August 1958 however very little information is openly available about the EMP from these tests and it is likely that not much data was obtained due to equipment malfunctions relevant to EMP measurement and a lack of accurate understanding of the EMP phenomenon Although scientists were aware of nuclear EMP in 1958 in many critical respects it was misunderstood Those early errors in the understanding of EMP made good data acquisition very difficult Both of these August 1958 tests used the 38 megaton W39 thermonuclear warhead There have been unconfirmed reports that one or both of these 1958 tests caused power outages in Hawaii

Computer simulations are indecisive

Emanuelson 9 Jerry ldquoNotes about nuclear EMPrdquo Futurescience LLC Jan 26 2009Because of the insufficient amount of hard data scientists have tried to do mathematical calculations about the strength and effects of the different components of the EMP There has never been any clear consensus about whose calculations are correct Since more testing cannot be done there is no way to test the accuracy of the calculations made by various scientists since 1962 The United States National Laboratories have a computer code in which they have a high level of confidence since it closely matches the sparse amount of actual data that does exist

Data is key to protect critical infrastructure

Chisholm 5 Patrick ldquoProtect our electronics against EMP attackrdquo Christian Science Monitor December 19 2005

Radasky one of the worlds few experts on protecting electronics against an EMP thinks that most electronics would undergo only a temporary disruption in the event of an EMP You may just have to restart the computer and everything would be fine said Radasky But a temporary shutdown of a control system for a critical infrastructure system he said would be troublesome And if just 1 percent of all electronics failed havoc could ensue Just think about the power outage in August of 03 when a couple of wires hit a tree observed Radasky That was a single failure propagated over a huge area Now imagine at the speed of light every place in the United States some portion of electronics failing Now you have a very widespread problem The only way to know the extent to which an EMP would knock out electronics is to conduct testing with EMP simulators Unfortunately since the end of the cold war most EMP simulators in the United States have been closed according to Radasky And the few that remain open are for military use not civilian use

51

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Russia Data Sharing (Testing)

Understanding EMP effects is key to prevent testing

Farley 9 Robert is an assistant professor at the University of Kentuckyrsquos Patterson School of Diplomacy and International Commerce ldquoNeocons Salivating Over Their Next Great Exaggerated Threat Electromagnetic Pulse Attackrdquo October 22 2009

Along with their Soviet and Chinese counterparts US military planners and scientists studied the potential dangersmdashand opportunitiesmdashpresented by EMP However since only one nation the United States has ever attacked another country with an atomic bomb the precise extent of EMPrsquos power to damage electronic-dependent infrastructures is not fully understood Testing bans have also prevented the established nuclear powers from fully investigating the EMP effect (prompting some EMP awareness activists to argue for a resumption of nuclear testing)

Nuke War

Johnson 2001(Rebecca Executive Dir Acronym Institute for Disarmament Diplomacy The Guardian 7-17Then the international arms control and non-proliferation regimes collapsed Americans werent bothered at first for hadnt the government promised a super-sophisticated force field round the whole nation that no terrorist or missile would ever penetrate So nuclear testing resumed in Nevada for new warheads to improve the kill prospects of missile interceptors and to penetrate deep into enemies bunkers India had been waiting for just such a go-ahead and Pakistan soon followed both raced to test warheads to fit on to missiles upping the tension in Kashmir and along the borders with China Free now to resume its own testing China boosted its programme to modernise and increase the size of its small nuclear arsenal Somewhat reluctantly Russia followed Moscow suspended all further reductions and cooperative security and safety programmes for its still-large nuclear arsenal and facilities Within a few short years the nuclear non-proliferation treaty was just another discarded agreement Many governments with nuclear power programmes developed nuclear weapons as well while others fitted anthrax or sarin on to weapons just in case Most hadnt wanted to but fearful that their neighbours would all felt compelled Regional rivalries grew quickly into major international problems Alliances collapsed amid suspicion and recriminations The burgeoning arms races even spread into outer space threatening military surveillance as well as public communication entertainment and navigation No one knew who had what Deterrence was empty as defence analysts calculated the advantages of the pre-emptive strike In that terrified atmosphere of insecurity and mistrust someone launched first And then it was too late to speak out The Republicans hadnt yet managed to get missile defence to work Such a doomsday scenario is not so fanciful On July 7 the New York Times announced that President Bush wants to ditch the comprehensive test ban treaty A week before the administration asked nuclear laboratories to work out how quickly the US could resume testing after its nine-year moratorium If Bush were to back out of the test ban treaty or break the moratorium on nuclear testing - undertaken with China Russia Britain and France - he would also explicitly breach agreements made last May when 187 countries negotiated measures to strengthen and implement the non-proliferation treaty The test ban is no outdated cold war instrument but a fundamental tool to prevent new destabilising developments in nuclear weapons Over several decades from the Arctic to the Pacific from the capitals of Europe to the deserts of Nevada people have marched petitioned demonstrated and even sailed or hiked into test sites Many have been imprisoned and some even lost their lives trying to stop the nuclear weapons governments from polluting our oceans and earth with radioactivity from nuclear explosions conducted for one purpose only - to make better nuclear bombs It took three arduous years to complete negotiations on the comprehensive test ban treaty It isnt perfect No product of compromise ever is The verification system is very thorough but it also had to be affordable financially and politically The treaty stopped short of closing and dismantling the known test sites or banning laboratory testing which the weapon states said they needed to assure the safety and reliability of weapons in the stockpiles (pending achievement of their other treaty obligations to eliminate the nuclear arsenals completely) But it does ban all nuclear test explosions in all environments India panicked because the treaty would close off its nuclear options It refused to sign and then let off a string of nuclear explosions in May 1998 Pakistan followed to prove it could Even so the treaty held Neither government has felt able to keep testing which means their options for further developments were curbed Bush has embarked on a very slippery slope that could potentially put at risk the future of the citizens of even the most advanced military nation Mumbling and grumbling wont keep us safe It is time to speak out

52

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Russian ARMS control

Lewallen 2 John- Political Science at Whitman University organizer of the Nuclear Peace Action Group Fulbright Scholarship recipient Public Ocean Access Network ldquoHigh-Altitude Nuclear Warrdquo Nuclear Press p22-23Russia today is a collapsing superpower with an arsenal of thousands of nuclear missiles which it cannot afford to maintain Six thousand Russian strategic missiles are ready to launch today with about 2250 on high alert ldquoWhat counts most now is that Russia and United States start moving jointly or along parallel courses toward radically lowered ceilings on nuclear warheads without any holdupsrdquo Russiarsquos President Putin said on November 14 2000 Russian officials said President Putin would like to cut strategic missile arsenals to 1000 each for the US and Russia Still the Russians clearly want to maintain second-strike nuclear threat credibility against the United States

53

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Modeling Advantage 1

United States failure to reject nuclear EMP warfare has eroded the nuclear taboo surrounding high-altitude explosions and has led several states to incorporate nuclear EMP strikes into warplans

Pry 5 Dr Peter Vincent- EMP Commission Staff ldquoForeign Views Of Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP) Attackrdquo Before The United States Senate Subcommittee On Terrorism Technology And Homeland Security March 8 2005 httpwwwendtimesreportcomEMP_attackhtml

Some foreign analysts judging from open source statements and writings appear to regard EMP attack as a legitimate use of nuclear weapons because EMP would inflict no or few prompt civilian casualties EMP attack appears to be a unique exception to the general stigma attached to nuclear employment by most of the international community in public statements Significantly even some analysts in Japan and Germanyndashnations that historically have been most condemnatory of nuclear and other weapons of mass destruction in official and unofficial forumsndashappear to regard EMP attack as morally defensible For example a June 2000 Japanese article in a scholarly journal citing senior political and military officials appears to regard EMP attack as a legitimate use of nuclear weapons ldquoAlthough there is little chance that the Beijing authorities would launch a nuclear attack which would incur the disapproval of the international community and which would result in such enormous destruction that it would impede postwar cleanup and policies a serious assault starting with the use of nuclear weapons which would not harm humans animals or property would be valid If a nuclear warhead was detonated 40 kilometers above Taiwan an electromagnetic wave would be propagated which would harm unprotected computers radar and IC circuits on the ground within a 100 kilometer radius and the weapons and equipment which depend on the communications and electronics technology whose superiority Taiwan takes pride in would be rendered combat ineffective at one stroke If they were detonated in the sky in the vicinity of Ilan the effects would also extend to the waters near Yonakuni [in Okinawa] so it would be necessary for Japan too to take care Those in Taiwan having lost their advanced technology capabilities would end up fighting with tactics and technology going back to the 19th century They would inevitably be at a disadvantage with the PLA and its overwhelming military force superiorityrdquo (Su Tzu-yun Jadi 1 June 2000) An article by a member of Indiarsquos Institute of Defense Studies Analysis openly advocates that India be prepared to make a preemptive EMP attack both for reasons of military necessity and on humanitarian grounds ldquoA study conducted in the U S during the late 1980s reported that a high-yield device exploded about 500 kilometers above the ground can generate an electromagnetic pulse (EMP) of the order of 50000 volts over a radius of 2500 kilometers around the point of burst which would be collected by any exposed conductor Such an attack will not cause any blast or thermal effects on the ground below but it can produce a massive breakdown in the communications system It is certain that most of the land communication networks and military command control links will be affected and it will undermine our capability to retaliate This in fact is the most powerful incentive for a preemptive attack And a high-altitude exo-atmospheric explosion may not even kill a bird on the groundrdquo Although India Pakistan and Israel are not rogue states they all presently have missiles and nuclear weapons giving them the capability to make EMP attacks against their regional adversaries An EMP attack by any of these statesndasheven if targeted at a regional adversary and not the United Statesndashcould collaterally damage U S forces in the region and would pose an especially grave threat to U S satellites Many foreign analystsndashparticularly in Iran North Korea China and Russiandashview the United States as a potential aggressor that would be willing to use its entire panoply of weapons including nuclear weapons in a first strike They perceive the United States as having contingency plans to make a nuclear EMP attack and as being willing to execute those plans under a broad range of circumstances

54

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Modeling Advantage- Israel

The exclusion of EMP from the nuclear taboo means Israel will EMP strike Iran leading to the closure of the Strait of Hormuz and international terrorist attacks

Nagle 210 Chet- Pentagons International Security Affairs department Intel Research Corporation author of Iran Covenant ldquoItrsquos time to play the war cardrdquo The Daily Caller 021010

The world knows the US military can destroy any target in the world without using nuclear weapons But what about Israel That country with a population less than that of New York City has developed a ldquotriadrdquomdashthe capability to launch a nuclear strike from aircraft missile silos and submarines Besides Israel only the US Russia and China have that deterrent power But would Israel use nuclear weapons in a pre-emptive strike on Iran I suggest that is unlikely because as we will see below it is unnecessary in the usual sense As for a non-nuclear pre-emptive strike Israel cannot successfully attack Iran with conventional weapons or aircraft The distance is great the defenses formidable and the casualties would be very high Instead I believe Israel will use an electromagnetic pulse (EMP) weapon Whatrsquos that In 1962 the US conducted an atmospheric test called Starfish Prime In it a 14 megaton weapon was detonated 400 kilometers above Johnson Island in the Pacific The EMP from that test knocked out street lights in Hawaii 900 miles away The Soviets held similar tests and discovered EMP effects can penetrate far underground If Israel used one of its Jericho III missiles to detonate 400 kilometers above north central Iran there would be no blast or radiation effects on the ground In fact if the strike was at noon on a sunny day the people below would not know it happened except their lights would go out cars stop fridges die power line transformers short out refineries shut down and yes those uranium enrichment centrifuges in caverns stop spinning This bloodless annihilation coupled with a selective cyber attack would freeze Iran for decades What could be Iranrsquos response to such an attack If they can find a working radio they can announce they have mined the Strait of Hormuz Because of depth width and its hydrographic features the Strait cannot be mined but if Iran says it is mined it would have the same effect Lloyds will cancel insurance for any tanker transiting the Strait Then we revisit ldquoTanker Warrdquo tactics of 1985 and the US Navy would escort any ship anxious to cash in on the crisis If shore missile batteries were somehow still operational a battle group in the area together with bombers from Diego Garcia would reduce them to rubble along with associated infrastructure like military harbors A rain of missiles from Hezbollah in Syria would have to be endured by Israel unless another EMP weapon was used Terror attacks would be made on Israelis and Americans but those can be dealt with by law enforcement and military forces especially if they are forewarned Of course the price of oil and gold would spike for a while On the positive side Iranian ldquoGreenrdquo opposition forces would have an opportunity to take to the darkened streets of Tehran and rid themselves of the corrupt clerical regime So it seems the ldquowar cardrdquo is in the hands of Israel and the card has ldquoEMPrdquo on it

55

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Modeling Advantage- Israel

This shuts off the worldrsquos oil supply

Klare 2 Michael- Five Colleges professor of Peace and World Security Studies boards of directors of Human Rights Watch and the Arms Control Association ldquoResource Wars The New Landscape of Global Conflictrdquo p 72-73

Iran does not pose a direct threat to audi Arabia and the southern Gulf kingdomsmdashat least not for the time being However by building up its navy and deploying antiship missiles along its coasts Iran may imperil oil shipping in the Persian Gulf and the all-important Strait of Hormuz the Gulfs narrow opening to the Arabian Sea and the larger world beyond Although lacking major warships Iran has acquired three submarines twenty missile-armed patrol boats numerous shore-based missile batteries and a large inventory of antishipping mines This is enough General Zinni testified in 1999 to jeopardize open access to Gulf shipping lanes Only six miles wide at its narrowest point the Strait of Hormuz is described by the US Department of Energy as the worlds most important oil chokepoint because of the sheer volume of oilmdashover 15 million barrels per daymdashthat passes through it With missile batteries deployed at both entrances to the strait and a large inventory of anti-shipping mines Iran is in an ideal position to impede shipping through this vital channel Pentagon strategists suggest moreover that Iran will seek to do so in the event of a future clash with the United States Iran also seeks to extend its control over Abu Musa and both Greater and Lesser Tunb a small group of islands that guard the western approaches to the strait Iran seized the Tunbs from Ras al-Khaimah (part of the United Arab Emirates) in 1971 and has occupied them since It shared Abu Musa with Sharjah (another UAE component) until 1994 when it took control of the entire island When pressed by the UAE to submit the dispute over the islands to international mediation Tehran declared that they were an inseparable part of Iran46 Since then the Iranians have deployed antiship missiles on Abu Musa and fortified their positions on the Tunbs47

Collapses the global economy

Roberts 4 Paul- regular contributor to Harpers and NYT Magazine ldquoThe End of Oil On the Edge of a Perilous New Worldrdquo p 93-4

The obsessive focus on oil is hardly surprising given the stakes In the fast moving world of energy politics oil is not simply a source of world power but a medium for that power as well a substance whose huge importance encompasses entire nations in a global web that is sensitive to the smallest of variations A single oil event -- a pipeline explosion in Iraq political unrest in Venezuela a bellicose exchange between Russia and Saudi Arabia -- sends shockwaves through the world energy order pushes prices up or down and sets off tectonic shifts in global wealth and power In the volatile would of oil the tide could turn quickly As anxieties over the uncertainties in Iraq drove oil prices up to $40 the oil tide abruptly changed direction transferring tens of billions of dollars from the G-8 countries to the oil exporting countries and threatening the global economic recovery So embedded has oil became in todays political and economic spheres that the major Western governments now watch the oil markets as closely as they once watched the spread of communism This is because six of the last seven global recessions have been preceded by an oil price rise and fear is growing among economists and policy makers that in todays growth-dependent and energy-intensive global economy oil price volatility itself may eventually pose more risks to prosperity and stability and mere survival than terrorism or even war

56

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Modeling Advantage- China

China would love to drop a HEMP on Taiwan- lack of norm

Schneider 9 Mark- National Institute for Public Policy The Nuclear Doctrine and Forces of the Peoples Republic of China Comparative Strategy Volume 28 Issue 3 July 2009

There is also concern about Chinese preparations for a nuclear electromagnetic pulse attack on Taiwan the United States and Japan as part of its strategy to facilitate the conquest of Taiwan The Congressional Commission on the Threat to the United States from Electromagnetic Pulse reported that ldquoChina and Russia have considered limited nuclear attack options that unlike Cold War plans employ EMP as the primary or sole means of attackrdquo121 The 2005 Pentagon report on Chinese military power observed that ldquoSome PLA theorists are aware of the electromagnetic effect of using a high-altitude electromagnetic pulse (HEMP) and might consider using HEMP in an unconventional attack believing that the United States and other nations would not consider it as a use of force and a crossing of the nuclear thresholdrdquo122 A Congressional Research Service report by Ronald ORourke concluded that a US naval force coming to the aid of Taiwan against a Chinese attack would have to be prepared for use of nuclear weapons and EMP because ldquoChina could also use a nuclear-armed ballistic missile to detonate a nuclear warhead in the atmosphere to create a high-altitude electromagnetic pulse (EMP) intended to temporarily or permanently disable the electronic circuits of US or other civilian and military electronic systemsrdquo123 China expert Dr Michael Pillsbury has linked nuclear EMP attack to the Chinese ldquoassassins macerdquo concept of defeating the superior with the inferior Pillsbury has elsewhere noted that the March 2000 issue of Chinas Military Digest featured an article by Xian Fengli Lu Young and Ming Xiang which argued that ldquoEMP warheads will make it much easier to cross the nuclear thresholdrdquo124 The designers of the Chinese DF-11 SRBM ldquohave demonstrated the most interest in HEMP [high altitude nuclear EMP] weaponsrdquo125 According to the Wall Street Journal ldquoChina and Russia have the capability to launch EMP weaponsmdashand have let us know it China recently published an article on EMP in a Chinese-language technical journal To make sure the US got the message the article appeared in Englishrdquo126

This would collapse civilization

Straits Times 2k (Singapore) ldquoNo one gains in war over Taiwanrdquo June 25 lexisThe high-intensity scenario postulates a cross-strait war escalating into a full-scale war between the US and China If Washington were to conclude that splitting China would better serve its national interests then a full-scale war becomes unavoidable Conflict on such a scale would embroil other countries far and near and -horror of horrors -raise the possibility of a nuclear war Beijing has already told the US and Japan privately that it considers any country providing bases and logistics support to any US forces attacking China as belligerent parties open to its retaliation In the region this means South Korea Japan the Philippines and to a lesser extent Singapore If China were to retaliate east Asia will be set on fire And the conflagration may not end there as opportunistic powers elsewhere may try to overturn the existing world order With the US distracted Russia may seek to redefine Europes political landscape The balance of power in the Middle East may be similarly upset by the likes of Iraq In south Asia hostilities between India and Pakistan each armed with its own nuclear arsenal could enter a new and dangerous phase Will a full-scale Sino-US war lead to a nuclear war According to General Matthew Ridgeway commander of the US Eighth Army which fought against the Chinese in the Korean War the US had at the time thought of using nuclear weapons against China to save the US from military defeat In his book The Korean War a personal account of the military and political aspects of the conflict and its implications on future US foreign policy Gen Ridgeway said that US was confronted with two choices in Korea -truce or a broadened war which could have led to the use of nuclear weapons If the US had to resort to nuclear weaponry to defeat China long before the latter acquired a similar capability there is little hope of winning a war against China 50 years later short of using nuclear weapons The US estimates that China possesses about 20 nuclear warheads that can destroy major American cities Beijing also seems prepared to go for the nuclear option A Chinese military officer disclosed recently that Beijing was considering a review of its non first use principle regarding nuclear weapons Major-General Pan Zhangqiang president of the military-funded Institute for Strategic Studies told a gathering at the Woodrow Wilson International Centre for Scholars in Washington that although the government still abided by that principle there were strong pressures from the military to drop it He said military leaders considered the use of nuclear weapons mandatory if the country risked dismemberment as a result of foreign intervention Gen Ridgeway said that should that come to pass we would see the destruction of civilisation There would be no victors in such a war While the prospect of a nuclear Armaggedon over Taiwan might seem inconceivable it cannot be ruled out entirely for China puts sovereignty above everything else

57

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Modeling Advantage- Solvency

Establishing an environment that discourages EMP attacks is critical to prevent them from occurring

EMP Commission 4 Report of the Commission to Assess the Threat to the United States from Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP) Attack Volume 1 Executive Report 2004 Dr John S Foster Jr Mr Earl Gjelde Dr William R Graham (Chairman) Dr Robert J Hermann Mr Henry (Hank) M Kluepfel GEN Richard L Lawson USAF (Ret) Dr Gordon K Soper Dr Lowell L Wood Jr Dr Joan B Woodard

An EMP attack is one way for a terrorist activity to use a small amount of nuclear weaponrymdashpotentially just one weaponmdashin an effort to produce a catastrophic impact on our society but it is not the only way In addition there are potential applications of surface-burst nuclear weaponry biological and chemical warfare agents and cyber attacks that might cause damage that could reach large-scale long-term levels The first order of business is to prevent any of these attacks from occurring The US must establish a global environment that will profoundly discourage such attacks We must persuade nations to forgo obtaining nuclear weapons or to provide acceptable assurance that these weapons will neither threaten the vital interests of the United States nor fall into threatening hands

Plan resurrects the taboo

Bin amp Hongyi 9 Li- director of Arms Control Program at the Institute of International Studies and Nie- officer in the Peoplersquos Liberation Army ldquoAn Investigation of China ndash US Strategic Stabilityrdquo translation of an article published in Chinese in World Economics amp Politics 5-22-09

Damage to the nuclear taboo also comes from some pseudoscientific discussions These discussions completely ignore the effect of the nuclear taboo making casual suppositions about the use of nuclear weapons for example supposing nuclear nations after defeat in a conventional conflict must use nuclear weapons to reverse the war situation During every form of nuclear dialog between China and the United States American academics frequently engage in this type of ldquoacademicrdquo persuasion with the Chinese side The starting point is defending the US refusal to make a no first use pledge but this so-called academic propagandizing objectively weakens the confidence of Chinese scholars in the nuclear taboo During the Cold War the international anti-nuclear movement strengthened the nuclear taboo After the end of the Cold War because the large scale nuclear confrontation between the US and the Soviet Union fundamentally ended the influence of the grass roots of the international anti-nuclear movement has weakened This is not beneficial to the maintenance and strengthening of the nuclear taboo China from the perspective of protecting its own national interest should invest resources in propagandizing the danger of nuclear war oppose the first use of nuclear weapons and the threat to use nuclear weapons strengthening the nuclear taboo

58

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Israeli Strikes Bad

Israeli preemption causes conflagration

Eiland 10 Maj Gen Giora- senior researcher at the Institute for National Security Studies (INSS) in Tel Aviv former head of the Israeli National Security Council ldquoIsraels Military Optionrdquo The Washington Quarterly Volume 33 Issue 1 January 2010 pages 115 - 130

With these risks in mind Israel has made it clear that a military attack is an option The risks however are immense First an attack could fail tactically which would seriously harm Israels deterrent and provide Iran with a good excuse to attack Israel Second Iran could fight back conventionally which is more likely or even with chemical and biological weapons which would be more devastating Third an attack would mobilize Hezbollah increasing the chances of a conflict between Israel and Syria Fourth Israel will certainly lose its already minor international support More importantly Iran will no longer be seen as the bad guy Fifth Iran may choose to retaliate using Persian Gulf oil markets Closing the Strait of Hormuz or attacking the oil fields of the Persian Gulf states will create a serious worldwide crisis Sixth an attack will change the perspective of the Iranian public which currently does not have very strong negative feelings toward Israel And seventh it will increase the anti-Israel sentiment throughout the region An Israeli attack will involve other countries (Israel might need to use their air space with or without permission) This indirect and passive assistance to Israel will push Persian Gulf countries to take anti-Israel or anti-US steps The attack in fact could serve as the straw that breaks the camels back and may even provoke strong reactions from governments throughout the region

59

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Testing Advantage

Mohan 87 C Raja- Henry Alfred Kissinger Scholar in the John W Kluge Center at the Library of Congress ldquoNuclear Test Ban Receding Hopesrdquo Economic and Political Weekly Vol 22 No 7 (Feb 14 1987)The most lucrative among the nuclear weapons on the design board are the so- called third generation nuclear weapons The first generation weapons are those based on nuclear fission-the atomic bombs The second generation weapons are those designed around nuclear fusion-the hydrogen bombs The transition from the first generation to the second saw enormous increases in explosive power and tremendous design efficiency-in terms of yield-to-weight ratio that is larger explosive power for lesser overall weight of the weapons facilitating the development of a variety of nuclear weapons for different delivery systems The third generation weapons involve the development of a number of sophisticated designs which would channel a part of the nuclear explosive energy to a form more precisely tailored to the need than just blast and heat the most well known effects of nuclear weapons in the past4 The neutron bomb built in the 1970s was a precursor to the third generation nuclear weapons Among the major third generation concepts under investigation are the X-ray laser the gamma-ray laser the microwave bomb and the electomagnetic pulse (EMP) bomb The first two designs seek to convert nuclear explosive power into high energy radiation either in the X- or gamma-region of the electromagnetic spectrum It is hoped that such powerful laser weapons driven by nuclear weapons could play a central role in the proposed defence against a missile attack (star wars) Although the SDI has been advertised as a non-nuclear defence against nuclear weapons nuclear-driven exotic weapons have emerged as serious components of the programme In a microwave weapon the nuclear explosive energy is converted into microwaves Having lesser energy than the gamma- or X-ray laser the microwave beam weapons are not designed to destroy Soviet missiles in flight but would be used to debilitate the electronics of the missile and its warhead The EMP bomb is based on the observation that a nuclear explosion in the upper atmosphere would generate an intense pulse of high voltage electric charge which could put out all electric installations over a large area on the ground5 The EMP bomb would maximise the generation of this electromagnetic pulse The American nuclear weapons laboratories thus see the continuation of nuclear testing as essential for the investigation of these new concepts in the design of nuclear weapons Not only would they need to test but do a lot of it Because of the complexity of the third generation nuclear weapon design much more testing than before is required to develop these weapons According to American weapons designers the perfection of any one of the third generation designs could require 100 to 200 test explosions6 In the past only about six underground number tests on the average were required to develop a new nuclear weapon The requirements of the US nuclear strategy in coming years thus clearly demands more intensive testing of nuclear weapons A Comprehensive Test Ban which would block the new round of qualitative improvement in the design of nuclear weapons is clearly not on the American agenda

Acronym Institute 4 ldquoBallistic Missile Defence and the Weaponisation of Spacerdquo httpwwwacronymorgukspacerejintrohtmAt present any high altitude nuclear detonation would violate the provisions of the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT) Pending this treatys entry into force the ban on nuclear explosions is bolstered by moratoria undertaken by all the nuclear weapon states and by India and Pakistan Few would have the technological capacity to undertake such an explosion and it would be extremely difficult if not impossible for a perpetrator to evade detection As with a hostile missile launch the origin of a nuclear detonation can be quickly identified and would invite unified international diplomatic action or failing that overwhelming retaliation Though the technology to prevent a high altitude nuclear explosion is not available the perpetrator would incur high political costs for crossing the nuclear threshold and damaging space assets beneficial to millions around the world For a number of technological and political reasons therefore a high altitude nuclear detonation is unlikely although it cannot be ruled out altogether

60

Cornell HKHANE Aff

EMPacts Econ

Kills global econ

Riddle 4 Lieutenant Colonel Thomas C- United States Army ldquoNuclear High Altitude Electromagnetic Pulse ndash Implications For Homeland Security And Homeland Defenserdquo US Army War College 03 May 2004

Additionally the worldwide economy has grown increasingly interdependent The economic disruptions that occurred in the wake of the 2001 attacks provided a clear demonstration of this interdependence The disruption of the interdependent critical infrastructure of the United States would likely produce worldwide economic disruption The extended loss of the American consumer markets disruption of domestic manufacturing capability and chaotic financial institutions would contribute to an extended period of worldwide economic disruption

US economic collapse will destroy the global economy

Mead 4 Walter Russell- Senior Fellow at Council on Foreign Relations ldquoAmericas Sticky Powerrdquo Foreign Policy MarApr 2004

Similarly in the last 60 years as foreigners have acquired a greater value in the United States-government and private bonds direct and portfolio private investments-more and more of them have acquired an interest in maintaining the strength of the US-led system A collapse of the US economy and the ruin of the dollar would do more than dent the prosperity of the United States Without their best customer countries including China and Japan would fall into depressions The financial strength of every country would be severely shaken should the United States collapse Under those circumstances debt becomes a strength not a weakness and other countries fear to break with the United States because they need its market and own its securities Of course pressed too far a large national debt can turn from a source of strength to a crippling liability and the United States must continue to justify other countries faith by maintaining its long-term record of meeting its financial obligations But like Samson in the temple of the Philistines a collapsing US economy would inflict enormous unacceptable damage on the rest of the world That is sticky power with a vengeance

Electricity would be out for years

Emanuelson 9 Jerry ldquoNuclear Electromagnetic Pulserdquo Futurescience LLC Jan 26 2009A nuclear EMP attack would knock out most if not all of the electric power grid The extent of the electrical grid damage would depend upon the size of the bomb Full repair of the power grid would take anywhere from two months to three years or more Many components such as large transformers which are normally resistant to large voltage transients would be destroyed by the DC-like current induced by the E3 component of the pulse when they are connected to very long copper wires The design life of the transformers in the United States power grid is 40 years but the average age of these transformers is already more than 42 years If power companies were to keep adequate spare parts on hand the repair time could be kept closer to the two-month time frame Adequate parts are not currently being kept on hand and in most cases there are very long lead times for replacement parts for the electrical grid if the parts are not kept on hand by the electrical utility There is currently no United States manufacturing capability for the large power transformers in its power grid All of these extremely heavy transformers have to be manufactured and imported from other countries The current delivery time for these transformers is 3 years from the time that the order is placed but widespread destruction of these transformers would completely overwhelm the very limited worldwide production capacity

61

Cornell HKHANE Aff

EMPacts Heg

EMP attack kills heg

Riddle 4 Lieutenant Colonel Thomas C- United States Army ldquoNuclear High Altitude Electromagnetic Pulse ndash Implications For Homeland Security And Homeland Defenserdquo US Army War College 03 May 2004

To jump start national recovery efforts would likely require significant portions of the remaining overseas military resources of the United States to focus their efforts on domestic recovery The resulting lack of a viable forward presence coupled with an American government intently focused on internal recovery could result in numerous regional conflicts as nations attempted to gain advantage or to redress old grievances Several of these regional conflicts (India-Pakistan Israel-Syria China-Russia China-India) certainly have the potential to involve further use of WMD

Heg collapse results in wars around the globe

Ferguson 4 Niall Senior Fellow the Hoover Institution Stanford JulyAugust 2004 ldquoA World without Powerrdquo httpwwwforeignpolicycomstorycmsphpstory_id=2579amppage=3 ACC 91604 p online

The worst effects of the new Dark Age would be felt on the edges of the waning great powers The wealthiest ports of the global economymdashfrom New York to Rotterdam to Shanghaimdashwould become the targets of plunderers and pirates With ease terrorists could disrupt the freedom of the seas targeting oil tankers aircraft carriers and cruise liners while Western nations frantically concentrated on making their airports secure Meanwhile limited nuclear wars could devastate numerous regions beginning in the Korean peninsula and Kashmir perhaps ending catastrophically in the Middle East In Latin America wretchedly poor citizens would seek solace in Evangelical Christianity imported by US religious orders In Africa the great plagues of AIDS and malaria would continue their deadly work The few remaining solvent airlines would simply suspend services to many cities in these continents who would wish to leave their privately guarded safe havens to go there For all these reasons the prospect of an apolar world should frighten us today a great deal more than it frightened the heirs of Charlemagne If the United States retreats from global hegemonymdashits fragile self-image dented by minor setbacks on the imperial frontiermdashits critics at home and abroad must not pretend that they are ushering in a new era of multipolar harmony or even a return to the good old balance of power Be careful what you wish for The alternative to unipolarity would not be multipolarity at all It would be apolaritymdasha global vacuum of power And far more dangerous forces than rival great powers would benefit from such a not-so-new world disorder

62

Cornell HKHANE Aff

EMPacts Earthquake

Nuclear EMPs cause earthquakes

Mahler 10 William K- M2 Technologies ldquoHugo Chavez Cites Russian Sourcesrdquo Cape Cod Today January 22 2010

As for the ability to make an Earthquake Electro Magnetic Pulse has been around since the first atomic bomb tests way back during World War II It can be separated from a blast meaning it functions on its own as a tool no nuke explosions necessary (remember Hiroshima and Nagasaki) Over in Europe some years back it was around the Netherlands or a neighboring country where citizens protested a USA weapon involving EMP Why They feared (and rightfully so) that weapon would be used to hurt Russia for example How bad could it hurt Give the weapon a target such as a large building like our Empire State Building in New York once fired there would be hole clean through I suppose as clean as a light saber blade could cut in sci-fi such as Star Wars The EMP can penetrate anything to my knowledge so yes a shock jolt from an EMP could absolutely trigger an Earthquake no doubt about it and probably sans the radiation fallout guaranteed by an atomic (nuclear) blast

63

Cornell HKHANE Aff

EMPacts GPS

The EMP would disable GPS technologies

Scott 9 William B- Rocky Mountain Bureau Chief for Aviation Week amp Space Technology Michael J Coumatos- US Space Command director of wargaming William J Birnes- PhD from New York University ldquoCounterspace The Next Hours of World War IIIrdquo p 18

The high-level cram course on nuclear weapons effects Aster had received when he took over as STRATCOM chief had provided a basic understanding of electromagnetic pulse effects But that was thin knowledge at best The general needed more to assess the full spectrum of impacts nowMajor why would GPS be affected by that nuke All the Navstars are in much higher mid-Earth orbits something like twelve-thousand-plus miles right Thats too high for EMP effects cause theres no air to ionize that far outCorrect sir But that detonation created an extremely high radiation flux and its basically charging up the Van Allen Belt even though its way out there too In turn that causes what we call secondary radiation effects in electronic circuits on GPS birdsmdashthings like electronic gate latch-ups data losses and other effects It also created an ion-charged layer in the upper atmosphere which acts like a shield that blocks the weak signals from GPS and other satellites Most GPS navigation and timing signals are now prevented from reaching Earth especially out in the Pacific Probably going to affect the downlinks from some GEO birds too the major added referring to platforms in geostationary orbit 22500 miles from Earth

64

Cornell HKHANE Aff

EMPacts Satelites

A HANE would wipe out satelites

Kueter 7 Jeff- president of the George C Marshall Institute ldquoChinarsquos Space Ambitions ndash And Oursrdquo The New Atlantis Number 16 Spring 2007 pp 7-22

Another type of threat to space assets is high-altitude nuclear detonation An enemy could arm a missile with a nuclear warhead launch it and explode the warhead in space All satellites within the line of sight of the explosion would be destroyed or rendered ineffective immediately with the effects dissipating with distance from the explosion Whatrsquos more the radiation released by a single low-yield high-altitude nuclear explosion ldquocould disablemdashin weeks to monthsmdashall low-Earth orbit satellites not specifically hardened to withstand the radiation generated by that explosionrdquo according to the Defense Threat Reduction Agency Most US satellitesmdashincluding those commercial satellites that are used extensively for defense communicationsmdashare not hardened to withstand such an attack and they lack the maneuvering capabilities needed to ldquoget out of the wayrdquo of the attacking missile the explosion or the radioactive effects China certainly has the missile and nuclear capabilities required to conduct such an attack (So too do the United States Russia the United Kingdom France and possibly Israel India and Pakistan North Korea apparently lacks the missile competence and Iran probably does not have either the missile or nuclear know-howmdashas of this writing) Needless to say this most extreme measure would likely be attempted only in times of acute international crisis

Bright 2 Melanie ldquoHigh-Altitude Nuclear Explosions Blind Deaf And Dumbrdquo Janes Defence Weekly October 23 2002 httpwwwglobalsecurityorgorgnews2002nuke_explosionhtm

However blowing up targets on the Earths surface is only part of the story According to Dr Dennis Papadopoulos from the Department of Physics University of Maryland If someone were to explode a 10kT nuclear weapon at a high enough altitude over their own territory 90 of the worlds low earth orbit [LEO] satellites would be lost within a month In addition to the electromagnetic pulse (EMP) phenomenon generally understood satellites are vulnerable to the Christofilos Effect When a high-altitude nuclear explosion (HANE) is detonated at about 100km altitude the Earths magnetic field accelerates the large cloud of electrons and protons released by the blast The radiation particles speed up spread out all the while accelerating circling the globe until racing around it at speeds approaching the speed of light This effect is named after Dr Nicholas Christofilos who predicted this phenomenon The detonation produces an artificial radiation belt that within weeks to at most months delivers a lethal dose of radiation to [LEO] satellites said Dr Papadopoulos who worked with Dr Christofilos at what is now the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory The superpowers conducted six scheduled nuclear explosions in space during the Cuban Missile Crisis These HANEs damaged or destroyed all seven satellites then in orbit These tests conducted before the 1963 Atmospheric Test Ban Treaty provided the only experimental data on the vulnerability of satellites to nuclear detonation Today the implications of a HANE are far greater as millions use the 250-plus satellites in LEO

65

Cornell HKHANE Aff

EMPacts Healthcare

Ross 8 LH Jr Mihelic FM ldquoHealthcare vulnerabilities to electromagnetic pulserdquo Am J Disaster Med 2008 Nov-Dec3(6)321-5 Center for Homeland Security Studies Graduate School of Medicine University of Tennessee Knoxville Tennessee USA

The US healthcare system is particularly vulnerable to the effects of electromagnetic pulse (EMP) attack because of the systems technological sophistication but while national defense planners prepare for the considerable threat that EMP poses there has been little or no recognition of this threat within the US healthcare community and neither has there been any significant healthcare planning to deal with such an eventuality Recognition of the risk presented by EMP and advance institution of appropriate strategies to mitigate its effects on the healthcare system could enable the preservation of much of that systems function in the face of EMP-related disruptions and will greatly further all-hazards disaster preparations

66

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Morality Advantage

Wilson 8 Clay- Specialist in Technology and National Security Foreign Affairs Defense and Trade Division ldquoHigh Altitude Electromagnetic Pulse (HEMP) and High Power Microwave (HPM) Devices Threat Assessmentsrdquo Congressional Research Service March 26 2008

HEMP and HPM energy weapons primarily damage electronic systems with little or no direct effect on humans however these effects may be difficult to limit or control As HEMP or HPM energy fields instantly spread outward they may also affect nearby hospital equipment or personal medical devices such as pace-makers or other parts of the surrounding civilian infrastructure For this reason some international human rights organizations may object to the development or testing of HEMP or HPM weapons

67

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT Verifiability

Plan results in verifiable operational change and posture changes still have positive effects

Feiveson 99 Harold- Senior Research Policy Scientist at Princeton co-principal investigator of Princetons research Program on Science and Global Security ldquoChapter 4 Nuclear Strategy and Targeting Doctrinerdquo in ldquoThe Nuclear Turning Pointrdquo The Brookings Institution 1999

It will not be easy to break out of cold war thought patterns regarding the use of nuclear weapons War plans are carefully guarded secrets and changes in them can at best be verified only indirectly and over time through corresponding changes in force posture Nuclear doctrine is important however because it is the basis for force structure and operations and could largely determine how the entire nuclear command system would react in a crisis An evolving dialogue between US and Russian military leaders on this subject would be useful and could help pave the way toward very deep reductions in nuclear forces

Plan leads to removal of specific warheads although we cannot predict the exact change because the information is classified

Bernardin 99 Michael- Provost for Theoretical Institute of Thermonuclear Studies Los Alamos National Laboratory ldquoElectromagnetic Pulse Threats to US Military And Civilian Infrastructurerdquo Hearing Before The Military Research And Development Subcommittee October 7 1999

The Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) and the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) identify current and projected nuclear weapon threats and provide inputs to the Department of Energy nuclear design labs Los Alamos and Livermore National Laboratories who model foreign nuclear weapons The labs each have over 25 years of experience in performing this type of modeling The weapon models serve as a basis for associated EMP threat assessmentsFor the purpose of EMP assessment it is convenient to group the threat weapons into the following five categories One single-stage fission weapons two single-stage boosted weapons three nominal two-stage thermonuclear weapons with yields up to a few megatons four two-stage thermonuclear weapons with yields over a few megatons and five special technology thermonuclear weaponsThe reason for this grouping and the threat weapons themselves will be discussed in closed session The EMP produced by these weapons is also a topic delegated largely to closed session

Specific warhead removal is verifiable

Davis et al 10 ldquoTechnical Steps to Support Nuclear Arsenal Downsizingrdquo American Physical Society Report Commitee Jay Davis Chair John Browne Patricia Lewis Carolyn Pura Allen Sessoms Tom Shea Francis Slakey Benn Tannenbaum Jim Tape John Taylor Peter D Zimmerman Feb 18 2010

As bilateral US-Russian nuclear stockpile reductions result in arsenals that no longer dwarf those of other nuclear-armed states further reductions will require working with scientists and negotiators from a broader range of countries At some point it may be useful to monitor warhead dismantlement in such a way that the specific model (eg W88) can be determined Template methods (matching a particular radiation signature) may be useful in addition to attribute measurements (ensuring that certain measured levels exceed defined limits in order to increase confidence in the contents) and may prove to be very attractive for some applications A distinctive template would be created for each model and individual samples would then be compared to the templates on file to confirm (or reject) a declared item The templates could include for example a combination of passive radiation signatures andor radiation signatures caused by subjecting an item to a stream of neutrons andor gamma rays

68

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT Verifiability

The US has specific missiles designed to lay down an EMP attack

Lewallen 2k John- Public Ocean Access Network ldquoThe Blackout Bombrdquo North Coast Express Spring 2000 httpsonicnet~doretkIssues00-03-SPRtheblackhtml

Any future global war is likely to begin with a few Blackout Bombs China Russia the U nited S tates and other nuclear powers have several nuclear missiles and perhaps weaponized satellites designed to lay down EMP over continent-size areas instantaneously While every nation on Earth is vulnerable to attack from the United States the United States is vulnerable indeed defenseless to a secret class of nuclear weapons which has captured the attention of the major nuclear powers--China Russia Britain France and the United States itself--for the past thirty-eight years

Missile removal is verifiable

Davis et al 10 ldquoTechnical Steps to Support Nuclear Arsenal Downsizingrdquo American Physical Society Report Commitee Jay Davis Chair John Browne Patricia Lewis Carolyn Pura Allen Sessoms Tom Shea Francis Slakey Benn Tannenbaum Jim Tape John Taylor Peter D Zimmerman Feb 18 2010

Recent monitoring and inspection practices affecting the United States and Russia focused on verifying the numbers and locations of launchers and delivery platforms (and hence deducing the maximum number of warheads that could be deployed on strategic delivery systems) Modest reductions in US and Russian stockpile numbers (eg 1500) may rely primarily on these existing practices while more significant reductions in total stockpiles (1000 or fewer) will likely require the use of more intrusive techniques to verify numbers of warheads If and when reductions in all nuclear arsenals are verified by multilateral agreements the techniques employed and the inspectors must guarantee international assurance of compliance

Unilateral willingness to verify is best- formal agreements fail

Bunn 2 Matthew- the Project on Managing the Atom (MTA) Belfer Center Harvard ldquoIntroduction Monitoring Nuclear Stockpiles and Reductionsrdquo NTI October 28 2002 httpwwwntiorge_researchcnwmmonitoringindexasp

Finally it is important to understand that while most formal US-Russian transparency initiatives have been stymied by continuing secrecy concerns and the lack of strong incentives for both governments to agree to them informal measures have created an absolutely unprecedented degree of openness transparency and cooperation between the two nuclear weapons complexes As a result of a broad range of scientific and threat-reduction cooperation US and Russian experts have now visited most of the key facilities in the other nationrsquos nuclear weapons complexes and there has been a huge increase in the level of detailed understanding of what goes on at individual facilities and buildings within these complexes Some threat reduction programs have formalized this transparency with specific agreements regulating access to sensitive sites Both sides (particularly the United States ) have also unilaterally revealed a wealth of information about their nuclear stockpiles and complexes in both published reports and other sources The level of openness that now exists would have been completely unthinkable as recently as early 1994 (when it was still true that Russia was refusing to allow US experts direct access for implementing security upgrades at any facility in Russia where actual HEU or plutonium existed)

69

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Verifiability Extensions

Specific weapons are designed for EMP strikes

Schneider 7 Mark- National Institute for Public Policy The Emerging EMP Threat to the United States United States Nuclear Strategy Forum No 6 November 2007

All nuclear weapons detonated at high altitude produce EMP but some types of nuclear weapons are designed specifically to be efficient at producing EMP In 2004 Clay Wilson of the Congressional Research Service reported that ldquoA HEMP [high altitude electromagnetic pulse] attack directed against the United States might involve a one-megaton nuclear warhead or a smaller warhead that is specially-designed [to produce EMP] using a burst several hundred miles above the mid-western states to affect computers on both coastsrdquo 3

Extension- Missile removal is verifiable

WSLF 2 ldquoBanning Ballistic Missilesrdquo Western States Legal Foundation Feb 1 2002 httpwwwwslfweborgspaceMCRbriefhtm

A ban on missile flight tests would be relatively easy to verify It should include a system of inspections to assure that civilian rocket launches do not conceal efforts to develop weapons delivery systems These inspections could make it more difficult to develop and deploy weapons systems that operate through or from space If the type of inspections appropriate for controlling ballistic missiles worked well it could provide the technical and political basis for more comprehensive agreements aimed at preventing the further militarization of space

Specific warheads and their composition can be verified

Davis et al 10 ldquoTechnical Steps to Support Nuclear Arsenal Downsizingrdquo American Physical Society Report Commitee Jay Davis Chair John Browne Patricia Lewis Carolyn Pura Allen Sessoms Tom Shea Francis Slakey Benn Tannenbaum Jim Tape John Taylor Peter D Zimmerman Feb 18 2010

The techniques that have received the most attention for the purposes of warhead or material verification involve passive gamma and neutron measurements Medium resolution gamma measurements (eg by sodium iodide (NaI) detectors) could be used to indicate the presence or absence of plutonium and to match weapon template signatures High-resolution gamma measurements (eg high-purity Germanium detectors) provide in addition the ability to determine isotopic ratios indicative of weapons grade plutonium and americium content thus revealing whether the plutonium is weapons grade and the time since the last americium separation In general neutron measurement methods ranging from simple neutron counting to more complex coincidence and multiplicity techniques have been used to determine plutonium massesMeasurements of some highly-enriched uranium (HEU) characteristics and material mass using specially-developed gamma measurement techniques have been shown to be possible under some carefully-controlled conditions It is likely that high confidence measurements of HEU characteristics will require the use of active interrogation techniques Experiments and demonstrations using a range of measurement systems ndash sodium iodide highpurity germanium and helium-3 detectors as well as neutron multiplicity counters ndash have been performed to determine the feasibility and applicability of these techniques for potential verification measures

70

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT CMR

The pentagon is no longer cares about EMPs

Timmerman 2 Kenneth R- director of the Foundation for Democracy in Iran 2006 Nobel Peace Prize Nominee ldquoUS Threatened With EMP Attackrdquo Feb 1 2002

Twenty years ago only the Soviet Union had the capability to launch an EMP attack on the United States by exploding a nuclear warhead 500 kilometers (310 miles) in space Pentagon planners spent billions of dollars protecting US military equipment against EMP during the Cold War But during the last decade the military has canceled many of those protection programs alleging an end to the threat of a Soviet nuclear strike And none of our civilian infrastructure is protected because of the high cost

71

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Politics Link Answers

Congress doesnrsquot care about minor operational changes like the plan

Woolf 7 Amy F Specialist in National Defense Congressional Research Service ldquoCongress And US Nuclear Weapons Review and Oversight of Policies and Programsrdquo The Nonproliferation Review (peer-reviewed) Volume 14 Issue 3 November 2007

The US Congress charged with overseeing US nuclear weapons policy and programs usually addresses such policies and programs through the annual authorization and appropriations process focusing mostly on questions of how many and what types of weapons the United States should deploy with little attention paid to questions about nuclear weapons strategy doctrine and policy The oversight process has brought about some significant changes in the plans for US nuclear weapons including the elimination of funding for the Robust Nuclear Earth Penetrator study and the shift of that funding into a study of the Reliable Replacement Warhead But with the focus on authorizations and appropriations along with the divided jurisdiction over nuclear weapons policy and programs in congressional committees Congress has not either recently or during the Cold War and post-Cold War eras conducted a more comprehensive review of US nuclear weapons strategy policy or force structure Changes in committee jurisdictions could affect the oversight process but as long as nuclear weapons policy and programs remain a relatively low priority for most members of Congress and the country at large it is unlikely that Congress will pursue such a comprehensive debate

No link- EMP weapons donrsquot have a constituency

Forstchen 8 William R PhD Author of ldquoOne Second Afterrdquo httpwwwonesecondaftercompbwp_d10e87d9wp_d10e87d9html

EMP has managed to ldquostealthrdquo its way on to the highly dangerous list and few except for a small number of personnel in the Pentagon various research labs and men like Congressman Bartlett (R MD) who heads the Congressional Investigative Committee on EMP are aware of it For one it has a certain ldquosci-firdquo sound to it which makes many dismiss the potential before the discussion has even started Second the only way to truly evaluate the threat and demonstrate it is to detonate a nuclear weapon something we have not done since the full test ban went into effect decades ago It is therefore not ldquovisiblerdquo to us the way another airliner smashing into a skyscraper is now forever imprinted on our national psyche feared and prepared for Next with all the competing issues and threats in the world EMP simply does not have a ldquoconstituencyrdquo of influence Only a few members of Congress our military and scientific community are issuing the warnings There are no Hollywood stars placing themselves in front of cameras with this as their cause the few times it has been used in popular movies it has been portrayed inaccurately often absurdly

72

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Politics Link Answers

Congress doesnrsquot care

Matthews 8 William ldquoLittle Congressional Interest in EMP Threatrdquo Defense News Jul 10 2008Once again a congressional commission is warning that an electromagnetic pulse attack against the United States could wipe out the nations electronics-dependent civilization And again hardly anyone is listening Only a handful of the 60 members of the House Armed Services Committee showed up for a hearing on the EMP threat July 10 and most didnt stick around for the whole two-hour sessionIts obvious that theres not very much interest in it said Rep Roscoe Bartlett R-Md who asked for the hearing There are lots of seats vacant he lamented

Failure to reduce the threat of EMP strikes on the US will kill Obamarsquos capital

Kessler 9 Ronald- chief Washington correspondent of Newsmaxcom ldquoObama Democrats Expose US to EMP Attackrdquo Newsmax 17 Aug 2009

Despite polls showing that Americans overwhelmingly support missile defense President Obamarsquos administration already has cut the Pentagonrsquos missile defense budget by $14 billion or 15 percent If an EMP attack occurs we will have the Democrats to blame But without voting machines or any form of communication Americans who survive will not be able to vote them out of office

Plan prevents capital draining disputes for Obama

Hitchens 9 Theresa- Director UN Institute for Disarmament Research ldquoSaving Space Threat Proliferation and Mitigationrdquo International Commission on Nuclear Non-proliferation and Disarmament May 19 2009

While it remains to be seen what direction the new administration of President Barak Obamamdashwho spoke out against space weapons during the presidential campaign mdashwill take regarding national security in space (as well as regarding overall relations with China) it cannot be denied that the issue of how best to approach protection of space assets remains in mid-2009 a major issue in the domestic US debate over national security

73

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Politics Link Turn

Plan is a win for Obama- bolsters his agenda

New York Times 9 Christopher Drew October 28 2009 lthttpwwwnytimescom20091029business29defensehtml_r=1gt

When the Obama administration proposed canceling a host of expensive weapons systems last spring some of the military industryrsquos allies in Congress assumed as they had in the past that they would have the final say But as the president signed a $680 billion military policy bill on Wednesday it was clear that he had succeeded in paring back nearly all of the programs and setting a tone of greater restraint than the Pentagon had seen in many years Now the question is whether Mr Obama can sustain that push next year when the midterm elections are likely to make Congress more resistant to further cuts and job losses White House officials say Mr Obama took advantage of a rare political moment to break through one of Washingtonrsquos most powerful lobbies and trim more weapons systems than any president had in decades Rahm Emanuel the White House chief of staff said Wednesday that the plan was to threaten a veto over a prominent program mdash in this case the F-22 fighter jet mdash ldquoto show we were willing to expend political capital and could win on something that people thought we could notrdquo Once the Senate voted in July to stop buying F-22s Mr Emanuel said in an interview that success ldquoreverberated downrdquo to help sustain billions of dollars of cuts in Army modernization missile defense and other programs Mr Emanuel said the strategy emerged when the defense secretary Robert M Gates told Mr Obama they needed to ldquoshake up sacred cows and be seen as taking on fightsrdquo Military analysts said Mr Gates a holdover from the Bush administration also aimed at the most bloated programs And Senator John McCain of Arizona the former Republican presidential candidate who has criticized the Pentagonrsquos cost overruns provided Mr Obama with political cover to make the cuts without being seen as soft on the military ldquoThey probably get an lsquoArsquo from the standpoint of their success on their major initiativesrdquo said Fred Downey a former Senate aide who is now vice president for national security at the Aerospace Industries Association ldquoThey probably got all of them but one or maybe two and thatrsquos an extraordinarily high scorerdquo

Winners win

Pascal 9 Marc staff writer for The Moderate Voice 1052009 lthttpthemoderatevoicecom48571obamaE28099s-only-priority-get-re-electedgt

Many political leaders incorrectly confuse political capital with financial capital The first is a perpetually renewable commodity if used correctly and the latter is always finite no matter how much is amassed One cannot hoard political capital for some future battle that may or may not come It grows and shrinks directly as one uses it and it directly mirrors political fights taken and avoided Actually winning on certain core issues and major legislative battles helps increase political capital for future use But not using political capital causes it to dissolve rapidly Talking too much and never getting anything accomplished is a good recipe to dissipate valuable political capital

74

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT Geomagnetic Storms

Geomagnetic storms are predictable- prevention measures exist

PSEPC 2 Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness Canada ldquoGeomagnetic Storms - Reducing the Threat to Critical Infrastructure in Canadardquo 25 April 2002 httpwwwsolarstormsorgCanadaPipelineshtml

Preventative measures have been implemented to avoid events such as the 1989 Quebec blackout System operators in Canada have developed and implemented procedures to respond to these emergencies thereby reducing potential damage due to GICs Since 1989 Hydro-Quebec has spent more than $12 billion installing transmission line series capacitors These capacitors block GIC flow in order to prevent them from causing damage to the system Hydro-Quebec has also installed monitoring equipment that spots voltage fluctuations and immediately notifies operators so that they may redistribute the load to other parts of the network Additional protective measures include disconnecting the links between power grids desensitizing automatic control systems delaying power station maintenance and delaying the replacement of equipment Utilities are also relying on space weather forecasting to help remain operational during geomagnetic storms Operators can implement conservative operating procedures once they have received an advance warning of a storm threat

EMPs are too spontaneous- the protections fail

Survival 9 ldquoElectromagnetic Pulse (EMP) Review of One Second Afterrdquo Survival 2013 September 20 2009EMP is the energy surge that comes off a nuclear explosion If that explosion takes place in space say 300 miles above the surface we will feel only the tingling sensation thatrsquos similar to what we feel when lightning strikes nearby But all the electronics in the country will feel it and will be blown out The pulse travels down anything that serves as an antenna anything that is metal and fries all the equipment thatrsquos running Because the pulse is ldquofront-loadedrdquo therersquos no build-up or warning to allow surge protectors or circuit breakers to function It will stop cars dead in their tracks (unless yoursquore driving one of the 1965 or so models that the government wants to get off the road) and will do even more damage to airplanes (As many as a quarter million people who are flying at any given time would be killed immediately)

Geomagnetic storms pale in comparison to EMP strikes

Foster et al 8 ldquoReport of the Commission to Assess the Threat to the United States from Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP) Attackrdquo April 2008 Dr John S Foster Jr Mr Earl Gjelde Dr William R Graham (Chairman) Dr Robert J Hermann Mr Henry (Hank) M Kluepfel Gen Richard L Lawson USAF (Ret) Dr Gordon K Soper Dr Lowell L Wood Jr Dr Joan B Woodard

Geomagnetic storms represent an approximation to an E3-induced voltage effect The experience to date is of events that may be orders of magnitude smaller in scope and less severe than that expected from an EMP mdash although the Commission has also investigated the impact of a 100-year superstorm The induced geomagnetic superstorm currents in the transmission lines will cause hundreds of high voltage transformers to saturate creating a severe reactive load in the power system leading to voltage collapse in the affected area and damage to elements of the transmission system The nature of this threat did not allow for experimental testing of the E3 effect so this historical record is the best information on the effect

75

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT Geomagnetic Storms

Three times the damage

Foster et al 8 ldquoReport of the Commission to Assess the Threat to the United States from Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP) Attackrdquo April 2008 Dr John S Foster Jr Mr Earl Gjelde Dr William R Graham (Chairman) Dr Robert J Hermann Mr Henry (Hank) M Kluepfel Gen Richard L Lawson USAF (Ret) Dr Gordon K Soper Dr Lowell L Wood Jr Dr Joan B Woodard

The late time EMP or E3 follows E1 and E2 and may last for a minute or more The E3 pulse is similar in a great many respects to geomagnetic effects induced by solar storms Solar storms and their impacts on electrical systems with long lines have been thoroughly evaluated and are known to cause serious damage to major electrical system components at much lower levels than the reasonably possible E3 impact This damage has been incurred in spite of functioning in-place protective systems Given the preceding E1 and E2 pulse damage to the protective systems and other system components damage from E3 to unprotected major system components is virtually assured

EMPs worse- no ozone protection and cascading effects

Forstchen 8 William R PhD Author of ldquoOne Second Afterrdquo httpwwwonesecondaftercompbwp_d10e87d9wp_d10e87d9html

EMP is shorthand for Electro Magnetic Pulse It is a rather unusual and frightening by-product when a nuclear bomb is detonated above the earthrsquos atmosphere We all know that our atmosphere and the magnetic field which surrounds our planet is a thin layer which not only keeps us alive but also protects us from dangerous radiation from the sun On a fairly regular basis there are huge solar storms on the sunrsquos surface which emit powerful jets of deadly radiation If not for the protective layer of our atmosphere and magnetic field those storms would fry us At times though the storm is so power that enough disruptive energy reaches the earthrsquos surface that it drowns out radio waves and even shorts electrical power grids this happened several years back in CanadaView the detonation of a nuclear bomb two hundred miles straight up as the same thing but infinitely more powerful since it is so close by As the bomb explodes it emits a powerful wave of gamma rays As this energy release hits the upper atmosphere it creates a electrical disturbance know as the Compton Effect The intensity is magnified View it as a small pebble rolling down a slope hitting a larger one setting that in motion until finally you have an avalanche

EMP strikes are frontloaded- no protection

Forstchen 8 William R PhD Author of ldquoOne Second Afterrdquo httpwwwonesecondaftercompbwp_d10e87d9wp_d10e87d9html

Wouldnrsquot circuit breakers and surge protectors stop it This is where the effect of EMP starts to get complex All electricity travels of course at the speed of light The circuit breakers that are built into our electrical system or the ones you buy to plug your own computer in to are designed to ldquoreadrsquo the flow of current If it suddenly exceeds a certain level the breaker snaps and takes you off line thus protecting everything beyond it More than a few of us have found out that when you buy a cheap surge protector for ten or twenty bucks sure it will snap off but the surge has already passed through and fried your expensive pla sma television or new computer Unlike a lightning strike or other power surge an EMP surge is ldquofront loadedrdquo Meaning it doesnrsquot do a build up for a couple of mirco-seconds allowing enough time for the circuit breaker to ldquoreadrdquo that trouble is on the way and shut down It comes instead like a wall of energy without any advance wave building up as a warning It therefore slams through nearly all commercial and even military surge protectors already in place and is past the ldquosafety barrierrdquo and into the delicate electronics before the system has time to react

76

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT Blackout Alt Causes

Alt causes to blackout are not as severe

Foster et al 8 Chairman of the Board of GKN Aerospace Transparency Systems ldquoReport of the Commission to Assess the Threat to the United States from Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP) Attackrdquo April 2008 Dr John S Foster Jr Mr Earl Gjelde Dr William R Graham (Chairman) Dr Robert J Hermann Mr Henry (Hank) M Kluepfel Gen Richard L Lawson USAF (Ret) Dr Gordon K Soper Dr Lowell L Wood Jr Dr Joan B Woodard

Distinctions Past electric power blackouts provide a baseline for assessing the impact of an EMP attack on the power grid as discussed previously However there are several important factors that distinguish the EMP collapse scenario from these historical experiences 1048715 In the historical power system outages only one or a few critical elements within an entire system have been debilitated For example a power generation facility may trip because a surge of current is unexpectedly presented through a fault from a particular load Yet a substantial portion of the system may well be rendered out of service as the disruption triggers a series of cascading failures each instigating the next failure (eg first a generator trips then the frequency sags and a load trips off or a transmission line trips out with its associated loads which in turn causes the frequency to overrun and another generator trips out and it continues to oscillate until the interconnected system comes down) In the case of an EMP attack elements within many critical facility components are likely to be damaged or disrupted simultaneously over a relatively broad geographic area thus creating an almost certain cascading collapse of the remaining elements Similarly while lightning might strike a single plant transmission line or large load causing it to trip out lightning has not hit multiple locations spread over a very wide area of the system with sufficient intensity and hitting all simultaneously to the extent that would be representative of an EMP attack 1048715 During historical outages the telecommunications system and associated control systems have continued to function This provides the system operators with eyes and ears to know what was damaged where damage occurred and in some cases the range of damage While the power system may still come down it is more possible to take protective measures to minimize damage and impact in order to effectuate rapid restoration The communications and control systemsrsquo functionality are at high risk of disruption and damage themselves during an EMP attack A minimum communications capability is needed to support immediate responses to isolate parts for continued operation and to implement necessary measures to restore the electrical system 1048715 In the early stages of the EMP attack even before the disruptions could be sensed and trips could occur that would lead to collapse some or many of the protective devices will be damaged that have ensured critical system components are safe to allow fast recovery As a result some and perhaps much of the electrical system would not be able to protect itself from the effects of multiple simultaneous and cascading failures Widespread damage to the generation transmission and distribution infrastructures and equipment are probable Rather than simply restoring power to an intact infrastructure with only a very few damaged components the recovery task would be to replace an extensively damaged system under very difficult and decaying circumstances and then proceeding to restoration 1048715 The control systems would be damaged to some extent as opposed to remaining fully operational as in historical outages The operations and dispatch centers where the vast interconnected system is controlled and managed would probably have damaged and disrupted components the readings from the system would be fragmented and in many cases false or nonexistent and communication by whatever means would be difficult to impractical to impossible Control and knowledge would range from unreliable at best to simply nonexistent Finding what and where damage has occurred and getting it repaired would be very problematic in any reasonable time frame even within the control centers themselves let alone out over the vast network with millions of devices 1048715 Skilled labor for a massive and diverse repair effort is not currently available if allocated over a large geographic area with great numbers of components and devices to check and repair where necessary This scope of damage could cover perhaps 70 percent or possibly more of the continental United States as well as a significant part of Canadarsquos population This is far too large to bring in the limited skilled labor from very distant points outside the affected area in any reasonable time even if one could coordinate them and knew where to send them and they had the means to get there Thus the extensive support from nearby fringe areas used so effectively in historical outages is likely to be unavailable as a practical matter as they themselves would be affected The blackout resulting from Hurricane Katrina an event comparable to a small EMP attack overtaxed the ability of the Nation to quickly restore electric power a failure that contributed to the slow recovery of the afflicted region 1048715 Other infrastructures would be similarly impacted simultaneously with the electrical system such as transportation communication and even water and food to sustain crews The ability to find and get spare parts and components or purchase services would be severely hampered by lack of normal financial systems in addition to communication transportation and other factors The Hurricane Katrina blackout caused precisely such problems 1048715 Fuel supplies for the power generation would be interrupted First the SCADA and DCS systems used in delivery of the fuel would be adversely impacted In addition much of the fuel supply infrastructure is dependent upon the electrical system For example natural gas-fired plants (which make up such a large share of the domestic generation) would be rendered inoperable since their fuel is delivered just in time for use Coal plants have stockpiles that variously might be adequate for a week to a month The few remaining oil-fired plants similarly have a limited storage of fuel Nuclear plants would reasonably be expected to still have fuel but they would have to forego protective regulations to continue to operate Many renewable fueled resources would still have their fuel supply but EMP effects on controls may still render them inoperable

77

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT Alternative EMP forms

Nuclear EMPs affect the whole continental US Other HPMs only travel a mile

Wilson 8 Clay- Specialist in Technology and National Security Foreign Affairs Defense and Trade Division ldquoHigh Altitude Electromagnetic Pulse (HEMP) and High Power Microwave (HPM) Devices Threat Assessmentsrdquo Congressional Research Service March 26 2008

HEMP is produced when a nuclear weapon is detonated high above the Earthrsquos surface creating gamma-radiation that interacts with the atmosphere to create an intense electromagnetic energy field that is harmless to people as it radiates outward but which can overload computer circuitry with effects similar to but causing damage much more swiftly than a lightning strike6 The effects of HEMP became fully known to the United States in 1962 during a high-altitude nuclear test (code named ldquoStarfish Primerdquo) over the Pacific Ocean when radio stations and electronic equipment were disrupted 800 miles away throughout Hawaii The HEMP effect can span thousands of miles depending on the altitude and the design and power of the nuclear burst (a single device detonated at an appropriate altitude over Kansas reportedly could affect all of the continental United States)7 and can be picked up by metallic conductors such as wires or power cables acting as antennas to conduct the energy shockwave into the electronic systems of cars airplanes and communications equipment Description of High-Power Microwave HPM is a non-nuclear radio frequency energy field It can be produced as a weapon when a powerful chemical detonation is instantly transformed by a special coil device called a flux compression generator into a strong electromagnetic field of microwave energy8 Other methods such as powerful batteries can also be used to create a reusable HPM weapon HPM energy can be focused using a speciallyshaped antenna or emitter to produce effects similar to HEMP but only within a very limited range Unlike HEMP however HPM radiation is comprised of shorter wave forms at higher-frequencies which make it highly effective against electronic equipment and more difficult to harden against A mechanically simple suitcasesized device using a chemical explosive and special focusing antenna might theoretically produce a one-time instantaneous HPM shockwave that could disrupt many computers within a 1-mile range9 Also HPM energy at higher power levels (megawatts) and powered for a longer time interval reportedly could cause physical harm to persons near the source emitter or possibly in the path of a narrowly focused energy beam10

HPMs donrsquot effect a large area

Wilson 8 Clay- Specialist in Technology and National Security Foreign Affairs Defense and Trade Division ldquoHigh Altitude Electromagnetic Pulse (HEMP) and High Power Microwave (HPM) Devices Threat Assessmentsrdquo Congressional Research Service March 26 2008

Electromagnetic energy characterized as weapon potentially threatening to national security can be created as a pulse traditionally by two methods overhead nuclear burst and microwave emission High-Altitude Electromagnetic Pulse (HEMP) is an instantaneous electromagnetic energy field produced in the atmosphere by the power and radiation of a nuclear explosion and that is damaging to electronic equipment over a very wide area depending on the design of the nuclear device and altitude of the burst High-Power Microwave (HPM) electromagnetic energy can be produced as an instantaneous pulse created through special electrical equipment that transforms battery power or powerful chemical reaction or explosion into intense microwaves that are very damaging to electronics within a much smaller area

78

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT Protective Measures

The blast zaps through hardened electronics

Wilson 8 Clay- Specialist in Technology and National Security Foreign Affairs Defense and Trade Division ldquoHigh Altitude Electromagnetic Pulse (HEMP) and High Power Microwave (HPM) Devices Threat Assessmentsrdquo Congressional Research Service March 26 2008

Electronic equipment may be hardened by surrounding it with protective metallic shielding which routes damaging electromagnetic fields away from highly sensitive electrical components This method known as Faraday cage protection is traditionally used to protect electronic equipment from a lightning strike However power surges HEMP or HPM weapons could possibly involve peak currents of tens of millions of amps which can pass through a protective Faraday cage Additionally equipment placed within a Faraday cage may also be made vulnerable by any wires running into to the cage which can conduct the electromagnetic shockwave into the equipment Depending on the power level involved points of entry into the shielded cages can sometimes be protected from electromagnetic pulse by using specially designed surge protectors special wire termination procedures screened isolated transformers spark gaps or other types of specially-designed electrical filters Critical systems may also be protected by increasing the number of backup units and by keeping these units dispersed and out of range of the electromagnetic pulse source emitter26

The second stage of the EMP blast eats through protective barriers

Wilson 8 Clay- Specialist in Technology and National Security Foreign Affairs Defense and Trade Division ldquoHigh Altitude Electromagnetic Pulse (HEMP) and High Power Microwave (HPM) Devices Threat Assessmentsrdquo Congressional Research Service March 26 2008

A high altitude nuclear explosion (that creates HEMP) produces three major energy components that arrive in sequence and which have measurably different effects that can be cumulatively damaging to electronic equipment The first energy component is the initial energy shockwave which lasts about one microsecond and is similar to extremely intense static electricity that can overload circuitry for every electronic device that is within line of sight of the burst A secondary energy component then arrives which has characteristics that are similar to a lightning strike By itself this second energy component might not be an issue for some critical infrastructure equipment if anti-lightning protective measures are already in place However the rise time of the first component is so rapid and intense that it can destroy many protective measures allowing the second component to further disrupt the electronic equipment The third energy component is a longer-lasting magnetic signal from about one microsecond to one full second in duration This geomagnetic signal causes an effect that is damaging primarily to long-lines electronic equipment A localized magnetic effect builds up throughout the length of the transmission lines and then quickly collapses producing a magnetohydrodynamic (MHD) ldquoheaverdquo or ldquolate-timerdquo power surge that overloads equipment connected to the power and telecommunications infrastructure This latetime effect adds to the initial HEMP effect and systems connected to long-lines power and communications systems may be further disrupted by the combined effects Smaller isolated systems do not collect so much of this third energy component and are usually disrupted only by the first energy component of HEMP

79

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT Protective Measures

Commercial surge protectors will fail

Wilson 8 Clay- Specialist in Technology and National Security Foreign Affairs Defense and Trade Division ldquoHigh Altitude Electromagnetic Pulse (HEMP) and High Power Microwave (HPM) Devices Threat Assessmentsrdquo Congressional Research Service March 26 2008

Some assert that little has been done by the private sector to protect against the threat from electromagnetic pulse and that commercial electronic systems in the United States could be severely damaged by either HEMP or smaller-scale HPM8 Commercial electronic surge arresters used for lightning strikes reportedly do not clamp fast enough to protect against the instantaneous effects of electromagnetic pulse9 In March 2007 a survey of state Adjutants General who oversee National Guard units throughout the country found that most state-based emergency responders are not actively preparing against an attack on the United States by electromagnetic pulse The survey entitled Missile Defense and the Role of the States was conducted jointly by the Anchorage-based Institute of the North and the Claremont Institute of Claremont California Survey questions were sent to Adjutants General of all 50 states with more than half responding Although 96 of state Adjutants General indicated significant concern over an EMP attack the majority had done little or no analysis of the effects of an overhead EMP attack and little or no training or preparation to harden electronic equipment None of the Adjutants General surveyed indicated that they were actively involved in a formal planning process for response to an EMP attack10

80

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT Low Altitude Nuclear Explosions

Low altitude nuclear explosions do no cause any of the dangerous EMP effects

Johnston 9 Robert Wm- PhD in physics from UT-Dallas ldquoHigh-altitude nuclear explosionsrdquo 28 January 2009

Several effects are relatively unique to high altitude bursts Electromagnetic pulse (EMP) is important only for high altitude bursts For such detonations ionization

of the upper atmosphere can produce a brief intense pulse of radio frequency radiation which can damage or disrupt electronic devices For explosions above most of the atmosphere EMP can affect large areas

Ionization of the atmosphere from explosions in the atmosphere can interfere with radar and radio communications for short periods

Charged particles produced by explosions above the Earths atmosphere can be captured by the Earths magnetic field temporarily creating artificial radiation belts that can damage spacecraft and injure astronautscosmonauts in orbit

Ground attacks do not destroy satellites in LEO

Kueter 7 Jeff- president of the George C Marshall Institute ldquoChinarsquos Space Ambitions ndash And Oursrdquo The New Atlantis Number 16 Spring 2007 pp 7-22

There are numerous ways our space assets could be disabled or destroyed One likely threat to US space assets resides in a very terrestrial environment strikes against ground stations and launch systems Such attacks could constrain the usefulness of our existing satellites or reduce our ability to put new satellites into orbit But such ground attacks would probably at worst only diminish our ability to use our space assets since the data transmitted from orbiting satellites could in most cases be rerouted to other receiving stations on the ground and since our launch systems are (somewhat) redundant Of more concern is the possibility of attacks that directly destroy or damage satellites since they cannot at present be replaced quickly easily or cheaply Without a reorientation of the way it acquires space hardware the United States faces substantial barriers to repairing or replacing damaged satellites

81

Cornell HKHANE Aff

CP Theories

Conditionality is a voter and justifies the aff capturing the perma) Time skew ndash the aff has to invest time in multiple worlds that the neg can just kickb) Strat skew ndash the neg can run multiple contradictory worldviews that prevent us from making our best

argumentsc) in-depth education is impossible when the neg can just kick any position that we really press them on

PICs are a voting issuea) Strat skew- by mooting the 1AC they deprive the aff of a third of speech timeb) Vague plan writing- trading off with more educational negative groundc) Aff contradiction ndash PICs force us to argue against ourselves Our strike plans not verifiable card could

be used against usd) Inifintely regressive- justifying any single pic opens up the floodgates for menial one word pics

International fiat is abusive and a voting issue1 Not Predictable- There are an infinite number of international actors that the aff can never be ready to

debate2 Literature- The negative should have to produce solvency evidence that speaks to the exact mandates

of the plan in context to their international actor so that they can ensure predictability within the literature

3 Bad Advocacy Model- The judge is supposed to be a US policy maker not have international jurisdiction These types of counterplans make world peace CPs and utopia CPs legitimate

4 Infinitely regressive- they can have as many actors as they want as well as the ability to fiat the object of resolution That allows them to literally fiat out our advantages and win on a small risk of disads meaning debate is never fair or predictable

5 International organizations are uniquely abusive- they compromise multiple countries including the US which makes them plan-plus and not competitive because US action is involved

82

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT Hardening CP

Perm do both

CP alone signals a new race and causes escalation

Lewallen 2 John- Political Science at Whitman University organizer of the Nuclear Peace Action Group Fulbright Scholarship recipient Public Ocean Access Network ldquoHigh-Altitude Nuclear Warrdquo Nuclear Press p48

If a US national effort to defend vital systems against nuclear EMP attack is done in the context of moving away from national missile defense and space weapons in general and toward cooperation for disarmament and non-proliferation of nuclear weapons with Russia China and other nations it will be viewed by US adversaries as a prudent defensive move to protect American civilization However if the United States starts to harden civilian electronics against EMP in the current context of a military domination of space and invulnerability to missile attack it will send an aggressive and offensive signal that the US is preparing to fight World War Three This is a war we well all lose

Guidelines will not be implemented

Sirak 4 Michael- JDW Staff Reporter ldquoUS vulnerable to EMP attackrdquo Janersquos Defence Weekly 26 July 2004While the US military has grown increasingly dependent on computers electronics and information systems it has relaxed requirements for EMP-hardened systems since the end of the Cold War and its overall record of adherence to its guidelines for such robust equipment has been spotty they said This trend continues in the wrong direction the panel noted Similarly the US civilian critical infrastructure is not adequately prepared to deal with the effects of an EMP attack according to the panel which is known formally as the Commission to Assess the Threat to the United States from Electromagnetic Pulse Attack Congress created the panel in 2000 out of concern that this issue was not receiving enough attention

Even CP protects military infrastructure the military will be undermined because they rely on commercial electronics

Wilson 8 Clay- Specialist in Technology and National Security Foreign Affairs Defense and Trade Division ldquoHigh Altitude Electromagnetic Pulse (HEMP) and High Power Microwave (HPM) Devices Threat Assessmentsrdquo Congressional Research Service March 26 2008

The US military has adopted a policy where commercial electronic equipment is now used extensively in support of complex US weapons systems For example a large percentage of US military communications during Operation Iraqi Freedom was reportedly carried by commercial satellites and much military administrative information is currently routed through the civilian Internet43 Many commercial communications satellites particularly those in low earth orbit reportedly may degrade or cease to function shortly after a high altitude nuclear explosion44 However some observers believe that possible HEMP and HPM vulnerabilities of military information systems are outweighed by the benefits gained through access to innovative technology and increased communications flexibility that come from using state-of-the-art electronics and from maintaining connections to the civilian Internet and satellite systems

Bright 2 Melanie ldquoHigh-Altitude Nuclear Explosions Blind Deaf And Dumbrdquo Janes Defence Weekly October 23 2002 httpwwwglobalsecurityorgorgnews2002nuke_explosionhtm

The most obvious solution to HANEs is to harden civilian satellites In fact this is not an option with current technology More shielding means more weight

83

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT Hardening CP

Hardening sends threatening signals

Lewallen 99 John- Public Ocean Access Network ldquoThe Blackout Bomb What It Means To Yourdquo httpnonuclearnettheblackoutbombhtm

However I respectfully disagree with Dr Woods recommendation that any civilian hardening to protect us from EMP be done After a flirtation with civil defense and bomb shelters Americans have realized that nuclear attack against the United States is not something they are willing to prepare for because there is no rational way to prepare for it I believe Russia China and the United States form a Nuclear Triangle with constant low-to high-key nuclear weapons confrontation in the air If we start hardening our civilian infrastructure to withstand EMP it will signal to the Russians and Chinese that we are moving toward the brink of nuclear war

CP links to politics

Chisholm 5 Patrick ldquoProtect our electronics against EMP attackrdquo Christian Science Monitor December 19 2005

It is a thorny question as to whether the FCC should revise its standards to require electronics manufacturers to build in EMP protection This could be prohibitively expensive for the manufacture of individual components But businesses and government agencies should install EMP protection at the system level (This also would provide protection against other electromagnetic disturbances such as lightning)

84

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT NMD CP

Lewallen 2 John- Political Science at Whitman University organizer of the Nuclear Peace Action Group Fulbright Scholarship recipient Public Ocean Access Network ldquoHigh-Altitude Nuclear Warrdquo Nuclear Press p9-10

Dr Graham noted that a nuclear missile could have ldquosympatheticrdquo or ldquosalvagerdquo fusing which means it could be detonated when attacked by a missile defense system In other words US national missile defense if effective could cause a high-altitude nuclear EMP burst

Lewallen 2 John- Political Science at Whitman University organizer of the Nuclear Peace Action Group Fulbright Scholarship recipient Public Ocean Access Network ldquoHigh-Altitude Nuclear Warrdquo Nuclear Press Pg45The Chinese weapon to trump the National Missile Defense is a missile satellite or fractional orbiting nuclear bomb either intended for high-altitude nuclear EMP or fused to detonate when attacked by a hit-to-kill National Missile Defense system As noted by William Graham at the Weldon Hearings ldquoone of the ways an offensive nuclear weapon on a missile can be armed is in what is called a sympathetic or a salvage fusing mode so that even if you intercepted above the atmosphere before it reaches its target once it knows it is being attacked once the offensive nuclear warhead knows it is being attacked its fusing system may choose to detonate itself there to get at least the EMP and space radiation effect of the weaponrdquoIn short Clintonrsquos hit-to-kill National Missile Defense if effective could cause high-altitude nuclear explosions Laser missile defense systems in earlier stages of research and development are coming to be focused on shooting down missiles in their boost phase before they achieve high altitude The Russians and Chinese are very unlikely to allow effective boost-phase missile attack systems to be set up by the United StatesAll attempts by the United States or any other nuclear power to develop homeland missile defense systems suffer from three fatal flaws First counter-measures to any system can be developed much more cheaply than the system itself Secondly missile defense systems will take years to deploy at best while the Russians and Chinese have high-altitude and low-altitude nuclear weapons deployed and ready to strike the United States nowThirdly a credibly effective national missile defense of the United States poses much greater threat of nuclear missile attack against the US than do the incredibly ineffective systems now publicly visible The imminent deployment of a missile defense system that would work (or that an adversary believes would work or even believes that the United States commanders believe would work) poses Russia or China with an ugly choice submit to US military domination or launch a preemptive nuclear strike against the US before its defenses are set up

Doesnrsquot solve spaceLewallen 2 John- Political Science at Whitman University organizer of the Nuclear Peace Action Group Fulbright Scholarship recipient Public Ocean Access Network ldquoHigh-Altitude Nuclear Warrdquo Nuclear Press Pg33On Feb 4 2001 Sergei Ivanov Russian President Putinrsquos closest military advisor got up at a Munich meeting of defense ministers from many nations and said that any US national missile defense system would by definition abolish the 1972 Antiballistic Missile Treaty (ABM)ldquoAndrdquo Mr Ivanov added ldquothe destruction of the ABM treaty we are quite confident will result in the annihilation of the whole structure of strategic stability and create prerequisites for a new arms race ndash including one in spacerdquo

85

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT PAROS CP

Perm do both Curbing Chinese space ambitions is a prerequisite for a successful PAROS

Hitchens 9 Theresa- Director UN Institute for Disarmament Research ldquoSaving Space Threat Proliferation and Mitigationrdquo International Commission on Nuclear Non-proliferation and Disarmament May 19 2009

Finally the test also reverberated in the diplomatic arena calling into question the credibility of Chinarsquos longstanding efforts to push forward a treaty on the Prevention of an Arms Race in Outer Space (PAROS) and threatening to further weaken already shaky chances for negotiations on such a treaty to commence at the Conference on Disarmament (CD) in Geneva Disagreement on starting PAROS negotiations had been at the center of the CDrsquos 12-year standstill blocking the acceptance of a formal program of work and most specifically preventing negotiations on a Fissile Material Cutoff Treaty (FMCT)mdashdue to the standoff between the US and China on whether one set of talks should go forward without the other Although Russia and China dropped the demand for simultaneous negotiations in 2003 (instead calling for ldquodiscussionsrdquo of PAROS) at the time the Bush administration was not interested in a deal on either FMCT or PAROS With the May 29 agreement by the CD on a new program of work that includes both FMCT negotiations and PAROS discussions progress toward nuclear disarmament and nonproliferation looking more achievable than it has in many years Certainly this momentous shift is largely due to the dramatic change in US policy emerging from the Obama administration Nonetheless there remain major obstacles to a PAROS treaty (elaborated below)

86

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT Asteroids PIC

Quantitatively even if we only win 11000 probability for the solvency deficit it outweighs the risk of an asteroid hitting Earth even assuming the nuclear weapon works

Anissimov 9 [Michael Media Director for the Singularity Institute and Fundraising Director North America for the Lifeboat Foundation consultant for a variety of future-oriented non-profit organizations and for-profit companies including the Methuselah Foundation Center for Responsible Nanotechnology and Kurzweil Technologies ldquoEurekalert How to deflect asteroids and save the Earthrdquo Thursday Apr 16 httpwwwacceleratingfuturecommichaelblog200904eurekalert-how-to-deflect-asteroids-and-save-the-earth]

The asteroid risk is a great one to get people acquainted with the concept of catastrophic risk in general because it is statistically pinned down very well However according to some calculations the risk of a civilization-ending asteroid hitting Earth in the next 100 years is only 15000 leading to a 1500000 annual probability Say we give a 1500 annual probability estimate of the end of civilization due to nuclear war (Seems like quite the underestimate) According to standard cost-benefit analysis we should assign roughly 1000 times more importance to the task of minimizing the chance of catastrophic nuclear war than to deflecting asteroids We may see some common miscalculations on this score as asteroids are new and exciting and nuclear war is the same boring old risk that has been around for over half a century

PICs are a voting issuee) Strat skew- by mooting the 1AC they deprive the aff of a third of speech timef) Vague plan writing- trading off with more educational negative groundg) Aff contradiction ndash PICs force us to argue against ourselves Our strike plans not verifiable card could

be used against ush) Inifintely regressive- justifying any single pic opens up the floodgates for menial one word pics

Conditionality is a voter and justifies the aff capturing the permd) Time skew ndash the aff has to invest time in multiple worlds that the neg can just kicke) Strat skew ndash the neg can run multiple contradictory worldviews that prevent us from making our best

argumentsf) in-depth education is impossible when the neg can just kick any position that we really press them on

87

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT Japan Rearm

Japan likes the plan ndash they think US EMP attacks would damage Japan

Birdnow 6 Timothy contributor to American Daily Review writer for The American Thinker ldquoEMP and the Unfought Victoryrdquo July 1 httpwwwamericanthinkercom200607emp_and_the_unfought_victoryhtml

Couple an EMP attack on the West Coast with a terrorist strike and you have a recipe for chaos Here is one simple scenario send men into the CaliforniaArizonaNevada scrubland and light fires Without aircraft or water those fires could engulf the entire west This would be an easy lowmdashtech way to maximize damage while keeping operational costs to a minimum Of course the usual terrorist methods mdash bombs sniper attacks etc would also work well You could light natural gas wells oil wells and other combustible facilities on fire and watch the black smoke pour into the sky You could take steps to poison water sources so that people would die from drinking tainted water The point is nobody will be able to stop sleeper cells from acting after such an attack and the terrorists would know the best ways to strike to maximize their damage The real question is how would the United States respond to such an attack Will we launch a nuclear strike against North Korea killing millions and poisoning the entire region (including our friends in Japan and South Korea) An EMP attack against the DPRK would be the equivalent of embargoing gasoline on Sitting Bull they have so few high tech gadgets it would be pointless

88

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT Consult Japan

Japan says no ndash they fear an EMP attack

a) China

Pry 5 Dr Peter Vincent- EMP Commission Staff ldquoForeign Views Of Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP) Attackrdquo Before The United States Senate Subcommittee On Terrorism Technology And Homeland Security March 8 2005 httpwwwendtimesreportcomEMP_attackhtml

Some foreign analysts judging from open source statements and writings appear to regard EMP attack as a legitimate use of nuclear weapons because EMP would inflict no or few prompt civilian casualties EMP attack appears to be a unique exception to the general stigma attached to nuclear employment by most of the international community in public statements Significantly even some analysts in Japan and Germanyndashnations that historically have been most condemnatory of nuclear and other weapons of mass destruction in official and unofficial forumsndashappear to regard EMP attack as morally defensible For example a June 2000 Japanese article in a scholarly journal citing senior political and military officials appears to regard EMP attack as a legitimate use of nuclear weapons ldquoAlthough there is little chance that the Beijing authorities would launch a nuclear attack which would incur the disapproval of the international community and which would result in such enormous destruction that it would impede postwar cleanup and policies a serious assault starting with the use of nuclear weapons which would not harm humans animals or property would be valid If a nuclear warhead was detonated 40 kilometers above Taiwan an electromagnetic wave would be propagated which would harm unprotected computers radar and IC circuits on the ground within a 100 kilometer radius and the weapons and equipment which depend on the communications and electronics technology whose superiority Taiwan takes pride in would be rendered combat ineffective at one stroke If they were detonated in the sky in the vicinity of Ilan the effects would also extend to the waters near Yonakuni [in Okinawa] so it would be necessary for Japan too to take care Those in Taiwan having lost their advanced technology capabilities would end up fighting with tactics and technology going back to the 19th century They would inevitably be at a disadvantage with the PLA and its overwhelming military force superiorityrdquo (Su Tzu-yun Jadi 1 June 2000)

b) North Korea

Weldon 99 Curt Weldon A Representative From Pennsylvania Chairman Military Research And Development Subcommittee Electromagnetic Pulse Threats To US Military And Civilian Infrastructure House of Representatives Committee on Armed Services Military Research and Development Subcommittee Washington DC Thursday October 7 1999 httpcommdocshousegovcommitteessecurityhas280010000has280010_0HTM

The EMP threat may have acquired new and urgent relevance as the proliferation of nuclear weapons and missile technology accelerates North Korea for example is assessed as already having developed one or two atomic weapons and is on the verge of testing an Inter-Continental Ballistic Missiles (ICBM) capable of delivering a nuclear warhead to the United States North Korea already has missiles capable of delivering a nuclear warhead against US regional allies and US forces based in Japan and South Korea

89

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT Primacy DA

Primacy collapse is inevitable in the status quo- rogue states will achieve EMP capability that can decimate the US Their primacy good cards assume that the US will be the only country capable of a first strike And This is impossible because Primacy leads other nations to seek asymmetric warfighting tactics like EMP

Calleo 3 David P- Currently director of the European Studies Program and Professor of The Johns Hopkins University Taught at Brown Yale and Columbia ldquoEurope and America Different Geopolitical Wavelengthsrdquo Annual Foreign Policy Conference Heinrich Boumlll Stiftung - November 13th 2003

Military superiority is frequently vulnerable to what might be called the ldquoLaw of Asymmetrical Deterrencerdquo In the Cold War for example despite the huge nuclear arsenals of the superpowers anyone else with a ldquosecond-strikerdquo capability could have a reasonable deterrent with only a few hundred missiles Nothing has changed in that realm since the Soviet collapse ndash except that there are a few more nuclear powers Nuclear deterrence still seems a cheap way for the weak to counter the strong This seems true of weapons of mass destruction in general Not only are they relatively cheap equalizers but the presence of a superpower actively exercising its military superiority is a great inducement for others to acquire these equalizing weapons

EMP warfare shatters US primacy since the consequences are so huge and the US is the most vulnerable

Lewallen 2 John- Political Science at Whitman University organizer of the Nuclear Peace Action Group Fulbright Scholarship recipient Public Ocean Access Network ldquoHigh-Altitude Nuclear Warrdquo Nuclear Press Pg38

The United States has overwhelming military superiority and a gargantuan vulnerability to high-altitude nuclear EMP attack Russia and China have had several decades to fill their weapons bag with specialized nuclear EMP weapons and to prepare to sling them over the American homeland by missile by satellite or in a fractional orbiting bomb flung into orbit with a Scud or other short-range missile David knew that Goliath had a soft spot in his forehead just as the Russians and Chinese are perfectly aware that the United States in the words of Representative Weldon is the ldquomost vulnerable nation on Earth to electronic warfarerdquo

Primacy via EMP weapons makes nuclear apocalypse inevitable

Lewallen 2 John- Political Science at Whitman University organizer of the Nuclear Peace Action Group Fulbright Scholarship recipient Public Ocean Access Network ldquoHigh-Altitude Nuclear Warrdquo Nuclear Press Pg43

If it comes the next global war almost certainly will begin with high-altitude nuclear EMP Anything done or refrained from to reduce international conflict and promote international cooperation will help humanity avoid the awesome setback of global war The nation-state system itself is perhaps the most dangerous factor auguring high-altitude nuclear war It is perhaps amazing that we humans have gone the past fifty-five years without anyone blowing up a nuclear bomb How much longer can we tickle the dragonrsquos tail before the fundamental flaw of competing armies with nuclear weapons finishes us off The United States fond of calling itself the worldrsquos only superpower has the same tendency as past military empires (although not a self-acknowledged empire) a strong and perhaps inevitable drive to move from world preeminence to world domination The US military-industrial complex is set up to endlessly conceive design produce and deploy new strategic weaponry

90

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT Primacy DA

Extend our CDI and Schorr evidence that EMP primacy causes dangerous crisis escalation and accidental nuclear war

Nuclear primacy causes uncontrollable crisis dynamics

Schwarz 6 Benjamin- literary editor and the national editor of The Atlantic foreign policy analyst at the RAND Corporation ldquoThe Perils of Primacyrdquo The Atlantic JanuaryFebruary httpwwwtheatlanticcomdoc200601primacy

Lieber and Press emphasize that their analysis doesnt prove that a US first strike would succeed but it highlights a development that is grave if only because its one that prudent planners in Russia and China who conduct similar analyses are no doubt already surmising that their countries can no longer be confident of having a viable deterrent Surely adding to their alarm is the realization that the nuclear imbalance troubling enough already will only grow in the coming years Washingtons withdrawal from the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty and its concomitant pursuit of a national missile-defense system will greatly enhance its offensive nuclear capabilities because although critics of missile defense correctly argue that it could never shield America from a massive full-scale nuclear attack it could quite plausibly deal with the very few missiles an adversary might have left to deploy after a US first strike Whats more the United States is actively pursuing a series of initiativesmdashincluding further advances in anti-submarine and anti-satellite warfare in missile accuracy and potency and in wide-area remote sensing aimed at finding relocatable targets such as mobile ICBMsmdashthat will render Russias and Chinas nuclear forces all the more vulnerable To be sure Americas emerging nuclear hegemony could bring benefits including potential leverage vis-agrave-vis our superpower counterparts in such areas of competition as the Balkans and Taiwan It will also force China to divert defense resources from its power-projection efforts in East Asia (This however would be both a blessing and a curse We should expect a new prolonged and intense nuclear arms race Lieber and Press conclude) But whether or not America has deliberately pursued the ability to win a nuclear conflict that capability will increase the risk of great-power war US-Chinese relations are bound to be edgy or worse for the foreseeable future and although relations between Washington and Moscow are nowhere near their Cold War nadir actual and potential strains remain formidable Each country has nuclear-armed missiles that can be delivered against the other within minutesmdashand in Americas nuclear-war plans the overwhelming number of targets remain inside Russia Most important any shift in the nuclear balance itself will engender a volatility that could cause seemingly small conflicts between countries to quickly spiral Confronted with the growing nuclear imbalance Russia and China will be forced to try to redress it but given Americas advantages that effort as Lieber and Press note could take well over a decade Until a nuclear stalemate is restoredmdashif it ever ismdashMoscow and Beijing will surely buy deterrence by spreading out their nuclear forces decentralizing their command-and-control systems and implementing launch on warning policies If more than half a century of analyzing nuclear dangers and crisis stability has taught us anything it is that all these steps can cause crises to escalate uncontrollably They could trigger the unauthorized or accidental use of nuclear weapons this could lead to inadvertent nuclear war American military preponderance now embraces the entire spectrum of conflict as Pentagon planners put it That is to say were miles ahead of everyone in every type of warfare But if that preponderance is leading to a world in which Russian and Chinese launch commanders are fingering nuclear hair triggers the game may not be worth the candle Without any public scrutiny or debate the United States has emerged as the nuclear hegemon in possession of a destabilizing first-strike capability It does not matter whether this has come about by accident or design or whether Americas motives are worthy or malign the condition itself is the problem The ramifications of this state of affairs are of the gravest significance to Americas securitymdashand the worlds Its time for scrutiny and debate to begin

91

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT Damage Limitation

The ability to engage in various levels of nuclear war is key to damage limitation

Gray amp Payne 80 Colin S and Keith ldquoVictory is Possiblerdquo Foreign Policy Summer 1980 pp 14-27Nuclear war is unlikely to be an essentially meaningless terminal event Instead it is likely to be waged to coerce the Soviet Union to give up some recent gain Thus a president must have the ability not merely to end a war but to end it favorably The United States would need to be able to persuade desperate and determined Soviet leaders that it has the capability and the determination to wage nuclear war at even higher levels of violence until an acceptable outcome is achieved For deterrence to function during a war each side would have to calculate whether an improved outcome is possible through further escalation An adequate US deterrent posture is one that denies the Soviet Union any plausible hope of success at any level of strategic conflict offers a likely prospect of Soviet defeat and offers a reasonable chance of limiting damage to the United States Such a deterrence posture is often criticized as contributing to the arms race and causing strategic instability because it would stimulate new Soviet deployments However during the 1970s the Soviet Union showed that its weapon development and deployment decisions are not dictated by American actions Western understanding of what determines Soviet defense procurement is less than perfect but it is now obvious that Soviet weapon decisions cannot be explained with reference to any simple action-reaction model of arms-race dynamics In addition highly survivable US strategic forces should insure strategic stability by denying the Soviets an attractive first-strike target set

EMP warfare undermines our ability to perform limited nuclear war

Burnham 83 David- co-director of the Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse (TRAC) ldquoUS Fears One Bomb Could Cripple The Nationrdquo The New York Times

Another reason for the recent concern in the Government is the adoption by both the Carter and Reagan Administrations of a nuclear strategy that includes the possibility that this country might have to wage a prolonged limited nuclear war For a nation to conduct such a war military analysts stress much would depend on its ability to organize an effective civil defense that would enable a large part of the population to continue to house and feed itself CONTINUES The potential chaos that may be created by high altitude EMP has national security implications the Energy Department said in a statement explaining why it had started the new research program During a period of national crisis electrical power will be required to operate military installations civil defense facilities and critical industries In addition if EMP caused a disruption of the financial manufacturing retail transportation and communication industries as well as basic utilities serious economic and social consequences would result Disruption of the nations electrical power supply has grave implications In an article in Spectrum the authoritative magazine of the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers Eric J Lemer a contributing editor expressed similar concerns Power Grids Vulnerability The potential impact on the national power grid of a small number of high altitude EMP bursts would be comparable to that produced by large lightning bolts hitting every power line segment in the country he said When it is considered that two ordinary lightning bolts were the proximate cause of the 1977 New York City blackout it is easy to see why many analysts believe that a complete shutdown of the national power grid could be achieved by a handful of EMP detonations

92

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT Damage Limitation

Non Nuclear Pulse devices allow for damage limitation without undermining the escalation ladder

Wilson 8 Clay- Specialist in Technology and National Security Foreign Affairs Defense and Trade Division ldquoHigh Altitude Electromagnetic Pulse (HEMP) and High Power Microwave (HPM) Devices Threat Assessmentsrdquo Congressional Research Service March 26 2008

DOD research on pulsed-power HPM electromagnetic weapons is currently being done at Kirtland Air Force Base in Albuquerque New Mexico Weapons now being developed by the US military for electronic warfare can disrupt the trajectory of missiles while in flight and can overpower or degrade enemy communications telemetry and circuitry Other HPM weapons being tested by the military are portable and re-usable through battery-power and many are effective when fired miles away from a target These weapons can also be focused like a laser beam and tuned to an appropriate frequency in order to penetrate electronics that are heavily shielded against a nuclear attack The deepest bunkers with the thickest concrete walls reportedly are not safe from such a beam if they have even a single unprotected wire reaching the surface29 During Operation Iraqi Freedom many Iraqi command bunkers and suspected chemical-biological weapons bunkers were deeply buried underground and thought to be difficult to disable using conventional explosives New HPM weapons were reportedly considered for possible use in attacks against these targets because the numerous communications and power lines leading into the underground bunkers offered pathways for conducting powerful surges of electromagnetic energy that could destroy the computer equipment inside30 Because instantaneous HPM energy can reflect off the ground and possibly affect piloted aircraft above much testing currently involves HPM devices on Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs) and on the Air Force Conventional Air Launched Cruise Missile system By 2010 DOD reportedly will field several airlaunched UAVs using disposable and reusable HPM weapons designed to disrupt enemy computers31

93

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT Damage Limitation

A HEMP destroys US military capability and damage limitation

Graham 4 Dr William R- Deputy Administrator of NASA The report of the Commission to Assess the Threat to the United States From Electromagnetic Pulse Attackrdquo July 22 2004

Mr Langevin In the event that an EMP event threatened or damaged the GPS system what would happen to battlefield information and communications systems such as FBCB2 (Force XXI Battle Command Brigade-and-Below) Blue Force Tracker (BFT) and Movement Tracking System (MTS) Are there backup systems available if our situational awareness provided by GPS input is taken away Dr Graham Army battlefield information and communication systems such as FBCB2 (Force XXI Battle Command Brigade-and-Below) Blue Force Tracker (BFT) and Movement Tracking System (MTS) provide position location communication capability and force tracking-situational awareness These information and communication systems use the Global Positioning System (GPS) as a component Loss of a GPS signal would negate MTSs and BFTs ability to identify position location and to conduct force tracking While high Altitude EMP (HEMP) is not likely to directly damage the satellites that broadcast GPS signals because of the height of their orbits the ground-based systems that receive and make use of GPS information would be at risk unless protected against HEMP effects MTS and BFT transmit data via a communications satellite that would not be affected by loss of a GPS signal Certain ground platforms which use FBCB2 and BFT such as the Bradley Paladin and Ml have an inertial navigation unit (INU) which is a redundant capability for deternining position lacation Having to resort to using the INU would result in a degradation of performance and possible delay of missions due to reinitializing position data every 20-26 kilometers depending on the platform and the INU system used INUs do not rely on GPS signals The location data from the INU is transmitted via FBCB2 communications which again is not affected by loss of GPS signal The location data can then be used by FBCB2 for force tracking Situational awareness of any system on the battlefield which relies soley on GPS will no longer appear in the FBCB2 situational awareness display HEMP survivability is a requirement for the GPS receivers in MTS BFT and FBCB2 FBCB2 has been tested in many vehicles such as the HMMWV M1A2 SEP Tank STRYKER and LOSAT over the last four years There are no known HEMP survivability issues or concerns resulting from these tests BFT was tested on a HMMWV in April 04 and passed MTS evaluation on the Family of Medium Tactical Vehicles (FMTV) has been delayed due to asset availability However MTS relies on many of the same components as BFT so no major problems are anticipated It should also be noted that nuclear weapon effects other than HEMP could damage GPS or interfere with the transmission of GPS signals through the atmosphere bull In a high-altitude nuclear event loss of a GPS signal will degrade the ability of ground systems such as FBCB2 BFT and MTS to self-locate and track forces

94

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT Deterrence DA

1) Nuclear deterrent in trouble now

Kyl amp Perle 9 Jon Richard June 30 2009 ldquoOur Decaying Nuclear Deterrentrdquo Mr Kyl is a Republican senator from Arizona Mr Perle a fellow at the American Enterprise Institute was assistant secretary of defense in the Reagan administration lthttponlinewsjcomarticleSB124623202363966157htmlgt

Thus in his Prague speech Mr Obama announced that the US would immediately and aggressively pursue ratification of the comprehensive ban on the testing of nuclear weapons The administration believes without evidence that ratification of the test-ban treaty will discourage other countries from developing nuclear weapons Which countries does it have in mind Iran North Korea Syria Countries alarmed by the nuclear ambitions of their enemies Allies who may one day lose confidence in our nuclear umbrella There are good reasons why the test-ban treaty has not been ratified The attempt to do so in 1999 failed in the Senate mostly out of concerns about verification -- it simply is not verifiable It also failed because of an understandable reluctance on the part of the US Senate to forgo forever a test program that could in the future be of critical importance for our defense and the defense of our allies Robert Gates who is now Mr Obamas own secretary of defense warned in a speech last October that in the absence of a nuclear modernization program even the most modest of which

Congress has repeatedly declined to fund [a]t a certain point it will become impossible to keep extending the life of our arsenal especially in light of our testing moratorium Suppose future problems in our nuclear arsenal emerge that cannot be solved without testing Would our predicament

discourage nuclear proliferation -- or stimulate it For the foreseeable future the US and many of our allies rely on our nuclear deterrent And as long as the US possesses nuclear weapons they must be -- as Mr Obama recognized in Prague -- safe secure and effective Yet his proposed 2010 budget fails to take the necessary steps to do that Those steps have been studied extensively by the Perry-Schlesinger Commission (named for co-chairmen William Perry secretary of defense under President Bill Clinton and James R Schlesinger secretary of defense under Presidents Richard Nixon and Gerald Ford) Its consensus report released in May makes numerous recommendations to increase the funding for and improve the effectiveness of the deteriorating nuclear weapons laboratory complex (eg the Los Alamos facility in New Mexico the Pantex plant in Texas and the dangerously neglected Y-12 plant in Tennessee) that has become the soft underbelly of our deterrent force The commission also assessed the nuclear weapons infrastructure that is essential to a safe secure and effective deterrent and declared it in serious need of transformation It looked at our laboratory-based scientific and technical expertise and concluded that the intellectual

infrastructure is in serious trouble A major cause is woefully inadequate funding The commission rightly argued that we must exercise the full range of laboratory skills including nuclear weapon design skills Skills that are not exercised will atrophy The president and the Congress must heed these recommendations There are some who believe that failing to invest

adequately in our nuclear deterrent will move us closer to a nuclear free world In fact blocking crucial modernization means unilateral disarmament by unilateral obsolescence This unilateral disarmament will only encourage nuclear proliferation since our allies will see the danger and our adversaries the opportunity By neglecting -- and in some cases even opposing -- essential modernization programs arms-control proponents are actually undermining the prospect for further reductions of the US nuclear arsenal As our nuclear weapons stockpile ages and concern about its reliability increases we will have to compensate by retaining more nuclear weapons than would otherwise be the case This reality will necessarily influence future arms-control negotiations beginning with the upcoming Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty follow-on For these negotiations the Russians are insisting on a false linkage between nuclear weapons and missile defenses They are

demanding that we abandon defenses against North Korean or Iranian missiles as a condition for mutual reductions in American and Russian strategic forces As the president cuts the budget for missile defense and cedes ground to the Russians on our planned defense sites in Poland and the Czech Republic we may end up abandoning a needed defense of the US and our European allies from the looming Iranian threat There is a fashionable notion that if only we and the Russians reduced our nuclear forces other nations would reduce their existing arsenals or abandon plans to acquire nuclear weapons altogether This idea an article of faith of the soft power approach to halting nuclear proliferation assumes that the nuclear ambitions of Kim Jong Il or Mahmoud Ahmadinejad would be curtailed or abandoned in response to reductions in the American and Russian deterrent forces -- or that India Pakistan or China would respond with reductions of their own

Non Nuclear Pulse devices solve

Wilson 8 Clay- Specialist in Technology and National Security Foreign Affairs Defense and Trade Division ldquoHigh Altitude Electromagnetic Pulse (HEMP) and High Power Microwave (HPM) Devices Threat Assessmentsrdquo Congressional Research Service March 26 2008

DOD research on pulsed-power HPM electromagnetic weapons is currently being done at Kirtland Air Force Base in Albuquerque New Mexico Weapons now being developed by the US military for electronic warfare can disrupt the trajectory of missiles while in flight and can overpower or degrade enemy communications telemetry and circuitry Other HPM weapons being tested by the military are portable and re-usable through battery-power and many are effective when fired miles away from a target These weapons can also be focused like a laser beam and tuned to an appropriate frequency in order to penetrate electronics that are heavily shielded against a nuclear attack The deepest bunkers with the thickest concrete walls reportedly are not safe from such a beam if they have even a single unprotected wire reaching the surface29 During Operation Iraqi Freedom many Iraqi command bunkers and suspected chemical-biological weapons bunkers were deeply buried underground and thought to be difficult to disable using conventional explosives New HPM weapons were reportedly considered for possible use in attacks against these targets because the numerous communications and power lines leading into the underground bunkers offered pathways for conducting powerful surges of electromagnetic energy that could destroy the computer equipment inside30 Because instantaneous HPM energy can reflect off the ground and possibly affect piloted aircraft above much testing currently involves HPM devices on Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs) and on the Air Force Conventional Air Launched Cruise Missile system By 2010 DOD reportedly will field several airlaunched UAVs using disposable and reusable HPM weapons designed to disrupt enemy computers31

95

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT Deterrence DA

US EMP strikes are not used to deter EMPs

Riddle 4 Lieutenant Colonel Thomas C- United States Army ldquoNuclear High Altitude Electromagnetic Pulse ndash Implications For Homeland Security And Homeland Defenserdquo US Army War College 03 May 2004

Similarly the decision to implement an earlier deployment of an initial ground-based interceptor and improved ballistic missile tracking capabilities will support the improved passive and active defenses called for in the NSS 50 Also the convincing demonstration of the continuing efficiency and effectiveness of Americarsquos global precision strike capabilities during Operation IRAQI FREEDOM is a clear indication that multi-dimensional counterforce capabilities remain a viable element of Americarsquos counter-proliferation capabilities that may be used if required to prevent a HEMP attack on the United States Finally the United Statesrsquo demonstrated willingness to conduct preemptive strikes to neutralize WMD under the concept of imminent defense adds an unmistakable dimension to the concept of deterrence for those seeking to acquire weapons of mass destruction51

EMPs have no deterrent effect against the majority of countries because they are less reliant on electronic systems

Timmerman 2 Kenneth R- director of the Foundation for Democracy in Iran 2006 Nobel Peace Prize Nominee ldquoUS Threatened With EMP Attackrdquo Feb 1 2002

The more backward the country the more attractive EMP becomes as a weapon against the United States Bartlett explains ldquoIf North Korea were to launch a missile straight up and explode a nuclear weapon 500 kilometers over their own territory it wouldnrsquot do them a lot of damage because they have very little dependence on electronic systems But it would have a devastating impact on South Korea as well as on our 37000 troops stationed there With North Korearsquos million soldiers they could just walk all over us with impunityrdquo

Deterrence against EMP strikes fails now- lack of clear response

Spencer 4 Jack- Senior Policy Analyst for Defense and National Security in the Kathryn and Shelby Cullom Davis Institute for International Studies at The Heritage Foundation ldquoThe Electromagnetic Pulse Commission Warns of an Old Threat with a New Facerdquo Heritage Foundation Backgrounder 1784 August 3 2004

The difficulty of developing a clear response to EMP is due primarily to the unique nature of the threat It is unclear for example what would constitute a proportional response to an explosion that takes place in space without being seen or heard yet instantaneously devastates society or a military force while resulting in no initial loss of life or physical destruction Furthermore there is a dearth of academic or legal analysis by which to guide such policies because until very recently few took the threat seriously This is especially so in the context of rogue states or transnational groups

96

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT Deterrence DA

EMP attacks cannot be deterred

Wilson 8 Clay- Specialist in Technology and National Security Foreign Affairs Defense and Trade Division ldquoHigh Altitude Electromagnetic Pulse (HEMP) and High Power Microwave (HPM) Devices Threat Assessmentsrdquo Congressional Research Service March 26 2008

The threat of an EMP attack against the United States is hard to assess but some observers indicate that it is growing along with worldwide access to newer technologies and the proliferation of nuclear weapons In the past the threat of mutually assured destruction provided a lasting deterrent against the exchange of multiple high-yield nuclear warheads However now even a single specially designed low-yield nuclear explosion high above the United States or over a battlefield can produce a large-scale EMP effect that could result in a widespread loss of electronics but no direct fatalities and may not necessarily evoke a large nuclear retaliatory strike by the US military This coupled with the possible vulnerability of US commercial electronics and US military battlefield equipment to the effects of EMP may create a new incentive for other countries to develop or acquire a nuclear capability

Canrsquot deter EMP threats

EMP Commission 4 Report of the Commission to Assess the Threat to the United States from Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP) Attack Volume 1 Executive Report 2004 Dr John S Foster Jr Mr Earl Gjelde Dr William R Graham (Chairman) Dr Robert J Hermann Mr Henry (Hank) M Kluepfel GEN Richard L Lawson USAF (Ret) Dr Gordon K Soper Dr Lowell L Wood Jr Dr Joan B Woodard]

EMP effects from nuclear bursts are not new threats to our nation The Soviet Union in the past and Russia and other nations today are potentially capable of creating these effects Historically this application of nuclear weaponry was mixed with a much larger population of nuclear devices that were the primary source of destruction and thus EMP as a weapons effect was not the primary focus Throughout the Cold War the United States did not try to protect its civilian infrastructure against either the physical or EMP impact of nuclear weapons and instead depended on deterrence for its safety What is different now is that some potential sources of EMP threats are difficult to determdashthey can be terrorist groups that have no state identity have only one or a few weapons and are motivated to attack the US without regard for their own safety Rogue states such as North Korea and Iran may also be developing the capability to pose an EMP threat to the United States and may also be unpredictable and difficult to deter Certain types of relatively low-yield nuclear weapons can be employed to generate potentially catastrophic EMP effects over wide geographic areas and designs for variants of such weapons may have been illicitly trafficked for a quarter-century China and Russia have considered limited nuclear attack options that unlike their Cold War plans employ EMP as the primary or sole means of attack Indeed as recently as May 1999 during the NATO bombing of the former Yugoslavia high-ranking members of the Russian Duma meeting with a US congressional delegation to discuss the Balkans conflict raised the specter of a Russian EMP attack that would paralyze the United States

97

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT Deterrence DA

EMP Strikes will be used for catalytic wars

Lewallen 2 John- Political Science at Whitman University organizer of the Nuclear Peace Action Group Fulbright Scholarship recipient Public Ocean Access Network ldquoHigh-Altitude Nuclear Warrdquo Nuclear Press Pg36

The Soviet Union no longer exists Now many nations and even several corporations potentially have nuclear bombs in satellites In 1984 the US President knew right away where the nuclear attack was coming from Today any nuclear attack against the American homeland is almost sure to be anonymous How does one deter an adversary who can strike without attribution perhaps choosing a moment of crisis between its two nuclear adversaries to make it look like the other guy did it

98

Cornell HKHANE Aff

No US Second Strike

An EMP attack would decimate our sub deterrent- they would be unable to receive orders

Graham 4 Dr William R- Deputy Administrator of NASA The report of the Commission to Assess the Threat to the United States From Electromagnetic Pulse Attackrdquo July 22 2004

Mr Langevin Have you assessed the threat of EMP to our surface fleet and submarines Do submarines have a greater likelihood of retaining operational capabilities if they are underwater during an EMP strike Dr Graham The EMP Commission did consider the threat of EMP to surface vessels and submarines Ballistic Missile Submarines are designed and built to survive an EMP attack Care is taken when the ship is modified or equipment added or upgraded to insure that survivability is maintained Particular attention is paid to the potential vulnerability introduced when the ship is at periscope depth or trailing a wire antenna Submarines do have a greater likelihood of retaining operational capabilities if they are underwater during an EMP attack and not trailing an antenna which can couple energy into the submerged vessel However if land-based communications are impacted the ship may survive but not be capable of receiving orders and therefore accomplishing its mission because the sender cant send The survivability of the surface fleet is uncertain without testing and a submarine in port is a surface ship

An EMP strike would destroy communications

Wilson 8 Clay- Specialist in Technology and National Security Foreign Affairs Defense and Trade Division ldquoHigh Altitude Electromagnetic Pulse (HEMP) and High Power Microwave (HPM) Devices Threat Assessmentsrdquo Congressional Research Service March 26 2008

During the Cold War the US Military designed an innovative communications system to relay emergency messages between strategic military areas in the continental United States using signals that travel by means of low frequency ground waves mdash electromagnetic fields that hug the ground mdash rather than by radiating into the atmosphere The Ground Wave Emergency Network or GWEN system was intended to allow continuous communications despite EMP disruptions However the hardware was reportedly transistor based leaving the system with some level of vulnerability to EMP In addition the fixed locations of GWEN sites were known to adversaries and thus vulnerable to direct attack40

Even if military infrastructure is protected critical civilian infrastructure is not

Wilson 8 Clay- Specialist in Technology and National Security Foreign Affairs Defense and Trade Division ldquoHigh Altitude Electromagnetic Pulse (HEMP) and High Power Microwave (HPM) Devices Threat Assessmentsrdquo Congressional Research Service March 26 2008

The US military has adopted a policy where commercial electronic equipment is now used extensively in support of complex US weapons systems For example a large percentage of US military communications during Operation Iraqi Freedom was reportedly carried by commercial satellites and much military administrative information is currently routed through the civilian Internet43 Many commercial communications satellites particularly those in low earth orbit reportedly may degrade or cease to function shortly after a high altitude nuclear explosion44 However some observers believe that possible HEMP and HPM vulnerabilities of military information systems are outweighed by the benefits gained through access to innovative technology and increased communications flexibility that come from using state-of-the-art electronics and from maintaining connections to the civilian Internet and satellite systems

99

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Yes US Second Strike

EMPs cannot endanger our ability to retaliate

Critchlow 6 Robert D- National Defense Fellow Foreign Affairs Defense and Trade Division ldquoNuclear Command and Control Current Programs and Issuesrdquo CRS Report for Congress May 3 2006

Nuclear Command and Control Platforms The lead elements of the NCCS form the National Military Command System (NMCS) The NMCS is ldquothe priority component of the Global Command and Control System designed to support the Secretary of Defense and Joint Chiefs of Staff in the exercise of their responsibilitiesrdquo5 It provides the National Command Authorities (NCA)6 and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff (CJCS) with command and control of the armed forces both nuclear and conventional7 The NMCS includes the following command nodes and supporting components

National Military Command Center (NMCC) The NMCC is the primary location for national command and control on a day to day basis This center is staffed around-the-clock and each ldquowatch teamrdquo is led by a General or Admiral known as the ldquoDeputy Director for Operationsrdquo Located in a shielded room in the Pentagon the NMCC is responsible for monitoring nuclear forces and ongoing conventional military operations and can be augmented by additional response cells in the event of a crisis

National Airborne Operations Center (NAOC) If ground based command centers are destroyed the NAOC can serve as a survivable airborne backup to the NMCCrsquos command and control capabilities A NAOC aircraft is always on alert and the mobility of this airborne platform contributes to its survivability The NAOCs are a fleet of modified Boeing 747-200B aircraft each of which can include a crew of up to 114 people and are based at Offutt AFB in Nebraska Its communications which include both Extremely High Frequency (EHF) and Very Low Frequency-Low Frequency (VLFLF) links are hardened against Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP) Although the Joint Staff tasks the aircraft US Strategic Command (USSTRATCOM)9 provides personnel and day-to-day administration while the Air Forcersquos Air Combat Command serves as the programrsquos resource manager

Site-R Located at Fort Ritchie Maryland Site-R can be activated from a ldquocoldrdquo status to serve as an alternate NMCC location11

USSTRATCOM Global Operations Center (GOC) Located underneath the USSTRATCOM Headquarters at Offutt AFB Nebraska the GOC can serve as a back up element to the NMCS for essential emergency actions This center also serves as the command center for the USSTRATCOM Commander one of the four- star-general Unified Combatant Commanders for the day-to-day management of his forces and for providing situational awareness The facility is protected against EMP and has its own emergency power supply to enable extended operations This facility is staffed 24 hours a day 365 days a year with each team led by a Senior Controller who is always a full Colonel (Air Force Army or Marine Corps) or Captain (Navy)12

USSTRATCOM Airborne Command Post (ABNCP) Should the USSTRATCOM GOC be unable to fulfill its role the E-6B ABNCP can serve as a survivable airborne backup The ABNCPs are a fleet of modified Boeing 707 aircraft each of which carries a crew of 22 which includes aircrew communications operators and battlestaff personnel Historically each battle staff has been led by a General or Admiral known as the Airborne Emergency Action Officer (AEAO) This aircraft fulfills two additional key missions As the Airborne Launch Control System (ALCS) the aircraft has the ability to communicate launch codes directly to ICBM launch facilities to command launch in the event that their launch control centers are unable to perform that function Also the E-6B can serve as the Take Charge And Move Out (TACAMO) relay for Navy ballistic missile submarines The airplane can deploy a 2frac12-mile-long trailing wire antenna and communicate directives to the submarines over its VLFLF system In addition to the VLFLF the ABNCP can communicate using Ultra-High Frequency (UHF) or EHF satellite systems While USSTRATCOM provides the battlestaff personnel the aircraft aircrew and communications operators are from the Navyrsquos Strategic Communications (STRATCOMM) Wing One based at Tinker AFB Oklahoma13 USSTRATCOM Mobile Consolidated Command Center (MCCC) The MCCC is a convoy of trucks that can deploy during a crisis to serve as a survivable road-mobile backup to the USSTRATCOM GOC or ABNCP

100

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Yes US Second Strike

Strat nukes remain operable

Riddle 4 Lieutenant Colonel Thomas C- United States Army ldquoNuclear High Altitude Electromagnetic Pulse ndash Implications For Homeland Security And Homeland Defenserdquo US Army War College 03 May 2004

Additionally the military forces of the United States have been increasingly based in the continental United States (CONUS) and would also be affected Although the strategic nuclear forces (and portions of their supporting infrastructure) were designed to resist the effects of EMP the general purpose forces have not received the same focus After a successful HEMP attack the posts camps bases and stations throughout the country might not be able to provide the services necessary to function as power projection platforms Although some military programs have incorporated EMP resistance as part of the design and acquisition process increasingly the military forces have turned to commercial-off-the-shelf equipment that has little or no EMP protection

Military communication would survive

Wilson 4 Clay- Specialist in Technology and National Security Foreign Affairs Defense and Trade Division ldquoHigh Altitude Electromagnetic Pulse (HEMP) and High Power Microwave (HPM) Devices Threat Assessmentsrdquo Congressional Research Service August 20 2004

As the Cold War ended the US military took steps to reduce its nuclear arsenal and associated infrastructure32 After 1998 the USAF decommissioned GWEN assets and replaced the entire system with the Single Channel Anti-Jam Man-Portable (SCAMP) Terminal SCAMP uses extremely high frequency (EHF) technology is resistant to EMP and offers more flexibility than GWEN because the equipment is lightweight transportable and interoperable with DOD satellite networks33

101

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT Security Kritik

Russia data sharing solves the impact

Farley 9 Robert is an assistant professor at the University of Kentuckyrsquos Patterson School of Diplomacy and International Commerce ldquoNeocons Salivating Over Their Next Great Exaggerated Threat Electromagnetic Pulse Attackrdquo October 22 2009

The fact that EMP is poorly researched and not well understood works in its favor as a scare tactic Since evidence of EMPrsquos allegedly lasting impact is purely theoretical EMP awareness advocates can make outlandish claims regarding the threat that even the smallest nuclear arsenal poses They can also point to allegations made by the official EMP Commission ignoring the fact that many outside experts dispute its findings The Niagara conferencersquos emphasis on strategic and policy considerations shows that alarmist predictions about EMP attacks serve as fodder for promotion of a larger nuclear weapons stockpile for missile defense and for preventive attacks

Ignoring the threat results in disaster

Dunn 6 JR- editor of the International Military Encyclopedia ldquoThe EMP Threat ElectroMagnetic Pulse Warfarerdquo American Thinker April 21 2006

Above all we cant allow the problem to slip past without being addressed always a danger in a confusing and urgent time Threats have a way of sneaking up on democracies Back in the 70s an American president on the promise of the Soviet premier that no aerial attack would be carried out on the US decided to shut down the Aerospace Defense Command and its US Army equivalent responsible for air defense of the country The bases were closed the assets either scrapped or turned over to the National Guard Two decades later on a fine morning in September there were no alert squadrons longmdashrange interceptors or surfacemdashtomdashair missiles to defend New York and Washington The presidents name was Jimmy Carter We can do better

102

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT Kritiks

Informing the public is key to challenging the industrial military complex

Lewallen 2 John- Political Science at Whitman University organizer of the Nuclear Peace Action Group Fulbright Scholarship recipient Public Ocean Access Network ldquoHigh-Altitude Nuclear Warrdquo Nuclear Press p9-10

Certainly we are courting disaster by leaving all thought about high-altitude nuclear war to a tiny group of military-industrial-complex insiders Everyone testifying at the Congressional EMP hearings has an axe to grind weapons systems to promote a reputation to make a job to do a grim reality to deny

Engaging in the debate over high altitude nuclear weapons is crucial to curbing nuclear madness

Lewallen 2 John- Political Science at Whitman University organizer of the Nuclear Peace Action Group Fulbright Scholarship recipient Public Ocean Access Network ldquoHigh-Altitude Nuclear Warrdquo Nuclear Press p9-10

I humbly offer the following commentary as my initial thoughts on the strategic implications of high-altitude nuclear electromagnetic pulse weapons I invite peer review Today we are all peers beneath the sword of looming nuclear catastrophe I believe the global human network of love empathy and respect is ultimately superior to the forces pushing toward global nuclear war But we cannot afford to ignore nuclear weapons In the psychological darkness of reality denial they grow and grow Help cast the light which will dissipate nuclear madness

103

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT Religion K

Lewallen 2 John- Political Science at Whitman University organizer of the Nuclear Peace Action Group Fulbright Scholarship recipient Public Ocean Access Network ldquoHigh-Altitude Nuclear Warrdquo Nuclear Press Pg38

ldquoAnd David proceeded to take his staff in his hand and to choose for himself the five smoothest stones from the torrent valley and to place them in his shepherdsrsquo bag that served him as a receptacle and in his hand was his sling And he began approaching the PhilistineldquoAnd the Philistine began to come coming nearer and nearer to David and the man carrying the large shield was ahead of himhellipldquoThen David thrust his hand into his bag and took a stone from there and slung it so that he struck the Philistine in his forehead and the stone sank into his forehead and he went falling upon his face to the earth So David with a sling and a stone proved stronger than the Philistine and struck the Philistine down and put him to death and there was no sword in Davidrsquos handrdquo

- The Old Testament I Samuel 1740-50As Russia and China face the onslaught of the United States advancing militarily toward them behind a missile shield still in research and development their military position is similar to that of the young shepherd David confronting the giant and mighty Philistine warrior GoliathThe United States has overwhelming military superiority and a gargantuan vulnerability to high-altitude nuclear EMP attack Russia and China have had several decades to fill their weapons bag with specialized nuclear EMP weapons and to prepare to sling them over the American homeland by missile by satellite or in a fractional orbiting bomb flung into orbit with a Scud or other short-range missileDavid knew that Goliath had a soft spot in his forehead just as the Russians and Chinese are perfectly aware that the United States in the words of Representative Weldon is the ldquomost vulnerable nation on Earth to electronic warfarerdquo

104

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT Psychoanalysis

An EMP attack would cause serious psychological trauma

Foster et al 8 ldquoReport of the Commission to Assess the Threat to the United States from Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP) Attackrdquo April 2008 Dr John S Foster Jr Mr Earl Gjelde Dr William R Graham (Chairman) Dr Robert J Hermann Mr Henry (Hank) M Kluepfel Gen Richard L Lawson USAF (Ret) Dr Gordon K Soper Dr Lowell L Wood Jr Dr Joan B Woodard

The human consequences of such a scenario include the social and psychological reactions to a sudden loss of stability in the modern infrastructure over a large area of the country Loss of connectivity between the government and its populace would only exacerbate the consequences of such a scenario This analysis is based largely on selected case studies including major blackouts natural disasters and terrorist incidents in recent US history These incidents served as approximate analogs in order to best predict the sociological and psychological effects of an EMP attack Impact of an EMP AttackWhile no single event serves as a model for an EMP scenario with incidence of long lasting widespread power outage communications failure and other effects the combined analysis of the following case studies provides useful insight in determining human reactions following an EMP attackBlackouts

1048715 Northeast (1965)1048715 New York (1977)1048715 Hydro Quebec (1989)1048715 Western states (1996)1048715 Auckland New Zealand (1998)1048715 Northeast (2003)Natural Disasters1048715 Hurricane Hugo (1989)1048715 Hurricane Andrew (1992)1048715 Midwest floods (1993)Terrorist Incidents1048715 World Trade Center attack (2001)1048715 Anthrax attacks (2001)

BlackoutsIn 1965 a blackout occurred over the northeastern United States and parts of Canada New Hampshire Vermont Massachusetts Connecticut Rhode Island New York including metropolitan New York City and a small part of Pennsylvania were in the dark after operators at Consolidated Edison were forced to shut down its generators to avoid damage Street traffic was chaotic and some people were trapped in elevators but there were few instances of antisocial behavior while the lights were out5 It was a ldquolong night in the darkrdquo but the recovery proceeded without incident and citizens experienced relative civility TIME Magazine described New Yorkrsquos next blackout in 1977 as a ldquoNight of Terrorrdquo 6 Widespread chaos reigned in the city until power was restored mdash entire blocks were looted and set ablaze people flipped over cars and vans on the streets the city was in pandemonium That night 3776 arrests were made and certainly not all looters thieves and arsonists were apprehended or arrested7 While this is a dramatic example of antisocial behavior following a blackout sociologists point to extraordinary demographic and historical issues that contributed to the looting For instance extreme poverty and socioeconomic inequality plagued New York neighborhoods and many of the looters originated from the poorer sections of the city engaging in ldquovigilante redistributionrdquo by looting consumer goods and luxuries Racial tensions were high and a serial killer known as Son of Sam had recently terrorized New Yorkers

105

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Negative

106

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Not Topical

US doesnrsquot do EMP targeting

Citizendium 9 ldquoSingle Integrated Operational Planrdquo httpencitizendiumorgwikiSingle_Integrated_Operational_Plan

It is known that nuclear explosions produce varying intensities of electromagnetic pulse (EMP) which has the potential to damage electronic equipment Effective power coverage and frequencies of the electromagnetic pulse are dependent at a minimum on the yield of the nuclear weapon and the altitude of the burst[7] While general US planning and engineering documents specify means of EMP protection [8] no unclassified references suggest that any weapons targeted under SIOP are intended principally to produce EMP

EMP nukes have already been removed

Berry 8 Ken Research Coordinator ICNND ldquoNew Weapons Technologyrdquo International Commission on Nuclear Non-proliferation and Disarmament

Generally speaking the shorter pulse wave forms such as microwaves are far more effective against electronic equipment and more difficult to devise hardened protection against45 For maximum effect the electromagnetic burst must be in the upper atmosphere Thus such a weapon stationed in space could in theory knock out electrical systems including computers and communications across continent-wide distances With this in mind the Soviet Union developed nuclear weapons designed for detonations in the upper atmosphere The United States and the United Kingdom also carried out similar research It is believed that most of the nuclear EMP weapons were disarmed following the ReaganGorbachev arms talks in the 1980s

Kristensen 98 Hans M- Director of the Nuclear Information Project at the Federation of American Scientists ldquoNuclear Futures Proliferation of Weapons of Mass Destruction and US Nuclear Strategy British American Security Information Council Basic Research Report 982

It is still too early to predict whether these exotic designs will mature into actual nuclear weapons modifications But these and a wide range of other nuclear projects are clear indicators that US nuclear weapons are here to stay113 And the expansion of US nuclear doctrine is an increasingly prominent justification for new weapons

107

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Tix Links

Partisan issue

Weinberger 2-17 Sharon- CarnegieNewhouse School Legal Reporting Fellow International Reporting Project fellow at the Johns Hopkins University School of Advanced International Studies ldquoThe Boogeyman Bomb How afraid should we be of electromagnetic pulse weaponsrdquo Foreign Policy February 17 2010

But unlike some of the other national security threats on the horizon the e-bomb has emerged as a partisan issue with a core group of conservative supporters Gingrich has been among the most outspoken On Capitol Hill Rep Roscoe Bartlett (R-Md) has been one of the most ardent supporters of those pushing for an EMP defense establishing the investigatory commission and warning of a catastrophe on a scale far greater than Hurricane Katrina Despite EMPACTs claims of nonpartisanship liberals have largely dismissed the idea as conservative fear-mongering EMPs were even derisively labeled the Newt Bomb by New Republic senior editor Michael Crowley The real debate is not so much over whether EMP is a real phenomenon -- even critics of the commissions findings agree it exists -- but how much of a threat it poses to the nations infrastructure how likely it is that a group or country might build and use such a weapon and what should be done about it

Weinberger 2-17 Sharon- CarnegieNewhouse School Legal Reporting Fellow International Reporting Project fellow at the Johns Hopkins University School of Advanced International Studies ldquoThe Boogeyman Bomb How afraid should we be of electromagnetic pulse weaponsrdquo Foreign Policy February 17 2010

In the end advocates for EMP preparation could end up being their own worst enemy The unlikely scenarios they peddle lend themselves to caricature And though there are certainly some intellectual heavyweights among those who have warned about the effects of EMP -- like Johnny Foster the former head of Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory -- critics have derided EMP defense supporters for relying on the likes of science fiction writer William R Forstchen to help bolster their case By talking about time machines and turning the EMP bomb into something that goes bump in the night those advocating for better defenses risk pushing the issue further into the margins of science fiction

108

Cornell HKHANE Aff

GOP Link

GOP would support any measure to reduce EMP dangers

Smith 9 George ldquoNot Soiling Yourself Over an EMP Attack You mustrsquove voted for Obamardquo 62909The electromagnetic pulse attack lobby is now exclusively the property of the GOP Itrsquos a dumping ground for a rich a variety of Republican crazies a constituency which DD mapped for many years Like those who believe global warming to be a hoax the Republican right has electromagnetic pulse fear all locked up If one thinks about this paradox it has a neatly confounding internal anti-logic If something is backed up by hard science and poses a real danger for everyone on the planet the Republican party denies its existence If however the threat is something rather abstract to almost all Americans rests almost entirely on theoretical prediction is something not likely to ever occur at all and then only in the context of what would promise to be an all out nuclear war the GOP believes in it very strongly To paraphrase Paul Krugman characterizing GOP attitudes towards global warming You could call this crazy conspiracy theory but doing so would actually be unfair to crazy conspiracy theorists ldquoThe nightmare scenario of [EMP attack] is this A rogue nation like North Korea or a stateless terrorist like Bin Laden gets hold of a nuclear weapon and decides not to drive it into a large city but rather to launch it on a Scud-type missile straight into the atmosphere from a barge off the East Coastrdquo wrote one brilliant theoretician at Slate a couple years ago ldquoIn fact [a congressionally chartered commission] discovered that knowledge about EMP is widespread in such places as China Cuba Egypt India Iran Saddam Husseinrsquos Iraq North Korea Pakistan and Russiardquo wrote defense hawk and EMP crazy Frank Gaffney for the Washington Times also a couple of years ago

109

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT Terrorist EMP

Terrorists using EMPs is impossible

Butt 10 Yousaf M- Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics ldquoThe EMP threat fact fiction and response (part 2)rdquo The Space Review February 1 2010 httpwwwthespacereviewcomarticle15531

Thus it is not at all a simple matter even for countries with considerable resources and focused decades-long effort to build such weapons let alone pair them to reliable delivery systems As carefully argued by John Mueller in his new book Atomic Obsession it is virtually impossible for a terrorist cell to obtain the raw materials needed for a nuclear device and assemble it correctly themselves [Ref 22 p 172ndash198] Even a ldquocruderdquo U-type device is not all that ldquocruderdquo and requires the concerted effort of skilled scientists and engineers Any weapon produced by a terrorist cell would likely be a one of a kind and would have to remain untested For a terrorist group to then mate this weapon to a ballistic missile and successfully carry out an EMP strike beggars belief As John Pike director of GlobalSecurityorg has said ldquoIt is just very difficult to imagine how terrorists are going to be able to lay hands on a nuclear-tipped missile and launch it and reprogram it in such a way that it would be a high-altitude burst like thatrdquo Dr Philip Coyle former Pentagon director of operational test and evaluation has stated that the EMP commissionrsquos report appeared to ldquoextrapolate calculations of extreme weapons effects as if they were a proven fact and further to puff up rogue nations and terrorists with the capabilities of giantsrdquo The 2009 Strategic Posture Commission puts it more delicately by saying that ldquothe Commission is divided over how imminent a threat this ishelliprdquo If a terrorist cell miraculously built such a weapon they are likely to explode their ldquocrown jewelrdquo in a simple spectacular ground-burst that will destroy a large part of a city and not risk the complicationsmdashand likely failuremdashof a lofted EMP strike that will if all goes according to their plan cause casualties via unpredictable secondary effects upon a limited part of some of the nationrsquos infrastructure The risk versus reward calculation for both terrorists cells and so-called ldquoroguerdquo states would almost certainly force their hand to a spectacular and direct ground burst in preference to a unreliable and uncertain EMP strike A weapon of mass destruction is preferable to a weapon of mass disruption

Terrorists will use HPMs instead

Wilson 4 Clay- Specialist in Technology and National Security Foreign Affairs Defense and Trade Division ldquoHigh Altitude Electromagnetic Pulse (HEMP) and High Power Microwave (HPM) Devices Threat Assessmentsrdquo Congressional Research Service August 20 2004

In addition while HEMP weapons are large in scale and require a nuclear capability along with technology to launch high altitude missiles HPM weapons are smaller in scale involve a much lower level of technology and may be within the capability of many non-state organizations HPM can cause damage to computers similar to HEMP although the effects are limited to a much smaller area The technical accessibility lower cost and the apparent vulnerability of US civilian electronic equipment could make small-scale HPM weapons attractive for terrorist groups in the future

110

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT State EMP

States wouldnrsquot use EMPs

Butt 10 Yousaf M- Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics ldquoThe EMP threat fact fiction and response (part 2)rdquo The Space Review February 1 2010 httpwwwthespacereviewcomarticle15531

A state would be highly unlikely to launch an EMP strike from their own territory because the rocket could be traced to the country of origin and would probably result in nuclear or massive conventional retaliation by the US The EMP commission also considers adversarial nations carrying out a shipborne EMP attack that would be less traceable However even so there would some small risk of trace-back that would give the leadership in such nations pause While nuclear forensics are not well enough developed to assuredly ascribe the origin of a nuclear explosion even their current state of development would in some measure dissuade the leaders of a nation from seriously contemplating such an attack Furthermore the US certainly has data via its DSP satellites on the infrared (IR) signatures of the rocket exhausts from the missiles of various countries Though these signatures are probably virtually identical for the ScudShahabNo-dong family of missiles the nations which may entertain such attacks do not necessarily know whether eg the DSP data can discriminate between a NK Nodong versus an Iranian Shahabs perhaps due to differences in fuel andor subtle design idiosyncrasies This is data only the US has and it has an inherent deterrent value to nations thinking about launching an EMP strike via a ship-launched ballistic missile This is almost certainly the case if say Iran were to use its solid rocket motor technology to launch such a strikemdashif and when Iran obtains nuclear weapons of course In such a case the burn time-profile and solid-motor IR signatures could probably be used to tie the missile to a nation Furthermore the leaders of a nation contemplating such an attack would have to carefully consider what would happen in case the warhead was not delivered properly If it fell short andor did not explode it may be possible for US engineers and scientists to ascribe a national origin given the forensic material For the leadership of any nation to chance such an attack they must be almost suicidally optimistic they would have to presume that everything would go perfectly Even so it may still be possible to identify the country of origin which would invite massive US retribution

States wouldnrsquot give terrorists EMPs

Butt 10 Yousaf M- Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics ldquoThe EMP threat fact fiction and response (part 2)rdquo The Space Review February 1 2010 httpwwwthespacereviewcomarticle15531

What about an adversarial nation ldquosub-contractingrdquo its dirty work to a terrorist cell Again there would be substantial doubt in the nationrsquos leadership as to whether or not forensic evidence (whether the device exploded or not) could tie them to the weapon In any case as argued by Mueller [Ref 22 p 163] it is highly unlikely that a nation would give one of its crown jewels to an unpredictable terrorist cell At least in the case of Iran this view is supported by in-depth research done by authors at the National Defense University who conclude ldquo[W]e judge and nearly all experts consulted agree that Iran would not as a matter of state policy give up its control of such weapons to terrorist organizations and risk direct US or Israeli retributionrdquo

111

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT RussiaChina EMP

China and Russia would never EMP attack the US

Butt 10 Yousaf M- Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics ldquoThe EMP threat fact fiction and response (part 2)rdquo The Space Review February 1 2010 httpwwwthespacereviewcomarticle15531

Though they possess the technological know-how to fabricate a powerful EMP device the possibility of China or Russia carrying out such an attack is virtually nil Not only for the regular military deterrent reasons but also post-Cold War our economies are intimately linked which amounts to an inherent economic deterrent The latter is likely the more relevant deterrent [Ref 22 p 65] We owe China tremendous sums of money they need us as a market and both the US and China require Russian oil via intertwined world markets Although the EMP commissioners have offered a Chinese-language PowerPoint presentation outlining the effects of EMP devices as evidence that China has an interest in such weapons this presentation is actually of Taiwanese origin [ldquoElectromagnetic Pulse Attack and Defenserdquo by Dr Chien Chung] and it is not pertinent to any official Chinese military doctrine

112

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT Proliferators EMP

New nuclear states will not carry out EMP attacks

Butt 10 Yousaf M- Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics ldquoThe EMP threat fact fiction and response (part 2)rdquo The Space Review February 1 2010 httpwwwthespacereviewcomarticle15531

More importantly the DoD itself has weighed in on the issue in its ldquoMilitarily Critical Technologies Listrdquo This is a detailed compendium of the technologies the DoD assesses as critical to maintaining superior United States military capabilities Part II ldquoWeapons of Mass Destruction Technologiesrdquo addresses those technologies required for development integration or employment of biological chemical or nuclear weapons and their means of delivery against the US This document states that ldquoHEMP can pose a serious threat to US military systems when even a single high-altitude nuclear explosion occurs In principle even a new nuclear proliferator could execute such a strike In practice however it seems unlikely that such a state would use one of its scarce warheads to inflict damage which must be considered secondary to the primary effects of blast shock and thermal pulse Furthermore a HEMP attack must use a relatively large warhead to be effective (perhaps on the order of one megaton) and new proliferators are unlikely to be able to construct such a device much less make it small enough to be lofted to high altitude by a ballistic missile or space launcherrdquo Lastly General Robert T Marsh former Chairman of the Presidentrsquos Commission on Critical Infrastructure Protection concluded (in 1997) that he did not ldquosee any evidence that suggests capabilities seriously threatening our critical infrastructurehellip There are many easier less costly and more dramatic ways for terrorists to use nuclear weapons than delivery to a high altitude Such an event is so unlikely and difficult to achieve that I do not believe it warrants serious concern at this timerdquo

Attacks will be deterred now

Riddle 4 Lieutenant Colonel Thomas C- United States Army ldquoNuclear High Altitude Electromagnetic Pulse ndash Implications For Homeland Security And Homeland Defenserdquo US Army War College 03 May 2004

Similarly the decision to implement an earlier deployment of an initial ground-based interceptor and improved ballistic missile tracking capabilities will support the improved passive and active defenses called for in the NSS 50 Also the convincing demonstration of the continuing efficiency and effectiveness of Americarsquos global precision strike capabilities during Operation IRAQI FREEDOM is a clear indication that multi-dimensional counterforce capabilities remain a viable element of Americarsquos counter-proliferation capabilities that may be used if required to prevent a HEMP attack on the United States Finally the United Statesrsquo demonstrated willingness to conduct preemptive strikes to neutralize WMD under the concept of imminent defense adds an unmistakable dimension to the concept of deterrence for those seeking to acquire weapons of mass destruction51

113

Cornell HKHANE Aff

EMPacts False

Impacts of high altitude nuclear explosions are overstated

Ruppe 4 David ldquoPlausibility of EMP Threat Classified Expert Saysrdquo Global Security Newswire September 24 2004

Philip Coyle who was the assistant secretary of defense and Pentagon director of operational test and evaluation during the Clinton administration however questioned the certainty of the reportrsquos conclusion that smaller kiloton-scale nuclear weapons could be developed to produce the catastrophic consequences described by the report ldquoThe US military does not know how to do this today and has no way of demonstrating the capability in the future without returning to nuclear testingrdquo he said by e-mail ldquoThe fact is that a rogue nation or terrorists that tried this would be very unsure of the results and would risk massive retaliation from the United States for having achieved nothingrdquo he wrote Coyle who also worked at the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory for more than 30 years also said it is uncertain that even a massive nuclear weapon would cause the scale of destruction the commission predicted

Transportation would survive

Chisholm 5 Patrick ldquoProtect our electronics against EMP attackrdquo Christian Science Monitor December 19 2005

Unlike what was depicted in the 1983 movie The Day After automobiles may keep functioning after an EMP attack The electronics within automobiles enjoy robust shielding because of the harsh electromagnetic environment on existing roadways Aircraft have even stronger electromagnetic shielding so they are unlikely to fall out of the sky Some of the [aircrafts] equipment may not work but the propulsion and control system usually is pretty robust said Dr William A Radasky president of Metatech Corp a consulting firm specializing in electromagnetic environment analysis

114

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT Strait of Hormuz

The US would restore oil within days

Klare 2 Michael- Five Colleges professor of Peace and World Security Studies boards of directors of Human Rights Watch and the Arms Control Association ldquoResource Wars The New Landscape of Global Conflictrdquo p 73

Just as it would resist any new Iraqi assault on Kuwait the United States would greet any Iranian move to impede Persian Gulf shipping with an immediate and crushing military response Tomahawk cruise missiles and radar-guided bombs would most likely be used to demolish Iranian ships missile batteries airfields and communications facilities Ships and aircraft already deployed in the region would carry out most of the attacks backed up by additional units sent in from the United States and Europe And while the Iranians might succeed in damaging a number of tankers their ability to imperil the oil flow would quickly be eliminated by superior American firepower4s

115

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Alt Cause- Geomagnetic Storms

Geomagnetic storms make the impact inevitable

Butt 10 Yousaf M- Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics ldquoThe EMP threat fact fiction and response (part 2)rdquo The Space Review February 1 2010 httpwwwthespacereviewcomarticle15531

For the reasons outlined above it is highly unlikely that any adversary would choose tomdashor in the case of a terrorist cell even be remotely capable ofmdashcarrying out a nuclear EMP strike against the US However it is virtually guaranteed that a powerful geomagnetic storm capable of knocking out a significant section of the US electrical grid will occur within the next few decades In fact this may well happen even within next few years as we approach the next period of elevated solar activity known as ldquosolar maximumrdquo which is forecast to peak in 2013 Geomagnetic storms are E3-like low-intensity but long-lasting and low-frequency coupling to long-lines The first recorded evidence of space weather effects on technology was in 1847 when currents were registered in electric telegraph wires Later in 1859 a major failure of telegraph systems in New England and Europe coincided with a large solar flare called the ldquoCarrington Eventrdquo after astronomer Richard Carrington who witnessed the instigating flare However the real modern-era wakeup call to geomagnetic susceptibility of our infrastructure was the (moderate intensity) geomagnetic storm that shut down the entire Hydro Quebec grid in March 1989 There were also reports of computer failures in August of that year in Toronto Canada (which possibly indicate that the associated geomagnetic activity had considerably faster components than just E3) Geomagnetically induced currents (GICs) in long-line power delivery systems are caused by the rate-of-change of the geomagnetic field just as in an E3 pulse Thus the severity of such geomagnetic field disturbances is measured in nanotesla per minute (nTmin) Experience with modern-day infrastructure indicates failures can result even at relatively low-threat intensities For example the instigating activity associated with the Hydro Quebec collapse mentioned above only reached an intensity of ~480 nTmin Solar storms on other occasions have been known to produce geomagnetic disturbances of ~2000 nTmin and a solar storm on May 14ndash15 in 1921 may have produced a disturbance of 4800 nTmin [23] As Mr Kappenman states [23] ldquoanalysis indicates that storms withexcursions of ~2800 nTmin have been observed at geomagnetic latitudes of concern for modern day infrastructures Further anecdotal evidence suggests that ~5000 nTmin may have occurred during the Great Geomagnetic Storm of May 1921rdquo To understand the effects of such GIC on the electric grid we may examine the August 2003 Northeast Blackout which was not geomagnetically induced (It reportedly originated when high-voltage power lines came in contact with ldquoovergrown treesrdquo) This outage affected the Northeast US and parts of Canada and more than 200 power plants including several nuclear plants were shut down as a result of the electricity cutoff Other effects included loss of water pressure possible sewage contamination gridlock various other transportation problems (because of secondary effects on railways airlines and gas stations) and disruption of oil refineriesrsquo operations Phone service was stressed due to the high call volume and several radio and television stations went off the air It is estimated that the one-day blackout cost $7ndash10 billion in spoiled food lost production overtime wages and other related expenses inflicted on more than one-seventh of the US population [24] A similar vegetation-induced outage in Europe occurred on September 28 2003 when ldquoat 301 am one of the main north-south transit lines ndash the Lukmanier transmission line ndash shut down following a flash-over between a conductor cable and a treerdquo The blackout affected about 56 million people although electricity was restored gradually (about 3ndash6 hours) in most places and in most cities electricity were powered on again during the morning Rolling blackouts reportedly continued to affect about 5 of the population for the next two days as repairs were being made Although the August and September 2003 outage was not geomagnetic in origin solar outbursts during late October and early November 2003 triggered severe geomagnetic storms with wide-ranging effects that were described as follows in a 2008 National Academy of Sciences (NAS) study [25] The Sydkraft utility group in Sweden reported that strong geomagnetically induced currents (GIC) over Northern Europe caused transformer problems and even a system failure and subsequent blackout Radiation storm levels were high enough to prompt NASA officials to issue a flight directive to the [International Space Station] astronauts to take precautionary shelter Airlines took unprecedented actions in their high latitude routes to avoid the high radiation levels and communication blackout areas Rerouted flights cost airlines $10000 to $100000 per flight Numerous anomalies were reported by deep space missions and by satellites at all orbits GSFC Space Science Mission Operations Team indicated that approximately 59 of the Earth and Space science missions were impacted The storms are suspected to have caused the loss of the $640 million ADEOS-2 spacecraft On board the ADEOS-2 was the $150 million NASA SeaWinds instrument Due to the variety and intensity of this solar activity outbreak most industries vulnerable to space weather experienced some degree of impact to their operations Even more serious effects can be expected during future powerful geomagnetic storms To quote the NAS study [25] Because of the interconnectedness of critical infrastructures in modern society the impacts of severe space weather events can go beyond disruption of existing technical systems and lead to short-term as well as to long-term collateral socioeconomic disruptionshellip Collateral effects of a longer-term outage would likely includehellip disruption of the transportation communication banking and finance systems and government services the breakdown of the distribution of potable water owing to pump failure and the loss of perishable foods and medications because of lack of refrigeration The resulting loss of services for a significant period of time in even one region of the country could affect the entire nation and have international impacts as well Our electric power grid has continued to become more vulnerable to disruption from geomagnetic storms For example the power delivery system is now operating closer to margin than in the past As Kappenman states ldquomany of the things that we have done to increase operational efficiency and haul power long distances have inadvertently and unknowingly escalated the risks from geomagnetic stormsrdquo [25] The possible extent of a power system collapse from a 4800 nTmin geomagnetic storm (centered at 50deg geomagnetic latitude) is shown in Figure 2 Similar levelsmdash10 times those experienced during the March 1989 stormmdashwere reached during the great magnetic storm of May 14ndash15 1921 A nuclear weapon would need to be a ~multi-megaton size to cause the equivalent E3 damage [15] The most serious outcome of such power delivery system failures is damage to the transformers although other critical systems on the grid are also at risk As the NAS study points out transformers experience ldquoexcessive levels of internal heating brought on by stray flux when GICs cause a transformerrsquos magnetic core to saturate and to spill flux outside the normal core steel magnetic circuithellip previous well-documented cases have involved heating failures that caused melting and burn-through of large-amperage copper windings and leads in these transformers These multi-ton apparatus generally cannot be repaired in the field and if damaged in this manner they need to be replaced with new units which have manufacture lead times of 12 months or morerdquo Metatech Corp estimates that more than 300 large extra-high voltage (EHV) transformers would be exposed to levels of GIC sufficiently high to place these units at risk of failure or permanent damage requiring replacement [25] Figure 3 shows an estimate of percent loss of EHV transformer capacity by state for a 4800 nTmin threat environment such as might occur during a storm of the magnitude of the May 1921 event As a recent article in the journal Science states ldquoThe surging power-line currents induced by a severe solar storm could push the grid into uncharted territoryrdquo [26] In summary current US grid operational procedures are based largely on limited experience generally do not reduce GIC flows and are unlikely to be adequate for historically large disturbance events Historically large storms have a potential to cause power grid blackouts and transformer damage of unprecedented proportions long-term blackouts and lengthy restoration times and chronic shortages for multiple years are possible [25]

116

Cornell HKHANE Aff

China Turn

High Altitude Nuclear Explosions are key to dissuade China

Castle 6 Colonel Douglas A ldquoShaping Chinarsquos Rise Through Strategic Frictionrdquo USAWC Strategy Research Project March 2006

Continued strengthening of the US military can also decelerate Chinarsquos expanding potency Washington must not allow China to outpace Americarsquos conventional or nuclear capabilities and must maintain its clear technological advantages If the US can stay significantly ahead of China in weapons technology ndash such as advanced missile defense electromagnetic pulse (EMP) weapons and space utilization systems ndash then China would be forced to spend inordinate amounts of money to develop a costly defense infrastructure thereby further delaying its power build-up However this plan depends upon safeguarding technology from espionage corporate transmission and allied governmental transfers to prevent a free ride for China Chinarsquos military growth is disconcerting given that it faces no real regional challenge128 Its development of intercontinental nuclear missiles as well as land- and sea-launched weapons poses a significant threat to the continental US as well as forward-based land and maritime US forces Although China has publicly endorsed a ldquono first-strikerdquo strategic nuclear policy 129 its ldquocult of defenserdquo predilection increases the likelihood of a first-strike scenario130 America is especially vulnerable to the effects of a high-altitude EMP-producing detonation Such an attack would cripple Americarsquos economy and infrastructure yet the US has no publicly-stated policy of response131 An effective operational US anti-missile defense shield and credible EMP deterrence are thus essential to American security

Tellis 7 Ashley J- Senior Associate at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace ldquoChinas Military Space Strategyrdquo Survival Volume 49 Issue 3 September 2007

This has led some observers such as US Senator Jon Kyl to conclude that the solution to redressing emerging American space vulnerabilities in the context of competition with China lies in developing among other things US offensive counterspace capabilities90 These will almost certainly be required if for no other reason than to deter Beijings use of anti-space weaponry and to hold at risk its own emerging assets in space which are likely to become even more important for both economic and military purposes as China evolves into a great power91 Offensive American counterspace instruments serve the limited but critical purpose of raising the costs of Chinas evolving space-denial strategy increasing the probability that Beijing will desist from asymmetric attacks on US space assets

117

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT PGS Prolif

Conventional strike doesnrsquot lead to prolif

Guthe 2 Kurt- Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments ldquoThe Nuclear Posture Review How Is the ldquoNew Triadrdquo Newrdquo 2002

Some argue that greater US reliance on long-range precision-guided conventional weapons will increase the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction They claim that adversaries unable to match US nonnuclear strike capabilities will acquire weapons of mass destruction as an asymmetric counter This reasoning ignores the facts The first major demonstration of the operational effectiveness of US precision-guided weapons was the Gulf War of 1991 Foreign militaries were greatly impressed by the key contribution of precision weapons to the US victory Those hostile to the United States recognized the need for strategies tactics and capabilities to offset the US advantage Weapons of mass destruction have been seen as one response44 But every potential adversary of the United States had or was pursuing nuclear biological or chemical weapons well before 199145 While adversaries may see weapons of mass destruction as counters to US precision-guided weapons US nonnuclear strike capabilities have not been the cause of proliferation which results from political military and technological factors that vary with each country Abandoning this advantage would not reverse proliferation but would seriously impair the ability of the United States to defend itself and others Were certain allies and friends to lose confidence in US defense commitments those countries might seek security in nuclear weapons of their own increasing nuclear proliferation The long-range precision guided weapons of the New Triad offer options for deterring or otherwise preventing WMD use thus contributing to US efforts to deal with the existing problem of proliferation

118

Cornell HKHANE Aff

No Solvency- Conventional EMPs

No Solvency- the US has conventional EMPs that are just as powerful

Muumlller amp Schoumlrnig 1 Harald and Niklas- United Nations Institute for Disarmament Research ldquoRMA and nuclear weapons A calamitous link for arms controlrdquo Disarmament Forum 2001(4)

An alternative way to disrupt the opponentrsquos communication is the use of an Electro-Magnetic Pulse (EMP) weapon which produces a short wave of an intense electromagnetic pulse ruining basic electronic components in communication gear (and of course all electronically based equipment) Until recently a high altitude nuclear explosion was the only means to generate an EMP strong enough to seriously harm electronic devices in enemy territory Tests performed in the early 1960s confirmed that a detonation of a 14 megaton bomb 400 kilometres in orbit resulted in failures of electronic systems 1300 kilometres away13 The effects would be even more severe today as low powered electronic equipment tends to be more sensitive to voltage swings Up to now these scenarios based on nuclear weapons were banned by the Outer Space Treaty (OST) of 1967 signed by virtually all nations with certain and potential nuclear capabilities (with the exception of North Korea) However according to unconfirmed sources recent scientific progress in the United States has led to the design of workable conventional EMP weapons generating a less far reaching but similar shockwave14 With this development severe consequences for the OST are inevitable as nuclear-capable countries may feel the need to deploy nuclear EMP weapons in space as a counter-deterrent

119

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Conventional EMPs Shift

Military leaders would shift to HPM weapons ndash worse than an EMP because itrsquos just as dangerous but more usable

Global Security 5[ldquoHigh-power microwave (HPM) E-Bombrdquo httpwwwglobalsecurityorgmilitarysystemsmunitionshpmhtm]

High-power microwave (HPM) sources have been under investigation for several years as potential weapons for a variety of combat sabotage and terrorist applications Due to classification restrictions details of this work are relatively unknown outside the military community and its contractors A key point to recognize is the insidious nature of HPM Due to the gigahertz-band frequencies (4 to 20 GHz) involved HPM has the capability to penetrate not only radio front-ends but also the most minute shielding penetrations throughout the equipment At sufficiently high levels as discussed the potential exists for significant damage to devices and circuits For these reasons HPM should be of interest to the broad spectrum of EMC practitioners Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP) and High Powered Microwave (HMP) Weapons offer a significant capability against electronic equipment susceptible to damage by transient power surges This weapon generates a very short intense energy pulse producing a transient surge of thousands of volts that kills semiconductor devices The conventional EMP and HMP weapons can disable non-shielded electronic devices including practically any modern electronic device within the effective range of the weapon The effectiveness of an EMP device is determined by the power generated and the characteristic of the pulse The shorter pulse wave forms such as microwaves are far more effective against electronic equipment and more difficult to harden against Current efforts focus on converting the energy from an explosive munitions to supply the electromagnetic pulse This method produces significant levels of directionally focused electromagnetic energy Future advances may provide the compactness needed to weaponize the capability in a bomb or missile warhead Currently the radius of the weapon is not as great as nuclear EMP effects Open literature sources indicate that effective radii of ldquohundreds of meters or morerdquo are possible EMP and HPM devices can disable a large variety of military or infrastructure equipment over a relatively broad area This can be useful for dispersed targets A difficulty is determining the appropriate level of energy to achieve the desired effects This will require detailed knowledge of the target equipment and the environment (walls buildings) The obvious counter-measure is the shielding or hardening of electronic equipment Currently only critical military equipment is hardened eg strategic command and control systems Hardening of existing equipment is difficult and adds significant weight and expense As a result a large variety of commercial and military equipment will be susceptible to this type of attack The US Navy reportedly used a new class of highly secret non-nuclear electromagnetic pulse warheads during the opening hours of the Persian Gulf War to disrupt and destroy Iraqi electronics systems The warheads converted the energy of a conventional explosion into a pulse of radio energy The effect of the microwave attacks on Iraqi air defense and headquarters was difficult to determine because the effects of the HPM blasts were obscured by continuous jamming the use of stealthy F-117 aircraft and the destruction of Iraqs electrical grid The warheads used during the Gulf War were experimental warheads not standard weapons deployed with fielded forces Col William G Heckathorn commander of the Phillips Research Site and the deputy director of the Directed Energy Directorate of the Air Force Research Laboratory was presented the Legion of Merit medal during special retirement ceremonies in May 1998 In a citation accompanying the medal Col Heckathorn was praised for having provided superior vision leadership and direct guidance that resulted in the first high-power microwave weapon prototypes delivered to the warfighter The citation noted that Col Heckathorn united all directed energy development within Army Navy and Air Force which resulted in an efficient focused warfighter-oriented tri-service research program In December of 1994 he came to Kirtland to become the director of the Advanced Weapons and Survivability Directorate at the Phillips Laboratory Last year he became the commander of the Phillips Laboratory while still acting as the director of the Advanced Weapons and Survivability Directorate As with a conventional munition a microwave munition is a single shot munition that has a similar blast and fragmentation radius However while the explosion produces a blast the primary mission is to generate the energy that powers the microwave device Thus for a microwave munition the primary kill mechanism is the microwave energy which greatly increases the radius and the footprint by in some cases several orders of magnitude For example a 2000-pound microwave munition will have a minimum radius of approximately 200 meters or footprint of approximately 126000 square meters Studies have examined the incorporation of a high power microwave weapon into the weapons bay of a conceptual uninhabited combat aerial vehicle The CONOPS electromagnetic compatibility and hardening (to avoid a self-kill) power requirements and potential power supplies and antenna characteristics have been analyzed Extensive simulations of potential antennas have been performed The simulations examined the influence of the aircraft structure on the antenna patterns and the levels of leakage through apertures in the weapons bay Other investigations examined issues concerning the electromagnetic shielding effectiveness of composite aircraft structures Collateral damage from E-bombs is dependent on the size and design of the specific bomb An E-bomb that utilizes explosive power to obtain its damaging microwaves will result in typical blast and shrapnel damage Ideally an E-Bomb would be designed to minimize and dissipate most of the mechanical collateral damage Human exposure to microwave radiation is hazardous within several meters of the epicenter However there is a relatively low risk of bodily damage at further distances Any non-military electronics within range of the E-bomb that have not been protected have a high probability of being damaged or destroyed The best way to defend against E-bomb attack is to destroy the platform or delivery vehicle in which the E-bomb resides Another method of protection is to keep all essential electronics within an electrically conductive enclosure called a Faraday cage This prevents the damaging electromagentic field from interacting with vital equipment The problem with Faraday cages is that most vital equipment needs to be in contact with the outside world This contact point can allow the electromagentic field to enter the cage which ultimately renders the enclosure useless There are ways to protect against these Faraday cage flaws but the fact remains that this is a dangerous weakpoint In most circumstances E-bombs are categorized as non-lethal weapons because of the minimal collateral damage they create The E-bombs non-lethal categorization gives military commanders more politically-friendly options to choose from

120

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Conventional EMPs Shift

HPM triggers all your impacts

Danchev 6 Dancho Independent Security Consultancy Threat Intelligence Analysis (OSINTCyber Counter Intelligence) and Competitive Intelligence researcher ldquoEMP Attacks - Electronic Domination in Reverserdquo httpddanchevblogspotcom200605emp-attacks-electronic-domination-inhtml]

Why wouldnt a reported sponsor of terrorist nations wage EMP warfare or even try to over the US Because they would have the US in their backyard in less than a day but the opportunity to balance the powers or achieve temporary military advantage given the attack remains undetected is a tempting factor for future developments -- the ongoing miniaturization and the fact that intense energy effects can be can be produced without an A-Bomb makes it even worse Surgical HPM and EMP attacks without fear of retaliation is what possible adversaries could be aiming at and of course portability Other HPM weapons being tested by the military are portable and re-usable through battery-power and are effective when fired miles away from a target These weapons can also be focused like a laser beam and tuned to an appropriate frequency in order to penetrate electronics that are heavily shielded against a nuclear attack The deepest bunkers with the thickest concrete walls reportedly are not safe from such a beam if they have even a single unprotected wire reaching the surface

HPM or conventional EMP will be substituted

Krepinevich 1 Andrew- defense policy analyst executive director of the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments ldquoBeyond the Two-MTW Posturerdquo Testimony before the House Committee on Armed Services on June 20 2001

Strategic Strike The United States military is capable of moving beyond near-total reliance on nuclear weapons for prompt effective strategic strike operations Precision munitions have a significant substitution potential with respect to nuclear weapons Various forms of electronic attack (ie IW strikes conventionally generated EMP and HPM strikes) may also possess a significant substitution potential Such weapons are far more ldquouseablerdquo than nuclear weapons and may better deter an enemyrsquos attempts at coercion or aggression They can enable us to reduce the size of our nuclear arsenal (while encouraging others to follow suit)

121

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT Warfighting Advantage

Their warfighting advantage is logically flawed

Burnham 83 David- co-director of the Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse (TRAC) ldquoUS Fears One Bomb Could Cripple The Nationrdquo The New York Times

Many experts question the likelihood that any nuclear war would be limited to the exchange of a handful of nuclear explosions My personal feeling is that if an attack ever came it would be a massive one on our cities and military bases and the effect of EMP on the civilian economy would be irrelevant said Dr Gordon K Soper a senior scientist in the Defense Nuclear Agency But there has been a good deal of talk about the possibility of a protracted nuclear war Mr Latham the Pentagon official expressed the same kind of ambivalence I dont think a cheap shot is likely but there is no way we can know for sure The possibility of using EMP as a oneshot weapon is not considered likely because of impossibility of predicting the exact response

122

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Nuclear Winter Imagery Good

Forecasts of nuclear winter spur change to abandon nuclear madness

Robock amp Toon 10 Alan- Department of Environmental Sciences Rutgers University and Owen Brian- Director and Professor Department of Atmospheric and Oceanic Sciences University of Colorado ldquoLocal Nuclear War Global Sufferingrdquo Scientific American January 2010

Twenty-five years ago international teams of scientists showed that a nuclear war between the US and the Soviet Union could produce a ldquonuclear winterrdquo The smoke from vast fires started by bombs dropped on cities and industrial areas would envelop the planet and absorb so much sunlight that the earthrsquos surface would get cold dark and dry killing plants worldwide and eliminating our food supply Surface temperatures would reach winter values in the summer International discussion about this prediction fueled largely by astronomer Carl Sagan forced the leaders of the two superpowers to confront the possibility that their arms race endangered not just themselves but the entire human race Countries large and small demanded disarmament Nuclear winter became an important factor in ending the nuclear arms race Looking back later in 2000 former Soviet Union leader Mikhail S Gorbachev observed ldquoModels made by Russian and American scientists showed that a nuclear war would result in a nuclear winter that would be extremely destructive to all life on earth the knowledge of that was a great stimulus to us to people of honor and morality to actrdquo Why discuss this topic now that the cold war has ended Because as other nations continue to acquire nuclear weapons smaller regional nuclear wars could create a similar global catastrophe New analyses reveal that a conflict between India and Pakistan for example in which 100 nuclear bombs were dropped on cities and industrial areasmdashonly 04 percent of the worldrsquos more than 25000 warheadsmdashwould produce enough smoke to cripple global agriculture A regional war could cause widespread loss of life even in countries far away from the conflict

123

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Regional Nuclear War

Newest studies indicate small scale nuclear wars would lead to extinction

Robock amp Toon 10 Alan- Department of Environmental Sciences Rutgers University and Owen Brian- Director and Professor Department of Atmospheric and Oceanic Sciences University of Colorado ldquoLocal Nuclear War Global Sufferingrdquo Scientific American January 2010

By deploying modern computers and modern climate models the two of us and our colleagues have shown that not only were the ideas of the 1980s correct but the effects would last for at least 10 years much longer than previously thought And by doing calculations that assess decades of time only now possible with fast current computers and by including in our calculations the oceans and the entire atmosphere mdash also only now possiblemdashwe have found that the smoke from even a regional war would be heated and lofted by the sun and remain suspended in the upper atmosphere for years continuing to block sunlight and to cool the earth India and Pakistan which together have more than 100 nuclear weapons may be the most worrisome adversaries capable of a regional nuclear conflict today But other countries besides the US and Russia (which have thousands) are well endowed China France and the UK have hundreds of nuclear warheads Israel has more than 80 North Korea has about 10 and Iran may well be trying to make its own In 2004 this situation prompted one of us (Toon) and later Rich Turco of the University of California Los Angeles both veterans of the 1980s investigations to begin evaluating what the global environmental effects of a regional nuclear war would be and to take as our test case an engagement between India and Pakistan The latest estimates by David Albright of the Institute for Science and International Security and by Robert S Norris of the Natural Resources Defense Council are that India has 50 to 60 assembled weapons (with enough plutonium for 100) and that Pakistan has 60 weapons Both countries continue to increase their arsenals Indian and Pakistani nuclear weapons tests indicate that the yield of the warheads would be similar to the 15-kiloton explosive yield (equivalent to 15000 tons of TNT) of the bomb the US used on Hiroshima Toon and Turco along with Charles Bardeen now at the National Center for Atmospheric Research modeled what would happen if 50 Hiroshimasize bombs were dropped across the highest population-density targets in Pakistan and if 50 similar bombs were also dropped across India Some people maintain that nuclear weapons would be used in only a measured way But in the wake of chaos fear and broken communications that would occur once a nuclear war began we doubt leaders would limit attacks in any rational manner This likelihood is particularly true for Pakistan which is small and could be quickly overrun in a conventional conflict Peter R Lavoy of the Naval Postgraduate School for example has analyzed the ways in which a conflict between India and Pakistan might occur and argues that Pakistan could face a decision to use all its nuclear arsenal quickly before India swamps its military bases with traditional forces Obviously we hope the number of nuclear targets in any future war will be zero but policy makers and voters should know what is possible Toon and Turco found that more than 20 million people in the two countries could die from the blasts fires and radioactivitymdasha horrible slaughter But the investigators were shocked to discover that a tremendous amount of smoke would be generated given the megacities in the two countries assuming each fire would burn the same area that actually did burn in Hiroshima and assuming an amount of burnable material per person based on various studies They calculated that the 50 bombs exploded in Pakistan would produce three teragrams of smoke and the 50 bombs hitting India would generate four (one teragram equals a million metric tons) Satellite observations of actual forest fires have shown that smoke can be lofted up through the troposphere (the bottom layer of the atmosphere) and sometimes then into the lower stratosphere (the layer just above extending to about 30 miles) Toon and Turco also did some ldquoback of the enveloperdquo calculations of the possible climate impact of the smoke should it enter the stratosphere The large magnitude of such effects made them realize they needed help from a climate modeler It turned out that one of us (Robock) was already working with Luke Oman now at the NASA Goddard Space Flight Center who was finishing his PhD at Rutgers University on the climatic effects of volcanic eruptions and with Georgiy L Stenchikov also at Rutgers and an author of the first Russian work on nuclear winter They developed a climate model that could be used fairly easily for the nuclear blast calculations Robock and his colleagues being conservative put five teragrams of smoke into their modeled upper troposphere over India and Pakistan on an imaginary May 15 The model calculated how winds would blow the smoke around the world and how the smoke particles would settle out from the atmosphere The smoke covered all the continents within two weeks The black sooty smoke absorbed sunlight warmed and rose into the stratosphere Rain never falls there so the air is never cleansed by precipitation particles very slowly settle out by falling with air resisting them Soot particles are small with an average diameter of only 01 micron (μm) and so drift down very slowly They also rise during the daytime as they are heated by the sun repeatedly delaying their elimination The calculations showed that the smoke would reach far higher into the upper stratosphere than the sulfate particles that are produced by episodic volcanic eruptions Sulfate particles are transparent and absorb much less sunlight than soot and are also bigger typically 05 μm The volcanic particles remain airborne for about two years but smoke from nuclear fires would last a decade Killing Frosts in Summer The climatic response to the smoke was surprising Sunlight was immediately reduced cooling the planet to temperatures lower than any experienced for the past 1000 years The global average cooling of about 125 degrees Celsius (23 degrees Fahrenheit) lasted for several years and even after 10 years the temperature was still 05 degree C colder than normal The models also showed a 10 percent reduction in precipitation worldwide Precipitation river flow and soil moisture all decreased because blocking sunlight reduces evaporation and weakens the hydrologic cycle Drought was largely

124

Cornell HKHANE Aff

concentrated in the lower latitudes however because global cooling would retard the Hadley air circulation pattern in the tropics which produces a large fraction of global precipitation In critical areas such as the Asian monsoon regions rainfall dropped by as much as 40 percent The cooling might not seem like much but even a small dip can cause severe consequences Cooling and diminished sunlight would for example shorten growing seasons in the midlatitudes More insight into the effects of cooling came from analyses of the aftermaths of massive volcanic eruptions Every once in a while such eruptions produce temporary cooling for a year or two The largest of the past 500 years the 1815 Tambora eruption in Indonesia blotted the sun and produced global cooling of about 05 degree C for a year 1816 became known as ldquoThe Year without a Summerrdquo or ldquoEighteen Hundred and Froze to Deathrdquo In New England although the average summer temperature was lowered only a few degrees crop-killing frosts occurred in every month After the first frost farmers replanted crops only to see them killed by the next frost The price of grain skyrocketed the price of livestock plummeted as farmers sold the animals they could not feed and a mass migration began from New England to the Midwest as people followed reports of fertile land there In Europe the weather was so cold and gloomy that the stock market collapsed widespread famines occurred and 18-year-old Mary Shelley was inspired to write Frankenstein Certain strains of crops such as winter wheat can withstand lower temperatures but a lack of sunlight inhibits their ability to grow In our scenario daylight would filter through the high smoky haze but on the ground every day would seem to be fully overcast Agronomists and farmers could not develop the necessary seeds or adjust agricultural practices for the radically different conditions unless they knew ahead of time what to expect In addition to the cooling drying and darkness extensive ozone depletion would result as the smoke heated the stratosphere reactions that create and destroy ozone are temperature-dependent Michael J Mills of the University of Colorado at Boulder ran a completely separate climate model from Robockrsquos but found similar results for smoke lofting and stratospheric temperature changes He concluded that although surface temperatures would cool by a small amount the stratosphere would be heated by more than 50 degrees C because the black smoke particles absorb sunlight This heating in turn would modify winds in the stratosphere which would carry ozone-destroying nitrogen oxides into its upper reaches Together the high temperatures and nitrogen oxides would reduce ozone to the same dangerous levels we now experience below the ozone hole above Antarctica every spring Ultraviolet radiation on the ground would increase significantly because of the diminished ozone Less sunlight and precipitation cold spells shorter growing seasons and more ultraviolet radiation would all reduce or eliminate agricultural production Notably cooling and ozone loss would be most profound in middle and high latitudes in both hemispheres whereas precipitation declines would be greatest in the tropics The specific damage inflicted by each of these environmental changes would depend on particular crops soils agricultural practices and regional weather patterns and no researchers have completed detailed analyses of such agricultural responses Even in normal times however feeding the growing human population depends on transferring food across the globe to make up for regional farming deficiencies caused by drought and seasonal weather changes The total amount of grain stored on the planet today would feed the earthrsquos population for only about two months [see ldquoCould Food Shortages Bring Down Civilizationrdquo by Lester R Brown Scientific American May] Most cities and countries have stockpiled food supplies for just a very short period and food shortages (as well as rising prices) have increased in recent years A nuclear war could trigger declines in yield nearly everywhere at once and a worldwide panic could bring the global agricultural trading system to a halt with severe shortages in many places Around one billion people worldwide who now live on marginal food supplies would be directly threatened with starvation by a nuclear war between India and Pakistan or between other regional nuclear powers Typically scientists test models and theories by doing experiments but we obviously cannot experiment in this case Thus we look for analogues that can verify our models Burned cities Unfortunately firestorms created by intense releases of energy have pumped vast quantities of smoke into the upper atmosphere San Francisco burned as a result of the 1906 earthquake and whole cities were incinerated during World War II including Dresden Hamburg Tokyo Hiroshima and Nagasaki These events confirm that smoke from intense urban fires rises into the upper atmosphere The seasonal cycle In actual winter the climate is cooler because the days are shorter and sunlight is less intense the simple change of seasons helps us quantify the effects of less solar radiation Our climate models re-create the seasonal cycle well confirming that they properly reflect changes in sunlight Eruptions Explosive volcanic eruptions such as those of Tambora in 1815 Krakatau in 1883 and Pinatubo in 1991 provide several lessons The resulting sulfate aerosol clouds that formed in the stratosphere were transported around the world by winds The surface temperature plummeted after each eruption in proportion to the thickness of the particulate cloud After the Pinatubo eruption the global average surface temperature dropped by about 025 degree C Global precipitation river flow and soil moisture all decreased Our models reproduce these effects Forest fires Smoke from large forest fires sometimes is injected into the troposphere and lower stratosphere and is transported great distances producing cooling Our models perform well against these effects too Extinction of the dinosaurs An asteroid smashed into Mexicorsquos Yucataacuten Peninsula 65 million years ago The resulting dust cloud mixed with smoke from fires blocked the Sun killing the dinosaurs Massive volcanism in India at the same time may have exacerbated the effects The events teach us that large amounts of aerosols in the earthrsquos atmosphere can change climate drastically enough to kill robust species

125

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Regional Nuclear War

Prefer our evidence- only current research

Robock amp Toon 10 Alan- Department of Environmental Sciences Rutgers University and Owen Brian- Director and Professor Department of Atmospheric and Oceanic Sciences University of Colorado ldquoLocal Nuclear War Global Sufferingrdquo Scientific American January 2010

Some people think that the nuclear winter theory developed in the 1980s was discredited And they may therefore raise their eyebrows at our new assertion that a regional nuclear war like one between India and Pakistan could also devastate agriculture worldwide But the original theory was thoroughly validated The science behind it was supported by investigations from the National Academy of Sciences by studies sponsored within the US military and by the International Council of Scientific Unions which included representatives from 74 national academies of science and other scientific bodies Our current work has appeared in leading peer-reviewed journals Still we seem to be the only ones pursuing research into the global environmental risks of nuclear exchanges We urge others to evaluate and repeat the calculations both for the effects of a superpower conflagration and for more regional nuclear wars

126

Cornell HKHANE Aff

No EMP- Norms Now

Berry 8 Ken Research Coordinator ICNND ldquoNew Weapons Technologyrdquo International Commission on Nuclear Non-proliferation and Disarmament

However it is unlikelymdashthough unfortunately not impossiblemdashthat any nuclear armed state these days would use EMP generated by nuclear weapons Using an atmospheric nuclear blast would attract international opprobrium both for its proliferation implications and also increasingly important for its effects on the environment As has been discussed above the same widespread effects of shutting down a nationrsquos power grid production lines water utilities chemical plants financial institutions telecommunications and transportation routes could be achieved by cyber attack Moreover given the difficulty of tracing the perpetrators of cyberwarfare responsibility for such an attack would be deniable44

No risk of EMP use now

Arquilla and Ronfeldt 2k[John and David RAND ldquoSwarming and the Future of Conflictrdquo]

One of the most effective means of breaking down communications is by an airburst of a nuclear weapon at a high altitude This generation of a highly disruptive electromagnetic pulse (EMP) would temporarily disable most communications in the battlespace it would also damage the many embedded information systems that make modern weapons systems able to fire with accuracy (eg the optical sights of a main battle tank) The fact that the EMP is generated by a nuclear detonationmdashagainst which there are strong normative inhibitionsmdashsuggests that there are few actors who might actually be able to undertake such an action Yet we note the frequent discussion of EMP as a likely threat in cold warndashera ruminations on nuclear strategy44 Further the high-altitude nature of the burst means that there would be virtually no collateral damage Finally it should be noted that the Russian militaryrsquos declaratory stance with respect to nuclear weapons has moved in recent years from ldquono first userdquo to a willingness to engage in ldquofirst userdquo It may be that their inability to match American advances in conventional warfighting will impel the Russians to try to make up for any deficiencies in this manner Indeed the recently announced new Russian military doctrine is clearly more permissive of the use of nuclear weapons from the tactical to the strategic level

127

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Russia CMR Link

Russian military doctrine supports the potential use of EMP

Arquilla and Ronfeldt 2k[John and David RAND ldquoSwarming and the Future of Conflictrdquo]

One of the most effective means of breaking down communications is by an airburst of a nuclear weapon at a high altitude This generation of a highly disruptive electromagnetic pulse (EMP) would temporarily disable most communications in the battlespace it would also damage the many embedded information systems that make modern weapons systems able to fire with accuracy (eg the optical sights of a main battle tank) The fact that the EMP is generated by a nuclear detonationmdashagainst which there are strong normative inhibitionsmdashsuggests that there are few actors who might actually be able to undertake such an action Yet we note the frequent discussion of EMP as a likely threat in cold warndashera ruminations on nuclear strategy44 Further the high-altitude nature of the burst means that there would be virtually no collateral damage Finally it should be noted that the Russian militaryrsquos declaratory stance with respect to nuclear weapons has moved in recent years from ldquono first userdquo to a willingness to engage in ldquofirst userdquo It may be that their inability to match American advances in conventional warfighting will impel the Russians to try to make up for any deficiencies in this manner Indeed the recently announced new Russian military doctrine is clearly more permissive of the use of nuclear weapons from the tactical to the strategic level

128

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Infrastructure CP

The United States federal government should implement the findings of the EMP Commission

Solvency ndash

EMP Commissionrsquos findings havenrsquot yet been implemented

Treadwell and Thompson 9[Mead Treadwell is a Senior Fellow in Security and Defense and Jeremy Thompson is a Research Associate in Security and Defense both at the Institute of the North ldquoEMP Attacks Infrastructure amp Public Policy Concernsrdquo Inside ALEC NovDec]

Yet the dots are not being connected The Department of Homeland Security has made no official move to implement or even accept the recommendations of the EMP Commission report on critical national infrastructures While some members of Congress understand the threat and wish to do something about it most of the ire has been directed at power industry figures as a Congressional hearing earlier this summer illustrates

Solves vulnerability to EMP

EMP Commission 4[ Report of the Commission to Assess the Threat to the United States from Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP) Attack Volume 1 Executive Report 2004 Dr John S Foster Jr Mr Earl Gjelde Dr William R Graham (Chairman) Dr Robert J Hermann Mr Henry (Hank) M Kluepfel GEN Richard L Lawson USAF (Ret) Dr Gordon K Soper Dr Lowell L Wood Jr Dr Joan B Woodard]

The Nationrsquos vulnerability to EMP that gives rise to potentially large-scale long-term consequences can be reasonably and readily reduced below the level of a potentially catastrophic national problem by coordinated and focused effort between the private and public sectors of our country The cost for such improved security in the next 3 to 5 years is modest by any standardmdashand extremely so in relation to both the war on terror and the value of the national infrastructures involved The appropriate response to this threatening situation is a balance of prevention protection planning and preparations for recovery Such actions are both rational and feasible A number of these actions also reduce vulnerabilities to other serious threats to our infrastructures thus giving multiple benefits

129

Cornell HKHANE Aff

NMD CP

McNeill amp Weitz 8 Jena Baker- homeland security policy analyst at The Heritage Foundation and Richard- Senior Fellow and Director of the Center for Political-Military Analysis at Hudson Institute ldquoElectromagnetic Pulse (EMP) Attack A Preventable Homeland Security Catastropherdquo Heritage Foundation Backgrounder 2199 httpwwwheritageorgresearchhomelandsecuritybg2199cfm_ftn19

Build a Comprehensive Missile Defense System The most likely method of EMP attack would be a ballistic missile armed with a nuclear warhead Building a comprehensive missile defense system would allow the US to intercept and destroy a missile bound for the United States The mere implementation of such a system would go a long way to prevent an attack by dissuading those who wish to carry out such actions and sending a clear message that the US takes this threat seriously

Those opposed to missile defense in Congress and elsewhere have attempted to paint such an endeavor as a waste of resources that does nothing to further American security 33 Minutes Protecting America in the New Missile Age A Reader a collection of essays by pre-eminent defense scholars emphasized the need for such measures and recent missile testing by Iran demonstrates that other countries are actively involved in developing missile programsmdashwhich could be used against the US[21]

130

Cornell HKHANE Aff

LoW key to Stability

Hair trigger alert serves as a warning light not to push conflicts too far Plan leads to dangerous confrontations

Perry amp Millot 98 Walter L- Senior Information Scientist and Marc Dean ldquoChapter Three Issues from the Winter Wargamerdquo Issues from the 1997 Army After Next Winter Wargame RAND Corporation 9

The possible exception to the above statement is strategic nuclear war In this instance the technology supporting military operations outstrips the timelines of political decision During the Cold War a Soviet SLBM launched off the eastern seaboard of the United States would have given a President less than 10 minutes to decide whether to order a limited number of response options contained in the Single Integrated Operational Plan or leave that decision to a successor The flight time of Soviet ICBMs allowed the United States less than 45 minutes to execute what might well turn out to be a single retaliatory response The damage done by Soviet nuclear strikes might conceivably deny the United States the capacity to retaliate with weapons other than SLBMs if national leaders chose to decide on a response only after ldquoriding outrdquo the attack and would probably lead to an incoherent response But the damage done by even an incoherent US retaliation would have decimated the Soviet Union and destroyed large portions of its structures for controlling war A Soviet nuclear attack would have left the fate of the United States indeed the world solely in the hands of the President He wouldmdashat bestmdashhave perhaps minutes to confer with his closest advisors and literally no time for consultation or even communication with the Congress the people allies or even the Soviets The requirement to ldquouse it or lose itrdquo would have left no room for a political leaderrsquos wellhoned techniques of crisis management The Soviet leadership faced the same problem and the symmetry provided a powerful incentive for the two superpowers to avoid direct confrontation engage in measures designed to control the risks and consequences of nuclear war and enter into vastly expensive efforts to buy their NCAs and successors some ability to control the conduct of war including limited nuclear options effective means of nuclear attack assessment as well as tactical warning continuity of operations and ultimately strategic defenses

131

• EMP AFF Index
• 1AC Plan
• Solvency
• Future Wars Adv
• Future Wars Adv
• Accidents Adv
• Accidents Adv
• Accidents Adv
• Rogue EMP Adv
• Rogue EMP Adv
• Rogue EMP Adv
• Rogue EMP Adv
• Rogue EMP Adv
• China Advantage
• China Advantage
• General Topicality 12
• General Topicality 22
• General Topicality 1AR 12
• General Topicality 1AR 22
• More Topicality
• Future Wars Conflicts Likely
• Future Wars Ext
• AT Limited War Winter
• Accidents- LoW Bad
• AT FS Remains - Russia
• AT FS Remains - China
• AT FS Remains - Subs
• Rogue- Seeking
• China Solves NoKo
• Rogue Satelites
• Rogue- AT No Tech
• Rogue- AT No Long Range Missiles
• Rogue- AT Uncertain Effects
• Rogue- AT Attribution
• Iran Ev
• NoKo Ev
• Terrorism Adv
• Terrorism Adv
• Terrorism Ext
• China- AT Attribution
• Space Militarization Adv 1
• Space Militarization Adv 2
• Space Militarization Adv 3
• Space Ext
• Data Sharing Adv
• Data Sharing Adv
• Data Sharing Adv
• Data Sharing- Uniqueness
• Data Sharing- Data Needed
• Russia Data Sharing (Testing)
• Russian ARMS control
• Modeling Advantage 1
• Modeling Advantage- Israel
• Modeling Advantage- Israel
• Modeling Advantage- China
• Modeling Advantage- Solvency
• Israeli Strikes Bad
• Testing Advantage
• EMPacts Econ
• EMPacts Heg
• EMPacts Earthquake
• EMPacts GPS
• EMPacts Satelites
• EMPacts Healthcare
• Morality Advantage
• AT Verifiability
• AT Verifiability
• Verifiability Extensions
• AT CMR
• Politics Link Answers
• Politics Link Answers
• Politics Link Turn
• AT Geomagnetic Storms
• AT Geomagnetic Storms
• AT Blackout Alt Causes
• AT Alternative EMP forms
• AT Protective Measures
• AT Protective Measures
• AT Low Altitude Nuclear Explosions
• CP Theories
• AT Hardening CP
• AT Hardening CP
• AT NMD CP
• AT PAROS CP
• AT Asteroids PIC
• AT Japan Rearm
• AT Consult Japan
• AT Primacy DA
• AT Primacy DA
• AT Damage Limitation
• AT Damage Limitation
• AT Damage Limitation
• AT Deterrence DA
• AT Deterrence DA
• AT Deterrence DA
• AT Deterrence DA
• No US Second Strike
• Yes US Second Strike
• Yes US Second Strike
• AT Security Kritik
• AT Kritiks
• AT Religion K
• AT Psychoanalysis
• Negative
• Not Topical
• Tix Links
• GOP Link
• AT Terrorist EMP
• AT State EMP
• AT RussiaChina EMP
• AT Proliferators EMP
• EMPacts False
• AT Strait of Hormuz
• Alt Cause- Geomagnetic Storms
• China Turn
• AT PGS Prolif
• No Solvency- Conventional EMPs
• Conventional EMPs Shift
• Conventional EMPs Shift
• AT Warfighting Advantage
• Nuclear Winter Imagery Good
• Regional Nuclear War
• Regional Nuclear War
• No EMP- Norms Now
• Russia CMR Link
• Infrastructure CP
• NMD CP
• LoW key to Stability

Cornell HKHANE Aff

1AC Plan

Plan The United States federal government should ban high-altitude nuclear explosions

4

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Solvency

Plan eliminates electromagnetic pulse warfare

Johnston 9 Robert Wm- PhD in physics from UT-Dallas ldquoHigh-altitude nuclear explosionsrdquo 28 January 2009

Several effects are relatively unique to high altitude bursts Electromagnetic pulse (EMP) is important only for high altitude bursts For such detonations ionization

of the upper atmosphere can produce a brief intense pulse of radio frequency radiation which can damage or disrupt electronic devices For explosions above most of the atmosphere EMP can affect large areas

Ionization of the atmosphere from explosions in the atmosphere can interfere with radar and radio communications for short periods

Charged particles produced by explosions above the Earths atmosphere can be captured by the Earths magnetic field temporarily creating artificial radiation belts that can damage spacecraft and injure astronautscosmonauts in orbit

5

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Future Wars Adv

Future great power wars will be initiated with EMP strikes

Lewallen 2 John- Political Science at Whitman University organizer of the Nuclear Peace Action Group Fulbright Scholarship recipient Public Ocean Access Network ldquoHigh-Altitude Nuclear Warrdquo Nuclear Press p30

ldquoIn all the war games in which I have been present and all the ones which I have studied when I have not been present the attack the red attack always begins with an EMP laydown on blue that is a Soviet laydown on the continental United States by multiple megaton high-altitude burstsrdquo-Dr Lowell Wood Nuclear EMP Hearings p173Any major nuclear war these days seems sure to be a two-stage affair First one or several high-altitude nuclear explosions will occur wiping out all unprotected and imperfectly- protected military and civilian electronics within line of sight of the burst If Dr Lowell Wood and Mr William Graham are correct in their 1999 assessment of US nuclear strategic EMP hardening there might not be much left of the US nuclear retaliatory system after the initial EMP attack 35 The second stage low-altitude nuclear war might or might not coincide with or follow the initial high-altitude nuclear EMP strike Certainly all national leaders should have an EMP-hardened communication system to compare notes after the first high-altitude nuclear bomb goes off

In the absence of EMP strikes mutual interest would de-escalation nuclear war

Quinlan 9 Michael- Director of the Ditchley Foundation former British defence strategist and former Permanent Under-Secretary of State ldquoThinking about nuclear weapons principles problems prospectsrdquo p63

There are good reasons for fearing escalation These include the confusion of war its stresses anger hatred and the desire for revenge reluctance to accept the humiliation of backing down the desire to get further blows in first Given all this the risks of escalation are grave in any conflict between advanced powers and Western leaders during the cold war were rightly wont to emphasize them in the interests of deterrence But this is not to say that they are virtually certain or even necessarily odds-on still less that they are so for all the assorted circumstances in which the situation might arise in a nuclear world to which past experience is only a limited guide It is entirely possible for example that the initial use of nuclear weapons breaching a barrier that has held since 1945 might so horrify both sides in a conflict that they recognized an overwhelming common interest in composing their differences The human pressures in that direction would be very great Even if initial nuclear use did not quickly end the fighting the supposition of inexorable momentum in a developing exchange with each side rushing to overreaction amid confusion and uncertainty is implausible It fails to consider what the situation of the decision-makers would really be Neither side could want escalation Both would be appalled at what was going on Both would be desperately looking for signs that the other was ready to call a halt Both given the capacity for evasion or concealment which modern delivery platforms and vehicles can possess could have in reserve significant forces invulnerable enough not to entail use-or-lose pressures (It may be more open to question as noted earlier whether newer nuclear-weapon possessors can be immediately in that position but it is within reach of any substantial state with advanced technological capabilities and attaining it is certain to be a high priority in the development of forces) As a result neither side can have any predisposition to suppose in an ambiguous situation of fearful risk that the right course when in doubt is to go on copiously launching weapons And none of this analysis rests on any presumption of highly subtle or pre-concerted rationality The rationality required is plain

6

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Future Wars Adv

Nuclear planners know that EMP strikes make limited war impossible and are therefore forced to launch a full out nuclear strike at the onset of conflict

CDI 2 Center for Defense Information ldquoRethinking the Unthinkablerdquo The Washington Post July 28 2002 httpwwwcdiorgnuclearrethinking-prcfm

Yet counterforce theories to Blair were equally removed from operational reality The notion that a nuclear war might be rationally fought over an extended periodmdashthat it might involve a number of nuclear exchanges yet result in negotiations before things really got out of handmdashwas never more than pie-in-the-sky academic nonsense The main reason Blair saysmdashas military leaders have always understood in spadesmdashwas that in the early stages of a nuclear war command and control systems on both sides would be extremely vulnerable to what was called decapitation The pilots and battle staff responsible for the airborne SAC command post known at the time as Looking Glass were acutely aware of the decapitation problem Blair says Once the bombs start falling they used to tell him were totally screwed To make matters worse in the early 70s it was discovered that a single high-altitude nuclear explosion would release an intense pulse of electromagnetic energy that would massively disrupt communications and avionics Planes would be falling out of the sky Some aspects of the command and control system could bemdashand subsequently weremdashhardened against attack But some could not And the systems overall vulnerability Blair says meant that no matter how much concrete was packed around a Minuteman missile riding out a first strike was not a viable basis for strategy So what were the military planners to do The answer was to gear the whole war plan to launch on warning This was not acknowledged publiclymdashit was too controversial Blair saysmdashbut insiders knew that the system was designed to force a quick decision and get the missiles out of their silos as soon as possible after learning of an enemy attack Both sides were prepared to do this though the Soviets didnt put their launch-on-warning system in place Blair learned until that scary period in the early Reagan years Call this deterrence if you want Youve certainly got two sides facing off with each armed so heavily as to give the other pause Or call it counterforce All those missiles can be aimed at military targets and fired preemptively at any time But to Blair the label is beside the point What matters is the decision to place thousands upon thousands of potential Hiroshimas on hair-trigger alert in systems within which even a minor error carries the potential for unimaginable horror With a missile taking only 30 minutes to travel from the Soviet Union to the United Statesmdashand far less if delivered from an offshore submarinemdashthe launch-on-warning timetable is impossibly tight In the North American Aerospace Defense Commands bombproof bunker beneath Colorados Cheyenne Mountain they have three minutes from the time the first sensor report comes in to the time they have to say Were under attack Blair says Three minutes Then comes an emergency conference and an officer in Omaha briefs the president And do you know how much time hes allowed to give that briefing Thirty seconds

Plan solves EMP first-strike paranoia and nullifies the benefits of an all out nuclear war

Lewallen 99 John- Public Ocean Access Network ldquoThe Blackout Bomb What It Means To Yourdquo httpnonuclearnettheblackoutbombhtm

Major Stokes did not connect this statement to high-altitude EMP nuclear weaponry In fact his study of Chinarsquos real and imagined electronic weaponry has only cursory mention of EMP Is the Blackout Bomb so secret and potentially panic-causing that even many military strategists are in the dark about its true significance Dr Lowell Wood noted in verbal testimony at the 1997 EMP hearing in Congress that nuclear strategists in the United States do war simulations based on the presumption that a capable enemy would begin hostilities with high-altitude EMP weaponry Since the Russians and Chinese know that we are ready to lay heavy EMP on them at the outset of hostilities they try to be prepared to do the same to us preferably first Therefore if we careen closer to nuclear conflict with Russia or China the advantage of first-strike EMP escalates rapidly

7

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Accidents Adv

EMP warplans force adversaries to adopt a launch on warning policy creating intense time pressure

Schnurr 9 Avi- Executive Director of Israels Missile Defense Association reviewed US technology policy for the the Department of Defense the White House Homeland Security Council Congress and the National Academy of Sciences ldquoThe EMP Threat A Strategic Review of Geopolitical Risk Scenariosrdquo 27th July 2009 httpwwwhenryjacksonsocietyorgstoriesaspid=1227

When scientists saw this it began a new race in the Cold War in which a nuclear exchange would start with an attack intended to disable or destroy infrastructure During the Cold War the U nited S tates had engineers whose entire professions were simply to do EMP testing either in laboratories or with underground nuclear blasts They also protected hardware and command and control systems from these kinds of effects An example of EMP as a Cold War tactic actually came after the Cold War In 19 95 Norway decided it wanted to do an upper atmosphere weather test so they asked NASA to use one of its decommissioned nuclear boosters Norway notified the countries in the area including Russia that they were going to launch this weather test but the person in Russia responsible for taking this information to the defence authorities was sick and his replacement did not understand the protocol In Russia there are three individuals who can recommend a nuclear attack to the president the Prime Minister the Defense Minister and the Interior Minister each of whom could do so independently On this occasion all three were together meeting with the Russian president when someone ran into the room interrupting that they saw a launch coming from the North Sea The Defense Minister turned to Boris Yeltsin and said ldquoDo it Do it now This is it this is the attack Launch all of our missilesrdquo Yeltsin opened his little black box but did nothing When I first heard this story it made no sense to me Why would all of the warheads be launched with one missile coming in before itrsquos even clear that itrsquos heading toward Russia Obviously if they had waited a little bit longer they would have seen that it was only heading in the general direction but this harkens back to the Cold War mindset Both sides were so worried about the possibility of their infrastructures being destroyed by EMP and that they would not be able to launch a counter strike that the protocol said that if there was one missile coming in and it looked as if it could be an attack a response must be made very early This is the reason there is so little time Fear of an EMP attack in 19 95 almost launched World War III The EMP threat is the reason the US president still walks around with someone following him everyday carrying what they call the presidential ldquofootballrdquo The EMP was a primary focus of the US military during the Cold War Thereafter with a sense that the nuclear threat was diminishing the focus on EMP also diminished However in more recent times the Pentagon is beginning again to take it seriously by hardening infrastructure and adopting all of the EMP Commissionrsquos recommendations

8

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Accidents Adv

Launch on warning coupled with the intense time pressure results in massive nuclear war

Cirincione 9 Joseph- President of the Ploughshares Fund ldquoThe Continuing Threat of Nuclear Warrdquo in Global Catastrophic Risks by Nick Bostrom Milan M Ćirković p 383-4

Although much was made of the 1994 joint decision by Presidents Bill Clinton and Boris Yeltsin to no longer target each other with their weapons this announcement had little practical consequences Target coordinates can be uploaded into a warheads guidance systems within minutes The warheads remain on missiles on a high alert status similar to that they maintained during the tensest moments of the Cold War This greatly increases the risk of an unauthorized or accidental launch Because there is no time buffer built into each states decision-making process this extreme level of readiness enhances the possibility that either sides president could prematurely order a nuclear strike based on flawed intelligence Bruce Blair a former Minuteman launch officer now president of the World Security Institute says If both sides sent the launch order right now without any warning or preparation thousands of nuclear weapons ndash the equivalent in explosive firepower of about 70000 Hiroshima bombs ndash could be unleashed within a few minutes4 Blair describes the scenario in dry but chilling detail If early warning satellites or ground radar detected missiles in flight both sides would attempt to assess whether a real nuclear attack was under way within a strict and short deadline Under Cold War procedures that are still in practice today early warning crews manning their consoles 247 have only three minutes to reach a preliminary conclusion Such occurrences happen on a daily basis sometimes more than once per day if an apparent nuclear missile threat is perceived then an emergency teleconference would be convened between the president and his top nuclear advisers On the US side the top officer on duty at Strategic Command in Omaha Neb would brief the president on his nuclear options and their consequences That officer is allowed all of 30 seconds to deliver the briefing Then the US or Russian president would have to decide whether to retaliate and since the command systems on both sides have long been geared for launch-on-warning the presidents would have little spare time if they desired to get retaliatory nuclear missiles off the ground before they and possibly the presidents themselves were vaporized On the US side the time allowed to decide would range between zero and 12 minutes depending on the scenario Russia operates under even tighter deadlines because of the short flight time of US Trident submarine missiles on forward patrol in the North Atlantic Russias early warning systems remain in a serious state of erosion and disrepair making it all the more likely that a Russian president could panic and reach a different conclusion than Yeltsin did in 19956 As Russian capabilities continue to deteriorate the chances of accidents only increase Limited spending on the conventional Russian military has led to greater reliance on an ageing nuclear arsenal whose survivability would make any deterrence theorist nervous Yet the missiles remain on a launch status begun during the worst days of the Cold War and never turned off As Blair concludes Such rapid implementation of war plans leaves no room for real deliberation rational thought or national leadership Former chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee Sam Nunn agrees We are running the irrational risk of an Armageddon of our own making The more time the United States and Russia build into our process for ordering a nuclear strike the more time is available to gather data to exchange information to gain perspective to discover an error to avoid an accidental or unauthorized launch

9

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Accidents Adv

This causes extinction

Helfand amp Pastore 9 Ira- President of Physicians for Social Responsibility and John- Former President of Physicians for Social Responsibility ldquoUS-Russia nuclear war still a threatrdquo

President Obama and Russian President Dimitri Medvedev are scheduled to Wednesday in London during the G-20 summit They must not let the current economic crisis keep them from focusing on one of the greatest threats confronting humanity the danger of nuclear war Since the end of the Cold War many have acted as though the danger of nuclear war has ended It has not There remain in the world more than 20000 nuclear weapons Alarmingly more than 2000 of these weapons in the US and Russian arsenals remain on ready-alert status commonly known as hair-trigger alert They can be fired within five minutes and reach targets in the other country 30 minutes later Just one of these weapons can destroy a city A war involving a substantial number would cause devastation on a scale unprecedented in human history A study conducted by Physicians for Social Responsibility in 2002 showed that if only 500 of the Russian weapons on high alert exploded over our cities 100 million Americans would die in the first 30 minutes An attack of this magnitude also would destroy the entire economic communications and transportation infrastructure on which we all depend Those who survived the initial attack would inhabit a nightmare landscape with huge swaths of the country blanketed with radioactive fallout and epidemic diseases rampant They would have no food no fuel no electricity no medicine and certainly no organized health care In the following months it is likely the vast majority of the US population would die Recent studies by the eminent climatologists Toon and Robock have shown that such a war would have a huge and immediate impact on climate world wide If all of the warheads in the US and Russian strategic arsenals were drawn into the conflict the firestorms they caused would loft 180 million tons of soot and debris into the upper atmosphere mdash blotting out the sun Temperatures across the globe would fall an average of 18 degrees Fahrenheit to levels not seen on earth since the depth of the last ice age 18000 years ago Agriculture would stop eco-systems would collapse and many species including perhaps our own would become extinct

10

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Rogue EMP Adv

Iran is on the brink of achieving EMP capability to be used against the US

Timmerman 8 Kenneth R- director of the Foundation for Democracy in Iran 2006 Nobel Peace Prize Nominee ldquoUS Intel Iran Plans Nuclear Strike on USrdquo News Max 29 Jul 2008

Iran has carried out missile tests for what could be a plan for a nuclear strike on the United States the head of a national security panel has warned In testimony before the House Armed Services Committee and in remarks to a private conference on missile defense over the weekend hosted by the Claremont Institute Dr William Graham warned that the US intelligence community ldquodoesnrsquot have a storyrdquo to explain the recent Iranian tests One group of tests that troubled Graham the former White House science adviser under President Ronald Reagan were successful efforts to launch a Scud missile from a platform in the Caspian Sea ldquoTheyrsquove got [test] ranges in Iran which are more than long enough to handle Scud launches and even Shahab-3 launchesrdquo Dr Graham said ldquoWhy would they be launching from the surface of the Caspian Sea They obviously have not explained that to usrdquo Another troubling group of tests involved Shahab-3 launches where the Iranians detonated the warhead near apogee not over the target area where the thing would eventually land but at altituderdquo Graham said ldquoWhy would they do thatrdquo Graham chairs the Commission to Assess the Threat to the United States from Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP) Attack a blue-ribbon panel established by Congress in 2001 The commission examined the Iranian tests ldquoand without too much effort connected the dotsrdquo even though the US intelligence community previously had failed to do so Graham said ldquoThe only plausible explanation we can find is that the Iranians are figuring out how to launch a missile from a ship and get it up to altitude and then detonate itrdquo he said ldquoAnd thatrsquos exactly what you would do if you had a nuclear weapon on a Scud or a Shahab-3 or other missile and you wanted to explode it over the United Statesrdquo Several participants in last weekendrsquos conference in Dearborn Mich hosted by the conservative Claremont Institute argued that Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was thinking about an EMP attack when he opined that ldquoa world without America is conceivablerdquo

So is North Korea

Wilson 8 Clay- Specialist in Technology and National Security Foreign Affairs Defense and Trade Division ldquoHigh Altitude Electromagnetic Pulse (HEMP) and High Power Microwave (HPM) Devices Threat Assessmentsrdquo Congressional Research Service March 26 2008

Reportedly several potential US adversaries such as Russia or China are now capable of launching a crippling HEMP strike against the United States with a nuclear-tipped ballistic missile and other nations such as North Korea could possibly have the capability by 201532 Other nations that could possibly develop a capability for HEMP operations over the next few years include United Kingdom France India Israel and Pakistan

11

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Rogue EMP Adv

US First strike capabilities prevent China from curbing Iranian and North Korean nuclear ambitions

Wu 8 Anne- Managing the Atom Project at the Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs at Harvard University ldquoEngage China in Nuclear-Proliferation Issuerdquo Providence Journal October 27

Chinas crucial role has not been diminished since the North Korean denuclearization process started in 2003 even if the United States later started direct dialogue with Pyongyang Indeed it was just reported that Washington expects Pyongyang to submit to China a list of verification steps it would allow in return for being removed from the US terrorism-sponsor list Yet the North Korean issue only represents one piece of international non-proliferation efforts At a time when the global non-proliferation regime is weakened in the absence of consensus on priority and process China and the US share a common interest and responsibility to strengthen measures that prevent the proliferation of nuclear weapons The two countries both agree and disagree on nuclear non-proliferation Internationally the two countries are committed to promoting non-proliferation within frameworks such as the United Nations the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG) Regionally they maintain consultations on the nuclear issue on the Korean Peninsula and in Iran Bilaterally they have intensified dialogues and cooperation on export control and intelligence sharing as well as in other areas Yet differences ranging from strategic to practical issues remain The next president together with the Chinese leadership must lead by example through more effective cooperation The United States and China should be the strongest advocates for reducing the currency of nuclear weapons One thing in the way of their partnership is their differing views on their own nuclear weapons Since going nuclear in 1964 China has been committed to a policy of no-first-use of nuclear weapons and no use of nuclear weapons against non-nuclear states or in nuclear-free zones The United States on the other hand reserves its right as part of its nuclear doctrine to strike others in a pre-emptive manner Many Chinese believe that it is unfair for the US to ask other countries to not develop nuclear weapons while it maintains a huge nuclear stockpile And its policies are counterproductive because they continue to provide legitimacy to nuclear weapons in international affairs The United States and China must bridge their respective perceptions of potential nuclear threat and approaches to non-proliferation in order to work together to tackle the most urgent nuclear problems The United States could engage China more effectively on concerns such as the North Korean and Iranian nuclear issues by recognizing Chinas own interests Denuclearization efforts will not succeed without Chinas support and the perception that the United States is only using Chinas influence to reduce a nuclear threat to itself is detrimental to bilateral relations Regarding North Korea and Iran China envisions nuclear non-proliferation as a broad security concept that encompasses all-around solutions China believes that the fundamental purpose of non-proliferation is to safeguard and promote regional and international peace and security To achieve these goals non-proliferation should be pursued in a diplomatic manner that eschews coercion and other hostile measures China also advocates equilibrium between non-proliferation peaceful uses of nuclear energy and disarmament Because of its perceived balanced stance on North Korea and Iran China occupies the formidable middle ground and could play a constructive role in facilitating a solution that avoids full-scale crisis The United States should encourage China to continue its constructive intervention no nuclear-weapons program no escalating confrontations but continued flexible dialogue Otherwise should any of the parties up the ante the international community will lose a valuable avenue to mitigate the crisis

12

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Rogue EMP Adv

Plan prevents rogue acquisition of EMP weapons by garnering Russian and Chinese support

Lewallen 2 John- Political Science at Whitman University organizer of the Nuclear Peace Action Group Fulbright Scholarship recipient Public Ocean Access Network ldquoHigh-Altitude Nuclear Warrdquo Nuclear Press p26-27

That is not to say that there is no danger of missile attack against the US from ldquorogue statesrdquo which may be defined as ldquopoor nations who do not accept the military dominations of the United Statesrdquo More than thirty nations have Scud missiles capable of flinging a nuclear weapon into orbit over Earth and several nations are known to have nuclear weapons 25 In addition arms in general and nuclear weapons in particular are commodities on the world market Despite many treaties and restrictions deigned to staunch the proliferation of nuclear weapons and missiles among nations there is abundant evidence that nuclear missiles are spreading around 26 The pace and scope of nuclear missile proliferation is largely determined by China Russia and the United States If relations are peaceful in the Nuclear Triangle the three nations are inclined to serve their mutual interests in keeping nuclear missiles out of the hands of other powers If the atmosphere of nuclear confrontation heats up in the Nuclear Triangle nuclear missile proliferation accelerates as the three adversaries are driven to arm allies Russia President Vladimir Putin an adroit player of US fears that ldquorogue nationsrdquo might obtain long-range nuclear missiles has positioned himself so that he can threaten to instantly supply long-range nuclear missiles to Americarsquos worst nightmare du jour be it North Korea Ira Iran Libya Cuba or Syria27

EMP strikes are the most likely scenario for rogue lashout

Schneider 7 Mark- National Institute for Public Policy The Emerging EMP Threat to the United States United States Nuclear Strategy Forum No 6 November 2007

Weapons of mass destruction are potentially attractive to rogue states because these weapons can provide an asymmetric response to US conventional superiority International arms control treaties have made chemical and biological weapons the nearly exclusive prerogative of rogue states However the ability of rogue states to inflict effective attacks even with WMD payloads requires certain technical capabilities in the delivery systems Good accuracy is minimally necessary for WMD attacks on major urban industrial centers and for EMP attacks43 According to Dr Lowell Wood ldquoBecause a very small number ndash potentially one ndash nuclear weapon exploded at high altitude over an American expeditionary force attempting forced entry against a major regional power could potentially tip the balance against our efforts all such powers who contemplate confronting us will be incentivized to develop acquire or retain nuclear weaponryrdquo44 A key conclusion of the EMP commission report was that ldquoA determined adversary can achieve an EMP attack capability without having a high level of [technical] sophisticationrdquo45 From a political standpoint including alliance cohesion the most damaging form of attack by a rogue state would be WMD attacks or EMP attacks launched against the capitals or the major cities of the United States its friends or allies The US National Strategy for Combating the Proliferation of Weapons of Mass Destruction recognized that we must respond to any WMD attack rapidly and that ldquothe primary objective of a response is to disrupt an imminent attack or an attack in progress and eliminate the threat of future attacksrdquo46 The objective of rogue state WMD attacks could possibly be to shock the attacked populations into demanding that the war be ended promptly It would be the intent of such adversaries that such attacks would be so destructive that they would break up coalitions and cause our allies to deny the US critical basing rights Attacks might even be directed against nations that were not active participants in the conflict much as in the way Saddam Hussein attacked Israeli cities during Operation Desert Storm Catastrophic attacks using modern weapons of mass destruction can inflict casualties at levels that have not been experienced since World War II Nuclear EMP attack could be attractive to the less technically sophisticated rogue states because of the extensive damage that could be inflicted on a technologically superior adversary with a relatively crude ballistic missile In order to be able to employ high altitude EMP strikes the rogue state would not have to develop reentry vehicles or ballistic missiles with precision accuracy

13

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Rogue EMP Adv

A rogue EMP strike would collapse the economy

Timmerman 8 Kenneth R- director of the Foundation for Democracy in Iran 2006 Nobel Peace Prize Nominee ldquoUS Intel Iran Plans Nuclear Strike on USrdquo News Max 29 Jul 2008

The commission warned in a report issued in April that the United States was at risk of a sneak nuclear attack by a rogue nation or a terrorist group designed to take out our nationrsquos critical infrastructure If even a crude nuclear weapon were detonated anywhere between 40 kilometers to 400 kilometers above the earth in a split-second it would generate an electro-magnetic pulse [EMP] that would cripple military and civilian communications power transportation water food and other infrastructure the report warned While not causing immediate civilian casualties the near-term impact on US society would dwarf the damage of a direct nuclear strike on a US city ldquoThe first indication [of such an attack] would be that the power would go out and some but not all the telecommunications would go out We would not physically feel anything in our bodiesrdquo Graham said As electric power water and gas delivery systems failed there would be ldquotruly massive traffic jamsrdquo Graham added since modern automobiles and signaling systems all depend on sophisticated electronics that would be disabled by the EMP wave ldquoSo you would be walking You wouldnrsquot be driving at that pointrdquo Graham said ldquoAnd it wouldnrsquot do any good to call the maintenance or repair people because they wouldnrsquot be able to get there even if you could get through to themrdquo The food distribution system also would grind to a halt as cold-storage warehouses stockpiling perishables went offline Even warehouses equipped with backup diesel generators would fail because ldquowe wouldnrsquot be able to pump the fuel into the trucks and get the trucks to the warehousesrdquo Graham said The United States ldquowould quickly revert to an early 19th century type of countryrdquo except that we would have 10 times as many people with ten times fewer resources he said ldquoMost of the things we depend upon would be gone and we would literally be depending on our own assets and those we could reach by walking to themrdquo Graham said America would begin to resemble the 2002 TV series ldquoJeremiahrdquo which depicts a world bereft of law infrastructure and memory In the TV series an unspecified virus wipes out the entire adult population of the planet In an EMP attack the casualties would be caused by our almost total dependence on technology for everything from food and water to hospital care Within a week or two of the attack people would start dying Graham says ldquoPeople in hospitals would be dying faster than that because they depend on power to stay alive But then it would go to water food civil authority emergency services And we would end up with a country with many many people not surviving the eventrdquo Asked just how many Americans would die if Iran were to launch the EMP attack it appears to be preparing Graham gave a chilling reply ldquoYou have to go back into the 1800s to look at the size of populationrdquo that could survive in a nation deprived of mechanized agriculture transportation power water and communication ldquoIrsquod have to say that 70 to 90 percent of the population would not be sustainable after this kind of attackrdquo he said America would be reduced to a core of around 30 million people mdash about the number that existed in the decades after Americarsquos independence from Great Britain The modern electronic economy would shut down and America would most likely revert to ldquoan earlier economy based on barterrdquo the EMP commissionrsquos report on Critical National Infrastructure concluded earlier this year

14

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Rogue EMP Adv

This means Global War

Mead 9 [Walter Russell Senior Fellow in US Foreign Policy at the Council on Foreign Relations New Republic February 4 2009]

So far such half-hearted experiments not only have failed to work they have left the societies that have tried them in a progressively worse position farther behind the front-runners as time goes by Argentina has lost ground to Chile Russian development has fallen farther behind that of the Baltic states and Central Europe Frequently the crisis has weakened the power of the merchants industrialists financiers and professionals who want to develop a liberal capitalist society integrated into the world Crisis can also strengthen the hand of religious extremists populist radicals or authoritarian traditionalists who are determined to resist liberal capitalist society for a variety of reasons Meanwhile the companies and banks based in these societies are often less established and more vulnerable to the consequences of a financial crisis than more established firms in wealthier societies As a result developing countries and countries where capitalism has relatively recent and shallow roots tend to suffer greater economic and political damage when crisis strikes--as inevitably it does And consequently financial crises often reinforce rather than challenge the global distribution of power and wealth This may be happening yet again None of which means that we can just sit back and enjoy the recession History may suggest that financial crises actually help capitalist great powers maintain their leads--but it has other less reassuring messages as well If financial crises have been a normal part of life during the 300-year rise of the liberal capitalist system under the Anglophone powers so has war The wars of the League of Augsburg and the Spanish Succession the Seven Years War the American Revolution the Napoleonic Wars the two World Wars the cold war The list of wars is almost as long as the list of financial crises Bad economic times can breed wars Europe was a pretty peaceful place in 1928 but the Depression poisoned German public opinion and helped bring Adolf Hitler to power If the current crisis turns into a depression what rough beasts might start slouching toward Moscow Karachi Beijing or New Delhi to be born The United States may not yet decline but if we cant get the world economy back on track we may still have to fight

15

Cornell HKHANE Aff

China Advantage

China believes the US will use nuclear EMP attacks in future wars

Pry 5 Dr Peter Vincent- EMP Commission Staff ldquoForeign Views Of Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP) Attackrdquo Before The United States Senate Subcommittee On Terrorism Technology And Homeland Security March 8 2005 httpwwwendtimesreportcomEMP_attackhtml

Many foreign analysts perceive nuclear EMP attack as falling within the category of electronic warfare or information warfare not nuclear warfare Indeed the military doctrines of at least China and Russia appear to define information warfare as embracing a spectrum ranging from computer viruses to nuclear EMP attack For example consider the following quote from one of Chinarsquos most senior military theoristsndashwho is credited by the PRC with inventing information warfarendash appearing in his book World War the Third World WarndashTotal Information Warfare ldquoWith their massive destructiveness longrange nuclear weapons have combined with highly sophisticated information technology and computer technology today and warfare of the looming 21st century information war under nuclearInformation war and traditional war have one thing in common namely that the country which possesses the critical weapons such as atomic bombs will have lsquofirst strikersquo and lsquosecond strike retaliationrsquo capabilities As soon as its computer networks come under attack and are destroyed the country will slip into a state of paralysis and the lives of its people will ground to a halt Therefore China should focus on measures to counter computer viruses nuclear electromagnetic pulse and quickly achieve breakthroughs in those technologies in order to equip China without delay with equivalent deterrence that will enable it to stand up to the military powers in the information age and neutralize and check the deterrence of Western powers including the United Statesrdquo (2001)

This forces China to pursue EMP warfare and space militarization

Kueter 7 Jeff- president of the George C Marshall Institute ldquoChinarsquos Space Ambitions ndash And Oursrdquo The New Atlantis Number 16 Spring 2007 pp 7-22

A more important motivation for Chinarsquos investment in civil and military space is of course the countryrsquos perception of its security environment and its understanding of the evolution of modern warfare The Chinese have concluded from observing recent warsmdashincluding Operation Desert Storm NATO operations in the Balkans and the present wars in Afghanistan and Iraqmdashthat ldquothe PLArsquos past approach to wars which relied heavily on mass mobilization and preparation for all-out warfare are frankly no longer appropriaterdquo according to China scholar Dean Cheng of the Center for Naval Analyses Chinese analysts have reached several conclusions about the characteristics of future wars They will extend from operations on the land at sea and in the air to the electromagnetic spectrum and into outer space They will demand widely spread forces operating over large geographic areas demonstrating precise operational coordination and timing and requiring multiple military services working together Future wars will be characterized by long-range operations involve the decisive use of precision-strike weapons and require much higher rates of expenditure of munitions Operations will occur more rapidly and conflicts will conclude more quickly American strategists have reached similar conclusions as is reflected in the doctrines of the US military services embodied in the annual US defense budgets and written into recent Quadrennial Defense Reviews These conclusions have shaped Chinarsquos overall military modernization efforts as well as its outer-space ambitions

16

Cornell HKHANE Aff

China Advantage

Chinarsquos fears are reflected in their acquisition of space warfare and EMP capabilities

Wilson 8 Clay- Specialist in Technology and National Security Foreign Affairs Defense and Trade Division ldquoHigh Altitude Electromagnetic Pulse (HEMP) and High Power Microwave (HPM) Devices Threat Assessmentsrdquo Congressional Research Service March 26 2008

According to a 1999 DOD report China has been actively pursuing the development of electromagnetic pulse weapons and has devoted significant resources to development of other electronic warfare systems and laser weapons The report also noted that Chinarsquos leaders view offensive counter space weapons and other space-based defense systems as part of inevitable scenarios for future warfare The report noted that China could have as many as 60 ICBMs capable of striking the United States by 2010 Also China may replace 20 of its current ICBMs with a longer-range missile by the end of this decade or sooner36

Space weaponization leads to extinction

Mitchell 1 Gordon R- member of CSIS Working Group on Theater Missile Defenses in the Asia-Pacific Region Fletcher Forum On World Affairs Winter 2001

Deployment of space weapons with pre-delegated authority to fire death rays or unleash killer projectiles would likely make war itself inevitable given the susceptibility of such systems to ldquonormal accidentsrdquo It is chilling to contemplate the possible effects of a space war According to Bowman ldquoeven a tiny projectile reentering from space strikes the earth with such high velocity that it can do enormous damagemdasheven more than would be done by a nuclear weapon of the same size In the same laser technology touted by President Reagan as the quintessential tool of peace David Langford sees one of the most wicked offensive weapons ever conceived ldquoOne imagines dead cities of microwave-grilled peoplerdquo Given this unique potential for destruction it is not hard to imagine that any nation subjected to a space weapon attack would escalate by retaliating with maximum force including use of nuclear biological andor chemical weapons An accidental war sparked by a computer glitch in space could plunge the world into the most destructive military conflict ever seen

Plan solves space weaponization by breaking the feedback loop

Lewallen 2 John- Political Science at Whitman University organizer of the Nuclear Peace Action Group Fulbright Scholarship recipient Public Ocean Access Network ldquoHigh-Altitude Nuclear Warrdquo Nuclear Press Pg34

A strategic feedback loop would seem to make it at least ldquostrongly possiblerdquo that the United States China and Russia have high-powered EMP bombs in Earth orbit today The ability to wipe out an adversaryrsquos electronics continent-wide pretty much any time with a maneuverable EMP satellite bomb would confer major if not overwhelming advantage to the aggressor So if the other guy probably has EMP satellite bombs we need them too

17

Cornell HKHANE Aff

General Topicality 12

We reduce missions

Kristensen 98 Hans M- Director of the Nuclear Information Project at the Federation of American Scientists ldquoNuclear Futures Proliferation of Weapons of Mass Destruction and US Nuclear Strategy British American Security Information Council Basic Research Report 982

Other exotic design concepts stem from the emphasis on underground and deeply buried targets and the concern to limit the collateral damage from the use of nuclear weapons These are all prime features of the counterproliferation effort Research contracts for 1997 outlined by the Defense Special Weapons Agency (DSWA) formerly the Defense Nuclear Agency include adjusting Electromagnetic Pulse ( EMP) data for nuclear weapons to allow war planners to assess wide-area distributed target damages ldquoinflicted by nuclear weaponsrsquo EMP effectsrdquo The project aims to lower the burst height of nuclear weapons EMP by two-thirds from the existing boundary of 100 km altitude to 30 km and to revamp the capability to compute air and ground bursts EMP fields as well as shallow buried bursts The project will also investigate alternatives to potential design modification and weapon delivery with the aim to ldquolimit or minimize collateral damagerdquo from the use of nuclear weapons Models for using EMP to knock out blast and shock-hardened buried targets will be developed in order to ldquodevise a new tool for PC-based weapon lethality prediction and target damage assessment [hellipfor use by] USSTRATCOM and other regional commandshellip for their specific missions applications rdquo112

And the mission is current- strike plans prove

Kristensen 9 Hans M Reply to Response to ldquoPentagon Misses Warhead Retirement Deadlinerdquo October 13 2009 httpwwwfasorgblogssp200910w62php

In theory yes and EMP or High-Altitude EMP (HEMP) has been part of US and Russian nuclear strike planning for decades Some also believe China might also use it in a war But in recent years some people have warned about scenarios ranging from DPRK Iran or terrorist organizations using EMP against the United States or its allies to disrupt critical electronic infrastructure An EMP Commission has even been established by Congress in 2001

We reduce size

Lewallen 2k John- Public Ocean Access Network ldquoThe Blackout Bombrdquo North Coast Express Spring 2000 httpsonicnet~doretkIssues00-03-SPRtheblackhtml

Any future global war is likely to begin with a few Blackout Bombs China Russia the U nited S tates and other nuclear powers have several nuclear missiles and perhaps weaponized satellites designed to lay down EMP over continent-size areas instantaneously While every nation on Earth is vulnerable to attack from the United States the United States is vulnerable indeed defenseless to a secret class of nuclear weapons which has captured the attention of the major nuclear powers--China Russia Britain France and the United States itself--for the past thirty-eight years

18

Cornell HKHANE Aff

General Topicality 22

Plan reduces roles

Buchan et al 3 Glenn C David Matonick Calvin Shipbaugh Richard Mesic ldquoFuture Roles Of US Nuclear Forces Implications For US Strategyrdquo RAND sponsored by the United States Air Force

In addressing the role nuclear weapons might play in contemporary US national security policy the first step is a ldquoback to basicsrdquo review of nuclear weapons mdashwhat they do what makes them unique and how they have served US security interests in the past WHAT NUCLEAR WEAPONS DO The most fundamental characteristic of nuclear weapons is their almost unlimited destructive power That destructiveness manifests itself in two ways First is the potentially apocalyptic effects of a large-scale war fought with nuclear weapons That obviously has been the driving force behind movements to reduce or eliminate nuclear weapons since the dawn of the nuclear age Second is the enormous destructive power that can be put into a small package which can then be delivered by any one of a number of means A single nuclear detonation can destroy virtually any individual target or lay waste to large areas (eg destroy a city) That characteristic changed the nature of war dramatically It appeared to make defense in the traditional sense virtually impossible because of the damage that even a single nuclear weapon that leaked through defenses could cause Also when coupled with long-range delivery systems (particularly long-range bombers and ballistic missiles) nuclear weapons allowed those possessing them to destroy an enemyrsquos homeland without necessarily having to defeat its military forces first Thus nuclear weapons if used effectively could prevent an enemyrsquos military from achieving the most fundamental objective of any military establishment protecting its homeland That changed the traditional concepts of warEven in strictly military terms nuclear weapons are simply more effective than other weapons in destroying targets Table 21 shows some classes of targets against which nuclear weapons are particularly effective As experience with the weapons grew so did the range of potential applications Some took advantage of special effects of nuclear weapons other than just heat and blast Electromagnetic pulse (EMP) and radar and communications blackout are examples These characteristics of nuclear weapons offered attractive strategic advantages to those who owned them bull Coercion of enemies by threat or use of nuclear weapons (eg the US nuclear attacks on Japan to coerce Japan to surrender unconditionally and end World War II)bull Deterrence of a range of actions by threat of nuclear use bull A means of offsetting an imbalance of conventional forces (eg the US rationale for its nuclear posture in Europe the original motivation for the Swedish nuclear weapons program which never came to fruition)

19

Cornell HKHANE Aff

General Topicality 1AR 12

Extend that we reduce the missions of the nuclear weapons arsenal Kristensen indicates STRATCOM has specific missions employing EMPs Additionally Dunn indicates that high-altitude nuclear explosions have been in our strike plans since the early stages of the Cold War

Additionally war games prove we have EMP missions in early stages of nuclear warfare

Berry 8 Ken Research Coordinator ICNND ldquoNew Weapons Technologyrdquo International Commission on Nuclear Non-proliferation and Disarmament

An aggressor state deploying such weapons could destroy the vast majority of a target countryrsquos electronics including computers cars phones and the power grid All nuclear armed states have the capacity to achieve this and it has been estimated that as little as three high altitude nuclear explosions could blanket an area the size of continental US40 Western Europe Australia or Brazil Open source material has indicated that the US China France and Russia have all used the tactic of an EMP as a surprise first strike in war games 41 Chinese military writings have described scenarios where EMPmdashpresumably non-nuclearmdashis used against US aircraft carriers in a conflict over Taiwan42 A survey of worldwide military and scientific literature found widespread knowledge about EMP and its potential military utility in countries including Taiwan Israel Egypt India Pakistan Iran and North Korea Moreover some terrorist organizations have apparently sought information relating to EMP produced by nuclear weapons as well as on the technology of directed energy weapons These are small non-nuclear weapons that produce an EMP-like effect but over a very much more restricted area43

Extend that we reduce size- Lewallen says we have nuclear missiles designed for HANEs

And missiles are part of the nuclear weapons arsenal

Los Alamos National Laboratory 9 httpwwwlanlgovnatlsecuritynuclearstockpile Accessed 08-05-09The stockpile also called the nuclear arsenal refers to a countrys supply of readily available nuclear weapons The term nuclear weapons refers to the explosive warheads and the bombs and missiles that can deliver them to enemy targets

Extend that we reduce roles Buchan says that EMP attacks perform vital roles of the nuclear arsenal because of their unique effect including coercion deterrence and asymmetric warfare

Here is evidence that high altitude EMP strikes are key tools in asymmetric warfare

Weston 9 Maj Scott A USAF ldquoExamining Space Warfare Scenarios Risks and US Policy Implicationsrdquo Air amp Space Power Journal - Spring 2009

The United States has just one counterspace weaponmdashan electronic counter communication system specifically designed and fielded with the intent of disrupting enemy satellite communications23 Recently however we successfully utilized the Standard Missile 3 in a dual-use role as a kinetic ASAT weapon24 Although the political repercussions from creating additional space debris will likely prohibit further tests the missile and supporting systems are already fielded in an antiballistic missile (ABM) role therefore we consider it an ASAT system that we could field in the near term The U nited S tates can also conduct asymmetric space attacks (eg an EMP produced by exploding a US nuclear-tipped ballistic missile in space ) Since the United States possesses nearly half of all orbiting satellites such an indiscriminate attack would do more harm to US interests than to those of the enemy But what about our opponentsrsquo capability Does a space weapon ldquogaprdquo exist

20

Cornell HKHANE Aff

General Topicality 1AR 22

Lean aff on topicality the information is highly classified making it impossible for us to definitively prove US nuclear EMP posture

Ruppe 4 David ldquoPlausibility of EMP Threat Classified Expert Saysrdquo Global Security Newswire September 24 2004

When asked following his presentation whether US scientists have developed and tested a kilotons-scale weapon to demonstrate its EMP capability Wood said he could not comment The commission conducted assessments of what the United States and others know about such weapons and questions about such matters were addressed in a classified session with members of Congress following a public presentation of the commissionrsquos report he said ldquoWe presented in open session then we went up and spent another few more hours and presented in closed session where they asked and were given answersrdquo to such questions he said ldquoBut they are members and it was a tightly closed environment a doom roomrdquo he said ldquoIrsquod be willing to take the chance to inform the American people about what the situation is but Irsquom forbidden by law to do sordquo

EMP strikes play a prominent mission in the 2001 NPRrsquos tailored deterrence

Stearns-Boles 7 Sherry L- Air Force Space Command (AFSPC) Chair to Air University (AU) ldquoThe Future Role And Need For Nuclear Weapons In The 21st Centuryrdquo US Air Force 2007

The first official reference to tailored deterrence occurred in the 2001 NPR Spring and Gudgel assessed the tailored deterrence doctrine for nuclear weapons in accordance with the latest NPR [a prescription for] a flexible nuclear weapons policy This is necessary in todaylsquos environment of multiple players with different strengths which has replaced the two-player model of the Cold War [N]ew military requirements should be developed to address this changed environment and to ensure a modern strategic force that is capable of dealing with different missions- Leadership and command and control targets which operate from heavily fortified underground locations- Hostile nuclear coalitions which may include rogue states failed or failing states and powerful terrorist groups based in sanctuary states- New nuclear-armed allies which may or may not have confidence in the United Stateslsquo deterrent ability and- Electromagnetic pulse (EMP) weapons an effective deterrent that adversaries may not be able to wield 129

The New Triad includes EMP strikes

Guthe 2 Kurt- Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments ldquoThe Nuclear Posture Review How Is the ldquoNew Triadrdquo Newrdquo 2002

Differences in the damage mechanisms of New Triad strike capabilities should promote effects based targeting Effects-based targeting is intended not simply to destroy targets but to do so in a way that produces broader military political economic and social effects that further operational and strategic objectives106 The damage mechanisms for nuclear weapons include blast thermal radiation nuclear radiation and electromagnetic phenomena (electromagnetic pulse for example ) Those for nonnuclear munitions are blast fragmentation penetration and fire Damage mechanisms for offensive information operations include software tools (such as malicious code) that manipulate or destroy computer networks within military economic or telecommunications infrastructures and directed energy from high-power microwave weapons that can knock out military or commercial electronic systems Because their damage mechanisms have disparate direct (or first-order) physical effects on targets nuclear weapons nonnuclear munitions and information operations must be compared and traded off in terms of their capabilities for achieving indirect (or higher-order) effects that impair the ability or weaken the will of the enemy to fight The problem is not one of calculating how many more high-explosive weapons are needed in lieu of a single nuclear weapon to produce sufficient blast to destroy a given target Instead the problems will lie in acquiring more detailed intelligence and better understanding of critical vulnerabilities in targets and target systems predicting the effects when different strike capabilities are applied against these vulnerabilities assessing actual effects under wartime conditions (the consequences of offensive information operations may be especially hard to ascertain)

determining the linkages among effects outcomes and objectives and deciding how best to employ the various means of attack

21

Cornell HKHANE Aff

More Topicality

Kristensen 97 Hans M- Director of the Nuclear Information Project at the Federation of American Scientists ldquoTargets of Opportunityrdquo Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists SeptemberOctober 1997

The Defense Special Weapons Agencys 1997 projects include adjusting electromagnetic pulse (EMP) data for nuclear weapons to allow war planners to assess the damage that would be inflicted by nuclear weapons EMP effects The project will also investigate possible design modification and delivery methods that could ldquolimit or minimize collateral damagerdquo Models for using EMP to knock out hardened targets will be developed to devise a new tool for PC-based weapon lethality prediction and target damage assessmentsrdquo28

Dunn 6 JR- editor of the International Military Encyclopedia ldquoThe EMP Threat ElectroMagnetic Pulse Warfarerdquo American Thinker April 21 2006

EMP was discovered as a byproduct of the Starfish Prime nuclear test on July 9 1962 A 15 megaton bomb set off 240 miles over the Central Pacific blew up street lights and TV sets in Hawaii 1000 miles away created a mock aurora visible even further and destroyed a number of orbiting satellites including the Telstar I the pioneering telecommunications satellite In short order nuclear attack plans were modified to commence with an EMP strike over enemy territory Military electronics underwent a hardening process with the development of chips and other components resistant to EMP Today even military jets and missiles are constructed to withstand the effect (The same processes would work for civilian application as well but in most cases would be prohibitively expensive)

The US is continuing to develop nuclear EMP weapons

Merkle 97 Major Scott W- Air Command and General Staff College Maxwell Air Force Base ldquoNon-Nuclear EMP Automating the Military May Prove a Real Threatrdquo Military Intelligence Professional Bulletin

So to this extent the plot of Goldeneye is plausible Any of several nations with nuclear weapons and the capacity to launch them into space including the United States Russia China and even Israel could conceivably pulse us back to shall we say a simpler time when operations orders were done orally with a sandtable instead of with the high-speed graphics and charts that turn into an encyclopedia that few people care to read Even more unsettling however is the fact that the US Defense Technology Plan confirms that development of advanced EMP weapons continues to this day and not just by the Americans According to a report drafted by conservative members of the French National Assembly in 1992 EMP weapons testing was a recommended goal during Frances 1995 underground nuclear tests6

22

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Future Wars Conflicts Likely

There probability of great power nuclear war in the next 50 years is 40 percent (1 - 9950)

Hellman 8 Dr Martin- Stanford Professor of Engineering 2008 ldquoRisk Analysis of Nuclear Deterrencerdquo httpwwwnuclearriskorgpaperpdf

Since conditional probabilities were used they can be multiplied yielding an estimated range of (2E-4 5E-3) for lCMTC the failure rate of deterrence based on just this one failure mechanism The upper limit 5E-3 is within a factor of two of my estimate that the failure rate of deterrence from all sources is on the order of one percent per year and even the lower limit is well above the level that any engineering design review would find acceptable Because this estimate is based on a simplified time invariant model it does not apply to the current point in time when relations between the US and Russia are significantly better than they were on average during the last 50 years However that does not invalidate its conclusions Russian-American relations are deteriorating and new trigger mechanisms are coming into playmdashnotably nuclear proliferation terrorism and the expansion of NATO right up to the Russian bordermdashmaking it possible that the next 50 years could be even more dangerous than the last Furthermore atypical times have a disproportionate effect on risk A significant fraction of the total risk during the last 50 years occurred during the 13 days of the Cuban missile crisismdasha period that constituted just 007 of that time period Because crises produce so much of the overall risk it is important to look beyond todayrsquos relatively benign world and also consider the rare disruptive times when events

The past conflicts our Hellman analysis investigates arose for a variety of reasons They cannot access solvency for all possible scenarios of conflict

Hellman 8 Dr Martin- Stanford Professor of Engineering 2008 ldquoRisk Analysis of Nuclear Deterrencerdquo httpwwwnuclearriskorgpaperpdf

As noted above there have been at least three possible initiating events in the first 50 years of nuclear deterrence the Cuban missiles in 1962 President Reaganrsquos threat to reimpose a naval blockade of Cuba in the 1980s and the current deployment of an American missile defense system in Eastern Europe Taking the average rate of occurrence of these possible initiating events three in 50 years results in an estimate lIE = 006 A higher estimate would result if other crises were included as possible initiating events Examples include the Berlin crisis of 1961 the Six-Day War of 1967 and the Yom Kippur War of 1973 all of which involved at least implied nuclear threats To temper the possibility of this article being seen as alarmist it only considers the first three possible initiating events and therefore uses lIE = 006

23

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Future Wars Ext

Unfortunately future great power wars will be initiated with EMP strikes

Lewallen 2k John- Public Ocean Access Network ldquoThe Blackout Bombrdquo North Coast Express Spring 2000 httpsonicnet~doretkIssues00-03-SPRtheblackhtml

Any future global war is likely to begin with a few Blackout Bombs China Russia the United States and other nuclear powers have several nuclear missiles and perhaps weaponized satellites designed to lay down EMP over continent-size areas instantaneously While every nation on Earth is vulnerable to attack from the United States the United States is vulnerable indeed defenseless to a secret class of nuclear weapons which has captured the attention of the major nuclear powers--China Russia Britain France and the United States itself--for the past thirty-eight years

EMP-gtwar

Lewallen 2 John- Political Science at Whitman University organizer of the Nuclear Peace Action Group Fulbright Scholarship recipient Public Ocean Access Network ldquoHigh-Altitude Nuclear Warrdquo Nuclear Press Pg43

If it comes the next global war almost certainly will begin with high-altitude nuclear EMP Anything done or refrained from to reduce international conflict and promote international cooperation will help humanity avoid the awesome setback of global war The nation-state system itself is perhaps the most dangerous factor auguring high-altitude nuclear war It is perhaps amazing that we humans have gone the past fifty-five years without anyone blowing up a nuclear bomb How much longer can we tickle the dragonrsquos tail before the fundamental flaw of competing armies with nuclear weapons finishes us off The United States fond of calling itself the worldrsquos only superpower has the same tendency as past military empires (although not a self-acknowledged empire) a strong and perhaps inevitable drive to move from world preeminence to world domination The US military-industrial complex is set up to endlessly conceive design produce and deploy new strategic weaponry

24

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT Limited War Winter

a) Quinlin indicates that nuclear war would deescalate after the first detonation War wouldnrsquot escalate to even 100 nukes

b) Nuclear testing disproves their theory

Sublette 1 Carey ldquoGallery of US Nuclear Testsrdquo 6 August 2001 httpnuclearweaponarchiveorgUsaTestsBetween 16 July 1945 and 23 September 1992 the United States of America conducted (by official count) 1054 nuclear tests and two nuclear attacks The number of actual nuclear devices (aka bombs) tested and nuclear explosions is larger than this but harder to establish precisely Some devices that were tested failed to produce any noticeable explosion (some by design some not) other tests (by official definition) were actually multiple device detonations It is not clear whether all multiple device tests have yet been identified and enumerated

c) Their study assumes countervalue targeting which is important because only cities are ignited into firestorms Great powers use counterforce targeting which targets silos in the middle of the desert or Siberia

Madrigal 9 Alexis ldquolsquoRegionalrsquo Nuclear War Would Cause Worldwide Destructionrdquo WIRED Science April 7Millsrsquo work which appears online today in the Proceedings of the National Academies of Science used a model from National Center for Atmospheric Research to look at the impact of throwing 5 million metric tons of black carbon or soot into the atmosphere He found that when a cluster of cities are burning together they end up creating their own weather pumping soot 20000 feet into the atmosphere Once there sunlight would heat the smoke and drive it up 260000 feet above the earthrsquos surface

d) Robock admits limited nuclear war would not cause winter Our Helfand evidence indicates 1000 nukes are needed to cause winter

Harrell 9 Eben ldquoRegional Nuclear War and the Environmentrdquo TIME Jan 22 2009Alan Robock a Professor in the Department of Environmental Sciences at Rutgers University who participated in the original nuclear winter research recently completed a study on the results of a nuclear war between India and Pakistan He spoke with TIME from his office in New Brunswick New Jersey CONTINUED Your study predicts mass cooling With all the heat and radioactivity of the explosions why wouldnt nuclear war warm the planet It has nothing to do with the radioactivity of the explosions mdash although that would be devastating to nearby populations The explosions would set off massive fires which would produce plumes of black smoke The sun would heat the smoke and lift it into the stratosphere mdash thats the layer above the troposphere where we live mdash where there is no rain to clear it out It would be blown across the globe and block the sun The effect would not be a nuclear winter but it would be colder than the little ice age [in the 17th and 18th centuries] and the change would happen very rapidly mdash over the course of a few weeks

25

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Accidents- LoW Bad

Hair trigger alert creates a high risk of extinction

Blair 8 Bruce G- president of the Center for Defense Information and World Security Institute former senior fellow in foreign policy for the Brookings Institution and former Minuteman officer ldquoDe-alerting Strategic Forcesrdquo Reykjavik Revisited Steps Toward a World Free of Nuclear Weapons published by the Hoover Institute httpmediahooverorgdocuments9780817949211_ch2pdf

There are a host of reasons why removing forces from launch ready alert and abandoning archaic nuclear war-fighting strategies are urgent priorities Beyond the familiar arguments about the danger of accidental nuclear attack triggered by false alarms and unauthorized launches by unreliable personnel lurk shadowy new threats stemming from terrorist scenarios and growing cybernetic threats to the nuclear command and warning systems In an era of terrorism and information warfare staking the survival of humanity on the assumption that imperfect human and technical systems of nuclear command and control will forever prevent a disastrous breakdown of safeguards against mistaken or unauthorized use of nuclear weapons is simply imprudent in the extreme An in-depth discussion of the potential exploitable weaknesses in nuclear command systems is beyond the scope of this analysis but a few general observations are pertinent First many of the deficiencies are unknown some will never be found and others will not be discovered until it is too late The complexity of command systems prevents a full reckoning of the risks run by hair-trigger postures Periodic investigations routinely discover glaring weaknesses however For instance a Pentagon investigation conducted by an independent commission in the 1990s at the behest of then Sen Sam Nunn to evaluate the effectiveness of US nuclear safeguards against unauthorized launch found dozens of major deficiencies14 This commission recommended a multitude of remedies including installing a special new safeguard on Trident subsmdashthe inner safe described earliermdashto create a technical barrier to unauthorized launch Second many of the deficiencies that are identified and addressed turn out not to have been corrected The introduction of ldquoenable coderdquo devices into Minuteman launch centers in the 1960s is a case in point In theory the devices required launch crews to receive an eight-digit code from higher authority in order to arm their missilesrsquo warheads prior to launch In practice the Strategic Air Command unbeknownst to higher authority (such as former Defense Secretary Robert McNamara who initiated and pressed for this safeguard) configured the devices so that they were always set to all zerosmdashthat was the secret password known to all launch crews This circumvention persisted until 1976 when actual codes were finally introduced In the interim the posture ran a higher risk of unauthorized launch by crew members or others who might have gained access to the launch centers including terrorists15 Third the nuclear command systems today operate in an intense information battleground on which more than 20 nations including Russia China and North Korea have developed dedicated computer attack programs16 These programs deploy viruses to disable confuse and delay nuclear command and warning processes in other nations The US Strategic Command is no exception Information warfare is now one of its core missions At the brink of conflict nuclear command and warning networks around the world may be besieged by electronic intruders whose onslaught degrades the coherence and rationality of nuclear decision making The potential for perverse consequences with computer-launched weapons on hair-trigger is clear Other information warfare programs are designed to infiltrate and collect information on for example the schedule of the movement of nuclear warheads during peacetime Hacking operations of these sorts are increasing exponentially as the militaries of the world increasingly depend on computer and communications networks The number of attempts by outside hostile actors to break into Defense Department networks has surged by tenfold in the past couple of years Hostile intrusion attempts against Pentagon computer systems now run in the neighborhood of 1000 per day (China is especially active) What is worse some of this expanding illicit penetration involves insiders creating a whole new dimension to the ldquoinsiderrdquo threat to nuclear systems If insiders with knowledge of special passwords or other sensitive information related to nuclear weapons activities collude with outsiders the integrity of nuclear command and control systems and safeguards against the unauthorized launch of nuclear weapons on launch-trigger alert may well be compromised The guiding principle of nuclear safeguards during the past 50 yearsmdashthe twoman rulemdashmay be obsolete in the age of information warfare The notion that having a second person present during any sensitive nuclear operation would prevent an accidental or intentional nuclear incident may have been sound during the labor-intensive and analog dominated era of nuclear command and control but in the modern age of information warfare new safeguards may be needed to prevent the electronic compromise of missiles on hair-trigger alert Adding terrorists to this equation gives further reason to believe that the Cold War nuclear postures are counterproductivemdashthey exacerbate rather than alleviate nuclear problems and they are an accident waiting to happen There is a possibility that terrorists could spoof early warning sensors and thereby engender false alarms that precipitate nuclear overreactions The possibility also exists that terrorists possibly with insider help may get inside the command and communications networks controlling nuclear forces They might gain information useful to interdicting and capturing weapons or unauthorized actors might discover ways to inject messages into the circuits 17 Again the wisdom of keeping nuclear forces ready to fly instantaneously upon receipt of a short stream of computer signals is dubious

26

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT FS Remains - Russia

Without EMP hundreds of strategic weapons would have to be armed- Russia would notice and disperse

Yarynich amp Starr 7 Valery- Professor of the Academy for Military Sciences and Steven- Engineers and Scientists Against Proliferation ldquoNuclear Primacy is a Fallacyrdquo Global Research March 4 2007

Third in order to conduct a first strike it is necessary to implement a number of organizational and technical procedures within the strategic nuclear forces This is because in peacetime there are numerous procedural and technological blocks in place which are designed to protect nuclear weapons against human error accidents and sabotage In order to remove such barriers as a preliminary step towards launching a nuclear first strike it would require the participation of a significant number of crews on duty working at different operational levels The implementation of all the above mentioned circumstances as preparations for a ldquosurpriserdquo first strike would be technically impossible to hide Therefore the opposite side would have a certain amount of time to raise the combat readiness of its strategic nuclear forces If Russia did that then as Lieber and Press recognize themselves nuclear retaliation is inevitable

Mobile missiles make first strike impossible without EMPs

Podvig 6 Pavel- Research Associate at the Center for International Security and Cooperation at Stanford University ldquoNuclear Exchange Does Washington Really Have (or Want) Nuclear Primacyrdquo Foreign Affairs SeptemberOctober 2006

Lieber and Press are right to state that Russia may end up having as few as 150 land-based missiles by the end of the decade But about half of those ICBMs would probably be road-mobile Topols and Topol-Ms which if operated properly would have a good chance of surviving a first strike Lieber and Press dismiss Russias mobile missiles by saying that they rarely patrol In reality very little is known about Russias mobile-missile patrol rates and although it is quite plausible that they are low it is a stretch to assume that they are zero

EMP first strike capability is uniquely dangerous because it requires only a few warheads making the threshold for responding to false warnings much lower

Non EMP first strike requires thousands of warheads which will show up on EWS

Yarynich amp Starr 7 Valery- Professor of the Academy for Military Sciences and Steven- Engineers and Scientists Against Proliferation ldquoNuclear Primacy is a Fallacyrdquo Global Research March 4 2007

Lieber and Press also assume that the Russian Early Warning System will be completely unable to reveal a massed American attack capable of destroying all Russian nuclear forces ldquoA critical issue for the outcome of a US attack [they say] is the ability of Russia to launch on warning (ie quickly launch a retaliatory strike before its forces are destroyed) It is unlikely that Russia could do thisrdquo We believe this important conclusion demands more serious calculations than the mere statement that ldquoit is unlikelyrdquo Its necessary to prove that the Russian EWS will be completely incapable of revealing such massed American attack which is capable of destroying all Russian nuclear forces

27

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT FS Remains - China

Lack of perfect Intel makes a first strike on China impossible post plan

Aby 7 The Liberal 7142007 non-profit internationalist site committed to the dissipiation of information pertaining toworld politics social issues cultures travel tips local customs et el ldquoChinarsquos MAD Nuclear Deterrence Against USArdquo lthttpwwwabytheliberalcomworld-politicschinas-mad-nuclear-deterrance-usagt

Chinarsquos nuclear force is based on a lsquoNo First Uselsquo policy formulated by its erstwhile President Mao Zedong This makes sense as China could not launch a first strike against US without facing obliteration in a strike-back by US The small quantity of nuclear warheads and strategic missiles that China possesses would make a Chinese attack on US nuclear facilities futile as China has neither the accuracy of missiles nor the number of warheads required to destroy the all the US facilities On the other hand United States with its improvised and highly accurate strategic missiles (Trident and Minuteman) could strike and destroy over 75 of Chinarsquos nuclear facilities with just about 2-4 of its nuclear and missile arsenal spent But even in the event of a war a successful destruction of 75-80 of Chinarsquos nuclear facilities leaves at least 20-25 surviving which can be used as a retaliatory attack against the United States A 100 destruction of Chinarsquos nuclear facilities would be highly unlikely considering the logistical impossibility of targeting and destroying all of Chinarsquos mobile and SILO launched nuclear ICBMs Since China canrsquot destroy US nuclear facilities as a retaliatory resort it would strike what hurts USA most - its people This is primarily the reason why US cities have been targets of Chinese ICBMs for the last few decades A DF 5A (Dong Feng) missile launched from hardened or mobile SILOs in Chinarsquos Hunan province will have most of West and Central US in its reach A 12000 km DF 5 Mod 2 goes even further including east coast cities like New York and Atlanta in its range if a polar trajectory is followed A DF 5A ICBM can carry a 35 MT (Megaton) thermonuclear warhead The 35 MT warhead detonated at a height of 2500 meters would have a blast radius of 7 km exposing 154 km2 of the ground surface to a blast overpressure of 10 psi or higher In addition to the immediate energy shockwaves of the blast such a high yield H-Bomb would also cause widespread radiation fallouts and heated firestorms due to the rapid changes in the atmospheric pressure which follow such an explosion If a single such warhead is detonated over a busy megapolis like New York Chicago or Los Angeles at least 15 million people would be eliminated immediately during the explosion and a further million within another 72 hours due to radiation burns sickness and firestorms If only 5 of the DF 5As are launched against 5 US cities and 4 of them successfully strike the US mainland more than 10 million people would face extermination According to US DoD Reports to the Congress in 2006 a DF5A Mod2 can be MIRVed with 6 warheads of 250 KT each In such a case if each warhead detonates 1500 metres above the ground the total blast radius (10 psi) of all the six warheads would exceed 21 kms bringing over 1386 km2 under coverage The fatalities from a single such strike on a city like New York or Chicago would exceed 5 million at the bare minimum In such a scenario if 4 of these missiles with 24 warheads strike 4-10 US cities with an accuracy of 83 at least 14 million people would be annihilated in these cities This still leaves out the DF 31A ICBMs and JL-1 SLBMs which could strike US targets and further the damage From both the cases it can be understood than even a retaliatory second strike by China can inflict severe devastation on the continental US These are just bare conservative estimates reality could be much more deadly and devastating with 40-100 million casualties Chinese military strategists can easily do this calculation themselves and as such it becomes apparent why China is so sure that its relatively small number of ICBMs act as an adequate deterrent against the United States or even India and Russia for that matter The threat of even a few surviving nuclear missiles hitting the United States serves as a robust deterrent for the United States China would not consider a first strike either as it would face total annihilation due to the massive US nuclear and missile stockpile Thus the MAD balance is maintained between these two countries one wary of the other despite their significant disparity in nuclear weapons stockpile and delivery systems

28

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT FS Remains - Subs

China has subs

Stephen Herzog British American Security Information Council August 2008 ldquoThe Dilemma between Deterrence and Disarmament Moving beyond the Perception of China as a Nuclear Threatrdquo Basic Papers lthttpwwwbasicintorgpubsPapersBP57pdfgt

The Jin-class is Beijingrsquos replacement for the defunct Type 092-class (NATO designation Xiaclass) SSBN The Xia-class was Chinarsquos first nuclear-powered ballistic missile-capable submarine and was a resounding failure The PRC only produced two of these SSBNs and they did not conduct patrols outside of Chinese territorial waters27 The Jin-class is silentmdashdue to its nuclear power sourcemdashand is virtually invulnerable to a potential first-strike it ensures that the PRC has a sea-based deterrent to complement its land-based strategic nuclear forces Since China finds itself in a position of significant numerical warhead inferiority to the United Statesmdash possibly facing a first-strike in the event of a confrontationmdashthe Jin-class SSBN could give the Sino leadership confidence in their second-strike capability If this is the case rather than being viewed as a threat Chinese deployment of SSBNs could be seen as a confidence-building stabilizing factor in Chinarsquos relationship with the West While the PRC is known to have three commissioned Jin-class SSBNs the United States United Kingdom and France have a total of 22 SSBNs many of which are armed with MIRV-equipped SLBMs28

Russia has them too

NTI 9ldquoRussia Restores Nuclear-Armed Submarine Patrolsrdquo Global Security Wednesday Feb 18 2009Russia might be maintaining continuous nuclear-armed submarine patrols for the first time in 10 years the Federation of American Scientists announced yesterday (see GSN Feb 13) The number of patrols by ballistic missile submarines declined steadily after reaching a high of more than 100 in 1984 and dropped more steeply after the collapse of the Soviet Union In 2002 there were zero Russian missile submarine patrols Russia last year however conducted 10 patrols the most since 1998 That raises the possibility that Russia is always keeping at least one boat at sea for nuclear deterrence said FAS nuclear expert Hans Kristensen

EMPs threaten sub survivability

Graham 4 Dr William R- Deputy Administrator of NASA The report of the Commission to Assess the Threat to the United States From Electromagnetic Pulse Attackrdquo July 22 2004

Mr Langevin Have you assessed the threat of EMP to our surface fleet and submarines Do submarines have a greater likelihood of retaining operational capabilities if they are underwater during an EMP strike Dr Graham The EMP Commission did consider the threat of EMP to surface vessels and submarines Ballistic Missile Submarines are designed and built to survive an EMP attack Care is taken when the ship is modified or equipment added or upgraded to insure that survivability is maintained Particular attention is paid to the potential vulnerability introduced when the ship is at periscope depth or trailing a wire antenna Submarines do have a greater likelihood of retaining operational capabilities if they are underwater during an EMP attack and not trailing an antenna which can couple energy into the submerged vessel However if land-based communications are impacted the ship may survive but not be capable of receiving orders and therefore accomplishing its mission because the sender cant send The survivability of the surface fleet is uncertain without testing and a submarine in port is a surface ship

29

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Rogue- Seeking

Rogue states are seeking EMP capability

McNeill amp Weitz 8 Jena Baker- homeland security policy analyst at The Heritage Foundation and Richard- Senior Fellow and Director of the Center for Political-Military Analysis at Hudson Institute ldquoElectromagnetic Pulse (EMP) Attack A Preventable Homeland Security Catastropherdquo Heritage Foundation Backgrounder 2199 httpwwwheritageorgresearchhomelandsecuritybg2199cfm_ftn19

The range of actors that might attempt an EMP attack against the United States is obviouslymdashand distressinglymdashlarge and includes conventional military regimes rogue states with limited conventional military capabilities and terrorist groups that seek to inflict catastrophic damage on America Both Russia and China have dabbled in EMP technology for decades There is evidence that suggests that certain Russian nuclear weapons have already been optimized to generate enhanced EMP effects[16] Just this year Russian scientists claimed to have developed a compact apparatus that can fit on a dining table The electromagnetic pulse associated with this device could amount to billions of watts of power in a single platform[17] Analysts have also identified Chinese military writings that discuss using EMP weapons in international conflicts[18] For countries less dependent on modern technologies and electronics including both rogue states like Iran and North Korea as well as stateless terrorist groups EMP provides a potential way to attack the United States through asymmetric means EMPs could be used to circumvent Americas superior conventional military power while reducing vulnerability to retaliation in kind It would certainly not be impossible for a terrorist organization especially if state-sponsored to acquire or construct an unsophisticated ballistic missile (non-working Scuds are reportedly available on the open market for $100000) and use it in an EMP attack against America[19] Such a missile could be launched from a freighter in international waters and detonated in the atmosphere over the United States without warning

30

Cornell HKHANE Aff

China Solves NoKo

China can solve North Korea ndash the alternative is US Strikes which escalate to War ndash US action to influence China is key

Doug Bandow 2009 is a senior fellow at the Cato Institute A former special assistant to President Reagan he is the author of Tripwire Korea and US Foreign Policy in a Changed World (Cato Institute) and co-author of The Korean Conundrum Americas Troubled Relations with North and South Korea (PalgraveMacmillan) July 2 2009 (Real Clear World Time to Play China Card on North Korea)

North Korea appears to have moved from intermittent to constant provocation The only nation with real influence in Pyongyang is China South Koreas President Lee Myung-bak visited Washington two weeks ago but a solution is no closer American diplomacy should focus on encouraging Beijing to do its utmost to solve the problem of the Norths criminal regime The challenge posed by the so-called Democratic Peoples Republic of Korea (DPRK) is obvious to all Probably the most murderous government on earth Kim Jong-ils regime has presided over the death by famine of at least a half million people His regimes brutality is both tragic and legendary While impoverishing his people he has maintained an oversize military including an active nuclear-weapons program And he has created a unique marriage of communism and monarchy apparently designating his youngest son now called the brilliant comrade to be his successor just as he succeeded his father Kim Il-sung Although evil he is not suicidal Kim Jong-il enjoys his virgins in this life rather than desiring them in the next one Nevertheless eliminating his regime would be an obvious humanitarian and security plus Bottom of Form Unfortunately no easy solution presents itself Kims latest confrontational tactics do not prevent a negotiated settlement-US special envoy Stephen Bosworth has emphasized the administrations desire to engage Pyongyang-but the likelihood of diplomacy resulting in a demilitarized peninsula grows ever smaller Even if the DPRK proves willing to halt any new nuclear activities it is very unlikely to turn over existing nuclear materials And while Washington should continue to pursue both bilateral and multilateral negotiations the process may yield little other than frustration Tighter sanctions also offer but a forlorn hope Amid reports that the North is planning a new nuclear test the UN Security Council voted to tighten sanctions Americas UN ambassador Susan Rice said the measure provided a strong very credible very appropriate response But it in fact offered little in the way of increased enforcement North Korea already is the worlds most isolated state Moreover the regime has never let the suffering of its people affect its policies A government which allowed a half million people to starve is not likely to be moved by increased hardship for those who remain alive So is a North Korean nuclear arsenal inevitable Maybe not Only Beijing has the clout necessary to influence the DPRK The former provides the bulk of the Norths food fuel and consumer goods trade between the two nations has been rising Severing that lifeline could bring the North Korean economy to a standstill However so far the Peoples Republic of China (PRC) has demurred Indeed before passage of the latest Security Council resolution the PRC called for an appropriate and balanced measure and emphasized calmness and restraint Even now Chinas government appears to fear a North Korean collapse more than a North Korean nuclear weapon The last option is war-either a limited strike on Pyongyangs atomic bases or a more general attack Washington obviously could destroy nuclear facilities above ground and perhaps underground Whether doing so would permanently block the Norths nuclear efforts and eliminate its existing atomic capabilities are less clear Moreover an attack probably would result in war The Kim regime likely would see a strike as the first step in an attempt at coercive regime change Moreover to do nothing would wreck its credibility at home and stature abroad While it is not likely to foolishly start a losing war the DPRK government isnt likely to passively accept a conflict begun by the United States Although the North would lose any conflict it could cause massive damage to the South whose capital Seoul lies close to the Demilitarized Zone and thus within range of both artillery and Scud missiles Other possible consequences include the dispersion of nuclear debris and creation of mass refugee flows So is a North Korean nuclear arsenal inevitable Maybe not The China card has yet to be played Cynicism about Beijings role in the North Korean crisis abounds Some analysts believe that the PRC can do little to move Pyongyang which has steered an independent course for decades Others accuse China of consciously orchestrating the Norths destabilizing course And the mainstream view is that the PRC is unwilling to risk its relationship with Pyongyang or accept the costs of the regimes potential collapse Indeed Beijing has treated North Korean refugees who face prison and even death when repatriated with unconscionable brutality However Washington might be able to change Chinas calculus Its certainly worth attempting to do so The PRC could cut off aid and commerce Beijing also might be able to undertake covert action to transform the North Korean system

31

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Rogue Satelites

Rogue EMP collapses satellite communications

Haimes 9 Yacov Y- Lawrence Quarles Professor of Engineering and Applied Science Director of the Center for Risk Management of Engineering Systems University of Virginia ldquoRisk Modeling Assessment and Managementrdquo Edition 3 - 2009 p780

The vulnerability of satellites to a high-altitude nuclear detonation and the resulting electromagnetic pulse has been widely documented For example a report by the Defense Threat Reduction Agency [DTRA 2001] states LEO [low earth orbit] satellites will be of growing importance to government commercial and military users in coming years Proliferation of nuclear weapons and longer-range ballistic missile capabilities is likely to continue One low-yield (1 th-12 kt) high-altitude (125-300 km) nuclear explosion could disablemdashin weeks to monthsmdashall LEO satellites not specifically hardened to withstand radiation generated by that explosion The report states that a deliberate effort to cause economic damage with a lower likelihood of nuclear radiation fallout can he initiated by a rogue state facing economic strangulation or imminent military threat and pose economic threat to the industrial world without causing human casualties or visible damage to economic infrastructure An article in Scientific American by Dupont [2004] further highlights the risks to the global satellite system from nuclear explosions in orbit Dupont asserts that ldquoThe launch and detonation of a nuclear-tipped missile in low orbit could disrupt the critical system of commercial and civil satellites for years potentially paralyzing the global high-tech economy More nations (and maybe non-state entities) will gain this capability as nuclear-weapon and ballistic-missile technology spread around the world The possibility of an attack is relatively remote but the consequences are too severe to be ignoredrdquo A study conducted for the Commission to Assess the Threat to the United States from High-Altitude Electromagnetic Pulse Attack [Haimes et al 2005] highlights the risks to interdependent infrastructures and to the US economy due to such attacks and reiterates that the benefits of automation have brought an increased vulnerability Finally according to Dupont [2004] ldquoThe Pentagon has been working for decades to safeguard its orbital assets against the effects of nuclear explosionsHardening satellites is costly however Greater protection means more expense and more massive protective materials And heavier satellites cost significantly more to launchDespite the risks to civil orbiters however the Defense Department has failed to persuade US satellite builders to harden their spacecraft voluntarilyrdquo

32

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Rogue- AT No Tech

Tech is attainable

Schnurr 9 Avi- Executive Director of Israels Missile Defense Association reviewed US technology policy for the the Department of Defense the White House Homeland Security Council Congress and the National Academy of Sciences ldquoThe EMP Threat A Strategic Review of Geopolitical Risk Scenariosrdquo 27th July 2009 httpwwwhenryjacksonsocietyorgstoriesaspid=1227

One misunderstanding is the belief that those willing to use an EMP are not going to have the technology to create an EMP weapon However any small nuclear fission bomb would have this effect In fact without going into details there are ways to enhance the effect that would use a very small bomb Certainly a Hiroshima-sized bomb would be adequate a thermonuclear bomb a fusion bomb would not make it any larger That means the capability to do this is in the hands of anyone who can find a boat for example ndash were they to use a short-range missile ndash so it doesnrsquot have to be an ICBM Hezbollah has 300km missiles that carry half-ton warheads which would be more than adequate and al Qaeda is also well-situated in this regard And launching from a ship minimizes the fingerprints

33

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Rogue- AT No Long Range Missiles

Even if they cannot reach the middle of the US the consequences would be enormous

Birdnow 6 Timothy ldquoEMP and the Unfought Victoryrdquo American Thinker July 01 2006Even if an EMP strike should only hit the West Coast the disaster would be catastrophic the United States electric grid is divided into three segments and this strike will more than likely take the entire western power grid completely out Its going to be very hard to maintain order with no running water in the arid western United States Farmers will lose their crops the sick and elderly will die without air conditioning and other electricitymdashdependent services Of course Silicon Valley will be toast as well as such important places as Lawrence Livermore Labs our days as the highmdashtech leader could be numbered What will this do to our economy supposing the country makes it through in decent shape

Even if rogue states cannot build a big EMP they could use a small one on the battlefield

Wilson 8 Clay- Specialist in Technology and National Security Foreign Affairs Defense and Trade Division ldquoHigh Altitude Electromagnetic Pulse (HEMP) and High Power Microwave (HPM) Devices Threat Assessmentsrdquo Congressional Research Service March 26 2008

A HEMP attack directed against the Unites States continent might involve a one-megaton nuclear warhead or a smaller one that is specially-designed using a burst several hundred miles above the mid-western states to affect computers on both coasts20 However creating a HEMP effect over an area 250 miles in diameter an example size for a battlefield might only require a rocket with a modest altitude and payload capability that could loft a relatively small nuclear device If a medium or higher range missile with a nuclear payload were launched from the deck of a freighter at sea the resulting HEMP could reportedly disable computers over a wide area of the coastal United States

34

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Rogue- AT Uncertain Effects

Extend Schneider that rogues prefer EMP strikes to ground bursts because they are easier to produce Ground bursts require too much precision and rogue states will only engage in asymmetric warfare with a lower chance of retaliation

EMPs are well suited for rogue regimesrsquo goals

Timmerman 2 Kenneth R- director of the Foundation for Democracy in Iran 2006 Nobel Peace Prize Nominee ldquoUS Threatened With EMP Attackrdquo Feb 1 2002

The more backward the country the more attractive EMP becomes as a weapon against the United States Bartlett explains ldquoIf North Korea were to launch a missile straight up and explode a nuclear weapon 500 kilometers over their own territory it wouldnrsquot do them a lot of damage because they have very little dependence on electronic systems But it would have a devastating impact on South Korea as well as on our 37000 troops stationed there With North Korearsquos million soldiers they could just walk all over us with impunityrdquo

35

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Rogue- AT Attribution

Easy to get around attribution

Timmerman 8 Kenneth R- director of the Foundation for Democracy in Iran 2006 Nobel Peace Prize Nominee ldquoUS Intel Iran Plans Nuclear Strike on USrdquo News Max 29 Jul 2008

In his recent congressional testimony Graham revealed that Iranian military journals translated by the CIA at his commissionrsquos request ldquoexplicitly discuss a nuclear EMP attack that would gravely harm the United Statesrdquo Furthermore if Iran launched its attack from a cargo ship plying the commercial sea lanes off the East coast mdash a scenario that appears to have been tested during the Caspian Sea tests mdash US investigators might never determine who was behind the attack Because of the limits of nuclear forensic technology it could take months And to disguise their traces the Iranians could simply decide to sink the ship that had been used to launch it Graham said

Rogues do not fear retaliation

Wilson 8 Clay- Specialist in Technology and National Security Foreign Affairs Defense and Trade Division ldquoHigh Altitude Electromagnetic Pulse (HEMP) and High Power Microwave (HPM) Devices Threat Assessmentsrdquo Congressional Research Service March 26 2008

The threat of an EMP attack against the United States is hard to assess but some observers indicate that it is growing along with worldwide access to newer technologies and the proliferation of nuclear weapons In the past the threat of mutually assured destruction provided a lasting deterrent against the exchange of multiple high-yield nuclear warheads However now even a single specially designed low-yield nuclear explosion high above the United States or over a battlefield can produce a large-scale EMP effect that could result in a widespread loss of electronics but no direct fatalities and may not necessarily evoke a large nuclear retaliatory strike by the US military This coupled with the possible vulnerability of US commercial electronics and US military battlefield equipment to the effects of EMP may create a new incentive for other countries to develop or acquire a nuclear capability

Rogues can use terrorists

Schneider 7 [Dr Mark National Institute for Public Policy ldquoThe Emerging EMP Threat to the United Statesrdquo A Publication of the United States Nuclear Strategy Forum November httpwwwnipporgNational20Institute20PressCurrent20PublicationsPDFEMP20Paper20Final20November07pdf]

The possibility of a terrorist group obtaining a nuclear weapon particularly from a rogue state and launching an EMP attack with a crude ballistic missile such as a Scud missile is certainly within the realm of possibility Cooperation with terrorists may be attractive to nuclear-armed rogue states because of the lesser risk of attribution Indeed in March 2001 an Iranian journal stated that ldquoterrorist information warfare [includes] using the technology of directed energy weapons (DEW) or electromagnetic pulse (EMP)rdquo65

36

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Iran Ev

Iran military writings prove reliance on EMP strikes

Pry 5 Dr Peter Vincent- EMP Commission Staff ldquoForeign Views Of Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP) Attackrdquo Before The United States Senate Subcommittee On Terrorism Technology And Homeland Security March 8 2005 httpwwwendtimesreportcomEMP_attackhtml

Iran though not yet a nuclear weapon state has produced some analysis weighing the use of nuclear weapons to destroy cities as ldquoagainst Japan in World War IIrdquo compared to ldquoinformation warfarerdquo that includes ldquoelectromagnetic pulse for the destruction of unprotected circuitsrdquo An Iranian analyst describes ldquoterrorist information warfarerdquo as involving not just computer viruses but attacks using ldquoelectromagnetic pulse (EMP)rdquo (Tehran Siyasat-e Defa-I 1 March 2001) An Iranian political-military journal in an article entitled ldquoElectronics To Determine Fate Of Future Warsrdquo suggests that the key to defeating the United States is EMP attack ldquoAdvanced information technology equipment exists which has a very high degree of efficiency in warfare Among these we can refer to communication and information gathering satellites pilotless planes and the digital system Once you confuse the enemy communication network you can also disrupt the work of the enemy command and decision-making center Even worse today when you disable a countryrsquos military high command through disruption of communications you will in effect disrupt all the affairs of that country If the worldrsquos industrial countries fail to devise effective ways to defend themselves against dangerous electronic assaults then they will disintegrate within a few years American soldiers would not be able to find food to eat nor would they be able to fire a single shotrdquo (Tehran Nashriyeh-e Siasi Nezami December 1998 -January 1999)Iranian flight-tests of their Shahab-3 medium-range missile that can reach Israel and U S forces in the Persian Gulf have in recent years involved several explosions at high altitude reportedly triggered by a self-destruct mechanism on the missile The Western press has described these flight-tests as failures because the missiles did not complete their ballistic trajectories Iran has officially described all of these same tests as successful The flight-tests would be successful if Iran were practicing the execution of an EMP attack Iran as noted earlier has also successfully tested firing a missile from a vessel in the Caspian Sea A nuclear missile concealed in the hold of a freighter would give Iran or terrorists the capability to perform an EMP attack against the United States homeland without developing an ICBM and with some prospect of remaining anonymous Iranrsquos Shahab-3 medium-range missile mentioned earlier is a mobile missile and small enough to be transported in the hold of a freighter We cannot rule out that Iran the worldrsquos leading sponsor of international terrorism might provide terrorists with the means to execute an EMP attack against the United States

Iran is on the brink of gaining EMP capability

Timmerman 8 Kenneth R- director of the Foundation for Democracy in Iran 2006 Nobel Peace Prize Nominee ldquoUS Intel Iran Plans Nuclear Strike on USrdquo News Max 29 Jul 2008

In May 2007 then Undersecretary of State John Rood told Congress that the US intelligence community estimates that Iran could develop an ICBM capable of hitting the continental United States by 2015 But Iran could put a Scud missile on board a cargo ship and launch from the commercial sea lanes off Americarsquos coasts well before then The only thing Iran is lacking for an effective EMP attack is a nuclear warhead and no one knows with any certainty when that will occur The latest US intelligence estimate states that Iran could acquire the fissile material for a nuclear weapon as early as 2009 or as late as 2015 or possibly later Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld first detailed the ldquoScud-in-a-bucketrdquo threat during a briefing in Huntsville Ala on Aug 18 2004 While not explicitly naming Iran Rumsfeld revealed that ldquoone of the nations in the Middle East had launched a ballistic missile from a cargo vessel They had taken a short-range probably Scud missile put it on a transporter-erector launcher lowered it in taken the vessel out into the water peeled back the top erected it fired it lowered it and covered it up And the ship that they used was using a radar and electronic equipment that was no different than 50 60 100 other ships operating in the immediate areardquo Iranrsquos first test of a ship-launched Scud missile occurred in spring 1998 and was mentioned several months later in veiled terms by the Commission to Assess the Ballistic Missile Threat to the United States a blue-ribbon panel also known as the Rumsfeld Commission I was the first reporter to mention the Iran sea-launched missile test in an article appearing in the Washington Times in May 1999 Intelligence reports on the launch were ldquowell known to the White House but have not been disseminated to the appropriate congressional committeesrdquo I wrote Such a missile ldquocould be used in a devastating stealth attack against the United States or Israel for which the United States has no known or planned defenserdquo Few experts believe that Iran can be deterred from launching such an attack by the threat of massive retaliation against Iran They point to a December 2001 statement by former Iranian President Ali Akbar Hashemi-Rafsanjani who mulled the possibility of Israeli retaliation after an Iranian nuclear strike ldquoThe use of an atomic bomb against Israel would destroy Israel completely while [the same] against the Islamic only would cause damages Such a scenario is not inconceivablerdquo Rafsanjani said at the time

37

Cornell HKHANE Aff

NoKo Ev

North Korea is seeking and would use an EMP

Pry 5 Dr Peter Vincent- EMP Commission Staff ldquoForeign Views Of Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP) Attackrdquo Before The United States Senate Subcommittee On Terrorism Technology And Homeland Security March 8 2005 httpwwwendtimesreportcomEMP_attackhtml

In closing a few observations about the potential EMP threat from North Korea North Korean academic writings subscribe to the view voiced in Chinese Russian and Iranian writings that computers and advanced communications have inaugurated an ldquoinformation agerdquo during which the greatest strength and greatest vulnerability of societies will be their electronic infrastructures According to North Korean press Chairman Kim Chong-il is himself supposedly an avid proponent of this view (M A Kim Sang-hak ldquodevelopment of Information Industry and Construction of Powerful Socialist Staterdquo Pyongyang Kyongje Yongu 20 May 2002)The highest ranking official ever to defect from North Korea Hwang Chang-yop claimed in 1998 that North Korea has nuclear weapons and explained his defection as an attempt to prevent nuclear war According to Hwang in the event of war North Korea would use nuclear weapons ldquoto devastate Japan to prevent the United States from participating Would it still participate even after Japan is devastated That is how they thinkrdquo Although Hwang did not mention EMP it is interesting that he described North Korean thinking about nuclear weapons employment as having strategic purposesndash nuclear use against Japanndashand not tactical purposesndashnuclear employment on the battlefield in South Korea It is also interesting that according to Hwang North Korea thinks it can somehow ldquodevastaterdquo Japan with its tiny nuclear inventory although how precisely this is to be accomplished with one or two nuclear weapons is unknownPerhaps most importantly note that the alleged purpose of a North Korean nuclear strike on Japan would be to deter the United States At the time of Hwangrsquos defection in 1998 North Korearsquos longest-range missile then operational the No Dong limited North Korearsquos strategic reach to a strike on Japan Today North Korea is reportedly on the verge of achieving an ICBM capability with its Taepo Dong-2 missile estimated to be capable of delivering a nuclear weapon to the United States In 2004 the EMP Commission met with very senior Russian military officers who are experts on EMP weapons They warned that Russian scientists had been recruited by Pyongyang to work on the North Korean nuclear weapons program They further warned that the knowledge and technology to develop ldquoSuper-EMPrdquo weapons had been transferred to North Korea and that North Korea could probably develop these weapons in the near future within a few years The Russian officers said that the threat to global security that would be posed by a North Korea armed with ldquoSuper-EMPrdquo weapons is unacceptable The senior Russian military officers who claimed to be expressing their personal views to the EMP Commission said that while the Kremlin could not publicly endorse U S preemptive action Moscow would privately understand the strategic necessity of a preemptive strike by the United States against North Korearsquos nuclear complex

38

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Terrorism Adv

Plan is necessary to prevent multiple scenarios of terrorism

Lewallen 2 John- Political Science at Whitman University organizer of the Nuclear Peace Action Group Fulbright Scholarship recipient Public Ocean Access Network ldquoHigh-Altitude Nuclear Warrdquo Nuclear Press p31

Nuclear Weapons in the War of Terror A Modest Prediction on November 8 2001 Terrorist attacks against the United States will not end until the nuclear strategic balance the ldquobalance of terrorrdquo is restored among Russia China and the United StatesToday geopolitics moves at cyberspeed The War of Terror is spreading and deepening throughout the world Clear analysis of the many dimensions of the War of Terror may lead the world toward widespread peace and prosperity rather than toward the global war and depression which is being created today Rational strategic analysis of terrorism begins with the fact that international governmental cooperation is required to defeat terrorists The complete global defeat of terrorism implies international enforcement a world governmentThe nuclear confrontation of terror among Russia China and the United States is a major source of the feeling of terror sweeping the United States and much of the rest of the world With the nuclear strategic balance now disrupted and a United States having declared war on any nation it chooses with any weapons at hand actual nuclear war in the nuclear triangle is an increasingly imminent possibilityThe Russian and Chinese people are intensely and viscerally terrorized by US nuclear aggression as expressed by the US drive to achieve unilateral domination over them with national missile defense and weapons in spaceWithout the complete and wholehearted cooperation of the Chinese and Russian governments the United States will never defeat terrorismIf United States nuclear aggression continues and escalates we must expect terrorist attacks against the American homeland also to continue and escalateSeeking to avoid nuclear war with the United States Russia and China keep leading international efforts to ban weapons in space uphold the arms control treaty structure and move toward nuclear disarmament However the hands of George W Bush have torn up the treaties and loosed a US push for complete nuclear domination over Russia and ChinaThe Chinese and Russians have good reasons to publicly support the US war against international terrorism while secretly encouraging concealing or even sponsoring terrorism against the United States So much the better if the terrorists chased by the United States are also big problems to China and Russia It seems quite within either Russian or Chinese capability to sponsor acts of terrorism against the United States and to set evidence leading gullible US investigators to any terrorist networkAs I write this the Bush administration is pushing full-bore for national missile defense space weapons and intensified nuclear confrontation with Russia and ChinaThis means that terrorist attacks against the United States will continue and probably increase until the United States joins the world community of peace law and order

39

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Terrorism Adv

Future terrorist attacks threaten to collapse world order

Alexander 3 Yonah Director of Inter-University for Terrorism Studies Washington Times August 28Last weeks 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 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 [eg 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 strategy can be developed [eg 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 [eg 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 Israels 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 US military operation in Iraq eliminated Saddam Husseins 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 terror victory however long and hard the road may be For without victory there is no survival

40

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Terrorism Ext

Terrorists arenrsquot interested in non nuclear HPVs

Wilson 8 Clay- Specialist in Technology and National Security Foreign Affairs Defense and Trade Division ldquoHigh Altitude Electromagnetic Pulse (HEMP) and High Power Microwave (HPM) Devices Threat Assessmentsrdquo Congressional Research Service March 26 2008

It is difficult to assess the threat of a terrorist organization possibly using a smaller-scale HPM weapon against the United States critical infrastructure It could be argued that an HPM bomb by itself may not be attractive to terrorists because its smaller explosion would not be violent enough and the visible effect would not be as dramatic as a larger conventional bomb

41

Cornell HKHANE Aff

China- AT Attribution

China can smuggle the EMP nuke

Buff 6 Joe ldquoChina Myth Gets Dangerousrdquo Today in the Military December 04 2006Launching an ICBM and detonating its warhead in outer space as a ldquonon-lethalrdquo EMP generator above the Pacific would be awfully risky because the launch signature could be mistaken for a first strike against the US homeland inviting massive nuclear retaliation More shrewd would be to smuggle a nuclear weapon into space disguised as one of the PRCrsquos frequent launches of satellites (that this violates international treaties doesnrsquot mean Beijing wouldnrsquot do it) The nuke could then be set off at the appropriate place and time as part of the dreaded ldquoPearl Harbor in spacerdquo that could open outright conflict for hegemony It would be problematic for the US to launch any sort of retaliatory nuclear strike against China after such a surprise info-warfare attack -- discussion board fans of the macho ldquoglassing Chinardquo approach left aside With neither Beijing nor Washington being run by madmen or so we hope a conventional war could be fought beneath an unused umbrella of thermonuclear mutually assured destruction And us having to fight a big war is already a form of defeat We got dragged into World War II because our conventional deterrence failed and that victory cost 400000+ American lives

42

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Space Militarization Adv 1

The world in on the brink of massive space weaponization US space weaponization has contributed to states seeking latent space weapons capability

Hitchens 9 Theresa- Director UN Institute for Disarmament Research ldquoSaving Space Threat Proliferation and Mitigationrdquo International Commission on Nuclear Non-proliferation and Disarmament May 19 2009

During the Cold War the United States and the Soviet Union were the only real space powers The situation today is dramatically different Currently some 47 nations own andor operate satellites with nearly 900 working satellites in orbitmdashmostly for civilcommercial purposes The bulk of todayrsquos satellites are in Geostationary orbit (GEO 36000 kilometers in altitude) for civil and military communications purposes telephony internet services and broadcast television However an increasing number of satellites are being built in Low Earth Orbit (LEO up to 2000 kilometers) for Earth imaging with ever greater resolutions that can provide traditional data such as crop and ocean monitoring as well as data for tracking (and perhaps targeting) of military infrastructure There are approximately 389 working satellites in LEO including Earth observation (both civil and militaryintelligence gathering) weather and mobile communications satellites Of that number about 130 are Earth observation sats owned andor operated by 33 countries plus the European Space Agency Vietnam was the most recent nation to orbit an Earth observation satellite launching it in April 2008 In the military arena India most recently (in April 2009) launched a high-resolution (down to 1 meter) all-weather radar imaging satellite with the explicit purpose of monitoring military activities and terrorist movements primarily in rival Pakistan Indeed some ldquoreal estaterdquo in space is getting crowded particularly the GEO belt and the area over the poles where many satellites cross over each otherrsquos path This fact has created emerging concerns about simple ldquohighway safetyrdquo in space and the need to avoid accidental interference or collisions (see below)Further many other nations have recently been putting more emphasis on obtaining military advantages from spacemdashalthough China is the only other nation that has tested an ASAT and just two other nations India and Israel are currently suspected of pursuing such capabilities China France Germany Italy Israel Spain and the United Kingdom all have dedicated military space assets for communications andor imaging A number of other nations have or are building dual-use satellites that can provide both civil and military functions including India and Japan Iran and North Korea are pursuing space launch and satellite capabilities that also would be assumed to have dual-use functions The increasing interest in military uses of space has been fostered by two major factors The first is the easier access to space capabilities over the past 20 years and improvements in capabilities provided by the information revolution of the 1990s The second is the 1990s ldquorevolution in military affairsrdquo led by the United States which has resulted in the shift of national security space applications from strategic missions such as spying and early warning of missile launches to tactical applications which include perhaps most importantly weapons targeting using global navigation and positioning satellites The United States and Russia have long maintained navigation and positioning satellites for multiple purposes (besides targeting these satellites are important for logistics management and own-force tracking) their respective Global Positioning System (GPS) network and the GLONASS constellation Meanwhile the European Union hopes to deploy its Galileo system by 2013 and China intends to deploy a similar world-wide navigation satellite network dubbed COMPASS by 2015mdashalthough both systems are claimed to have primarily civilian functions The new emphasis on tactical applications of space power while greatly increasing military effectiveness on the ground also has spurred military thinking in many nations about how to negate enemy space assetsmdashthus the renewed interest in ASAT capabilities

43

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Space Militarization Adv 2

EMP war plans fuel space militarization

Danchev 6 Dancho- Bulgarian Association for Security ISECA ldquoWho needs nuclear weapons anymorerdquo Security Knowledge February 09 2006

In 2004 the EMP Commission met with very senior Russian officers and we showed that on the sign They warned that the knowledge and technology to develop what they called super EMP weapons had been transferred to North Korea and that North Korea could probably develop these weapons in the near future within a few years The Russian officers said that the threat that would be posed to global security by a North Korean armed with super EMP weapons was in their view and I am sure Mr Speaker in your view and mine unacceptable Foreign views of Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP) Attack reveals further details on other nations ambitions etc Perhaps one of the most famous commitments towards EMP is the The Trestle Electromagnetic Pulse Simulator that can also be seen at Google Maps still in my opinion its a defensive initiative for an offensive purpose Extending the topic even further The Space Warfare arms race has been an active policy of key worlds leaders for decades and thats not good The US Russia and China as the main players are fuelling the growth in one way or other due to believing in perhaps- that the other sides are actively developing such capabilities and they are because they think the opposite =gt arms race- growing trend towards asymmetric warfare

The US is the last obstacle to banning space weapons

Lewallen 2 John- Political Science at Whitman University organizer of the Nuclear Peace Action Group Fulbright Scholarship recipient Public Ocean Access Network ldquoHigh-Altitude Nuclear Warrdquo Nuclear Press p25

Russian and China are urgently asking the worldrsquos nations to begin talks to ban the militarization of space Chinarsquos ambassador to the United Nations Conference on Disarmament in January 2000 called for international talks to ban testing deployment and use of weapons in outer space 23 In March 2000 Russiarsquos ambassador to the UN Conference on Disarmament echoed this urgent plea for UN negotiations for an international treaty to ban testing stationing and use of weapons systems in outer space Of the 66 member nations of the UN negotiations to ban weapons in space the United States24 To avoid the rapidly approaching nuclear conflict with Russia andor China the United States must abandon its efforts to make a national missile defense system and join international talks to ban weapons in space If cornered the Russians and Chinese will fight the United States and both nations are prepared with high-altitude nuclear EMP weapons to attack US electronic civilization

44

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Space Militarization Adv 3

Space militarization leads to extinction

Mitchell Ayotte amp Helwich 1 Associate Professor of Communication and Director of Debate at the University of Pittsburgh Teaching Fellows in the Department of Communication at the University of Pittsburgh Missile Defence Trans-Atlantic Diplomacy at a Crossroads ISIS Briefing on Ballistic Missile Defence No 6 July

A buildup of space weapons might begin with noble intentions of lsquopeace through strength deterrence but this rationale glosses over the tendency that I the presence of space weapons will result in the increased likelihood of their use33 This drift toward usage is strengthened by a strategic fact elucidated by Frank Barnabv when it comes to arming the heavens anti-ballistic missiles and anti-satellite warfare technologies go hand-in- hand134 The interlocking nature of offense and defense in military space technology stems from the inherent dual capability of space borne weapon components As Marc Vidricaire Delegation of Canada to the UN Conference on Disarmament explains If you want to intercept something in space you could use the same capability to target something on land 35 To the extent that ballistic missile interceptors based in space can knock out enemy missiles in mid-flight such interceptors can also be used as orbiting Death Stars capable of sending munitions hurtling through the Earths atmosphere The dizzying speed of space warfare would introduce intense use or losersquo pressure into strategic calculations with the specter of split-second attacks creating incentives to rig orbiting Death Stars with automated hair trigger devices In theory automation would enhance survivability of vulnerable space weapon platforms However by taking the decision to commit violence out of human hands and endowing computers with authority to make war military planners could sow insidious seeds of accidental conflict Yale sociologist Charles Perrow has analyzed complexly interactive tightly coupled industrial systems such as space weapons which have many sophisticated components that all depend on each others flawless performance According to Perrow this interlocking complexity makes it impossible to foresee all the different ways such systems could fail As Perrow explains [the odd term normal accident is meant to signal that given the system characteristics multiple and unexpected interactions of failures are inevitable36 Deployment of space weapons with we-delegated authority to fire death rays or unleash killer projectiles would likely make war itself inevitable given the susceptibility of such systems to normal accidents according to retired Lt Col Robert M Bowman even a tiny projectile reentering from space strikes the earth with such high velocity that it can do enormous damage - even more than would be done by a nuclear weapon of the same size 37 In the same Star Wars technology touted as a quintessential tool of peace defense analyst David Langford sees one of the most - destabilizing offensive weapons ever conceived One imagines dead cities of microwave-grilled people138 Given this unique potential for destruction it is not hard to imagine that any nation subjected to space weapon attack would retaliate with maximum force including use of nuclear biological andor chemical weapons An accidental war sparked by a computer glitch in space could plunge the world into the most destructive military conflict ever seen

45

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Space Ext

Lewallen 2 John- Political Science at Whitman University organizer of the Nuclear Peace Action Group Fulbright Scholarship recipient Public Ocean Access Network ldquoHigh-Altitude Nuclear Warrdquo Nuclear Press Pg37Every nation in the world wants to join Russia and China in their urgent insistence that space weaponry should be legally prohibited every nation except one the United StatesIronically the United States is the most vulnerable nation on Earth to high-altitude nuclear electromagnetic pulse war One or a few nuclear detonations high above the United States could catastrophically devastate information civilization wiping out computer chips nationwide and also destroying satellites without harming people directlyThe most basic military strategic logic dictates that the United States should avoid war in space at all costs Space is simply a disastrously unfavorable field of battle for the United States The Russians and Chinese would prefer to avoid World War Three but should they deem it inevitable they have prepared the greatest ambush in military history a nuclear electromagnetic pulse surprise attack against the United States

Space AdvLewallen 2 John- Political Science at Whitman University organizer of the Nuclear Peace Action Group Fulbright Scholarship recipient Public Ocean Access Network ldquoHigh-Altitude Nuclear Warrdquo Nuclear Press Pg36The United States military is stumbling blindly into the greatest ambush in history Determined to dominate space the United States has tens of billions of dollars of space weaponry with many more space weapons systems in research and development

Space Sat EMPLewallen 2 John- Political Science at Whitman University organizer of the Nuclear Peace Action Group Fulbright Scholarship recipient Public Ocean Access Network ldquoHigh-Altitude Nuclear Warrdquo Nuclear Press Pg34Any rational person must accept the possibility that all three nations in the Nuclear Triangle have EMP bombs in Earth-orbiting satellites today ready to wipe out an adversaryrsquos electronics on very short notice Everyone knows that classified or secret weapons systems exist It is plain crazy to believe that China Russia and the United States are not prepared with high-altitude EMP and low-altitude nuclear weapons in satellites either ready to launch or in orbit alreadyA strategic feedback loop would seem to make it at least ldquostrongly possiblerdquo that the United States China and Russia have high-powered EMP bombs in Earth orbit today The ability to wipe out an adversaryrsquos electronics continent-wide pretty much any time with a maneuverable EMP satellite bomb would confer major if not overwhelming advantage to the aggressor So if the other guy probably has EMP satellite bombs we need them too

Lewallen 2 John- Political Science at Whitman University organizer of the Nuclear Peace Action Group Fulbright Scholarship recipient Public Ocean Access Network ldquoHigh-Altitude Nuclear Warrdquo Nuclear Press Pg25

Russia and China are urgently asking the worldrsquos nations to begin talks to ban the militarization of space Chinarsquos ambassador to the United Nations Converence on Disarmament in January 2000 called for international talks to ban testing deployment and use of weapons in outer space23 In March 2000 Russiarsquos ambassador to the UN Congerence on Disarmament echoid this ugent plea for UN negations for an international treaty to ban testing stationing and use of weapons systems in outer space CONT

46

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Data Sharing Adv

Potential exists for EMP intelligence sharing with Russia which is key to combat rogue or terrorist EMP attacks

Wood 4 Lowell L- member of the Technical Advisory Group US Senate Select Committee on Intelligence a member of the Undersea Warfare Experts Group US House of Representatives Committee on Armed Services a visiting fellow at the Hoover Institution and Stanford University The report of the Commission to Assess the Threat to the United States From Electromagnetic Pulse Attackrdquo July 22 2004

This is particularly strong in the circumstance of the Soviet Union where they detonated most of their high-altitude explosions over their own territory and thus had an opportunity to make extensive measurements That large body of physical data has come forth in a somewhat fragmentary fashion idiosyncratic fashion really over the years But since the end of the Cold War in particular in the context of cooperation against large-scale terrorism Russian workers and indeed the Russian government has indicated a willingness to collaborate with the United States against the common threat that EMP poses to both the Russian Federation and the United States in the hands of both state-substate-scale actors to Russian and American civilizations So there is the prospect for substantially improved understanding in the United States as far as what was actually observed but the large program that the government supported from the early 1960s up into the early 1990s to understand nuclear weaponry effects has run a very consistent thread through the limited body of experimental data that exists to the end of atmospheric testing

However Russia fears US nuclear EMP strikes

Pry 5 Dr Peter Vincent- EMP Commission Staff ldquoForeign Views Of Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP) Attackrdquo Before The United States Senate Subcommittee On Terrorism Technology And Homeland Security March 8 2005 httpwwwendtimesreportcomEMP_attackhtml

Many foreign analystsndashparticularly in Iran North Korea China and Russiandashview the United States as a potential aggressor that would be willing to use its entire panoply of weapons including nuclear weapons in a first strike They perceive the United States as having contingency plans to make a nuclear EMP attack and as being willing to execute those plans under a broad range of circumstances

Russiarsquos scientific community is especially aware of this EMP threat

Zak 6 Anatoly ldquoTHE K PROJECT Soviet Nuclear Tests In Spacerdquo The Nonproliferation Review Volume 13 Issue 1 March 2006

At the same time scientists realized that along with their higher efficiency nuclear-tipped ABMs would generate highly dangerous blast effects and electromagnetic pulse radiation (EMP) in the surrounding atmosphere and on the very territory they were designed to protect Among the affected infrastructure could be radar installations strategic communications networks and other command-and-control assets To further complicate the situation the Soviet military planners envisioned a scenario in which a nuclear attack on the USSR would likely be preceded by a US high-altitude nuclear explosion designed to ldquoblindrdquo the Soviet ABM tracking network1

47

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Data Sharing Adv

Russiarsquos fears prevent them pursuing cooperative programs and intelligence sharing

Robichaud 7 Carl- Program Officer at The Century Foundation and co-editor of Breaking the Nuclear Impasse New Prospects for Security against Weapons Threats ldquoThe Perils of Primacyrdquo The Century Foundation 9-5-2007 httpwwwtcforgprintasptype=NCamppubid=1673

Moreover primacy has costs The first is reduced conflict stability which heightens risks even for the dominant nation If Russia knows that it is at risk of being disarmed by a bolt from the blue it is likely to disperse its weapons shorten launch times and devolve control to sub-commanders Such a posture would exacerbate the risk of accidental or unauthorized launch in the context of a crisis Depending on how Russia responded to American primacy these risks could well outweigh whatever modest bargaining benefits it offered Already Russia is taking some provocative steps to mitigate its vulnerabilitymdashincluding the announcement last month that its nuclear bombers will for the first time since 1992 resume long-range patrols ldquoon a permanent basisrdquo Second the search for primacy directly undermines the Nunn-Lugar Cooperative Threat Reduction Program which remains our best defense against nuclear terrorism One of the reasons that progress on these programs has slowed to a crawl is Russiarsquos suspicion that the initiative is a cover for espionage into its nuclear installations

Russiarsquos important- they have the leading physicists

Wilson 8 Clay- Specialist in Technology and National Security Foreign Affairs Defense and Trade Division ldquoHigh Altitude Electromagnetic Pulse (HEMP) and High Power Microwave (HPM) Devices Threat Assessmentsrdquo Congressional Research Service March 26 2008

Vladimir Lukin the former Soviet Ambassador to the United States and former Chairman of the International Affairs Committee for the Russian Parliament reportedly has stated that Russia currently has a capability to create a HEMP effect over the United States37 During 1962 the then Soviet Union conducted a series of atmospheric nuclear tests and observed HEMP effects that included surge protector burnouts power supply breakdowns and damage to overhead and underground buried cables at distances of 600 kilometers Since then Russia has reportedly made extensive preparations to protect their infrastructure against HEMP by hardening both civilian and military electronic equipment and by providing continuous training for personnel operating these protected systems38 Other sources have reportedly stated that Russia may also have some of the leading physicists in the world currently doing research on electronic warfare weapons and electromagnetic pulse effects39

The US needs Russiarsquos data- we lack the capability

Riddle 4 Lieutenant Colonel Thomas C- United States Army ldquoNuclear High Altitude Electromagnetic Pulse ndash Implications For Homeland Security And Homeland Defenserdquo US Army War College 03 May 2004

Another area of concern is that many of the remaining nuclear physicist personnel specifically those associated with EMP are retiring without a next generation to follow their lead76 Similarly the physical plant to conduct EMP testing and simulation has atrophied almost to the point of non-existence77 Building upon a suggestion originally proposed by Doctor Wood Congress should mandate and oversee the creation of an interagency DoD-DHS led organization to champion the revitalization of both of these resources78

48

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Data Sharing Adv

Increased EMP knowledge is key to effectively hardening our infrastructure

McNeill amp Weitz 8 Jena Baker- homeland security policy analyst at The Heritage Foundation and Richard- Senior Fellow and Director of the Center for Political-Military Analysis at Hudson Institute ldquoElectromagnetic Pulse (EMP) Attack A Preventable Homeland Security Catastropherdquo Heritage Foundation Backgrounder 2199 httpwwwheritageorgresearchhomelandsecuritybg2199cfm_ftn19

The US cannot continue to ignore the EMP threat While some progress has been made in hardening potential US targets against attack including critical military and government systems the vast majority of electrical systems are unshielded and unprotected especially in the civilian sector If properly shielded electrical devices and systems can generally survive even the strongest EMPs[20] Congress and the new Administration must 1 Perform More Research on the Threat Further research is needed in order to ensure that America can respond to the EMP threat appropriately without wasting government resources on flimsy or useless security measures Although there are numerous methods to harness EMPs capable of affecting electronic systems there is still a theoretical limit to what damage they can produce in terms of both geographic size and intensity Some EMP weapons release just enough energy to disable small electrical devices while others can destroy all the electronic devices and systems within a city block Altitude plays a major role in whether an EMP attack will be successful lower heights typically expose a smaller surface area to EMP damage Some systems are simply more vulnerable to EMP attack than others such as devices plugged into power grids and commercial computer equipment The US government must gain knowledge of the attributes and capabilities of EMP and understand the amount of money time and effort that will be required for meaningful prevention EMP research should also include actions by Congress to simulate the effects of an EMP attack on Washington and other high-value targets and re-examine the Graham Report recommendations

Protections drastically reduce the dangers of EMP strikes

Chisholm 5 Patrick ldquoProtect our electronics against EMP attackrdquo Christian Science Monitor December 19 2005

Fortunately protecting electronics and critical infrastructure against an EMP is doable It involves enclosing every electronic component with a metallic cage that blocks out electromagnetic waves Sound impossible Actually electronic components already enjoy some form of shielding against electromagnetic interference Federal Communications Commission standards require it Such shielding is designed to prevent everyday electromagnetic radiation from entering andor exiting the device Your computer contains this shielding from metal housings down to the little metal coverings soldered to your motherboard There even are housings the size of rooms or buildings that protect sensitive equipment inside Without electromagnetic shielding many electronic devices would not work properly However most existing shielding may not be enough to protect against an EMP While US military standards often require electronic components to be protected against an EMP commercial standards do not And while our power grid is shielded against things such as lightning strikes it is not tested for protection against an EMP Upgrading to shield against an EMP would entail using more robust shielding materials especially for the cords cables andor wires that connect devices to external entities such as power supplies or networks Cables and wires act as antennas through which an EMP travels directly into a device

49

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Data Sharing- Uniqueness

Potential exists for collaboration between Russia and the US to reduce EMP dangers

Weldon 4 Curt- vice-chair of the Armed Services Committee and the House Homeland Security Committee The report of the Commission to Assess the Threat to the United States From Electromagnetic Pulse Attack Committee on Armed Services House of Representatives One Hundred Eighth Congress second session hearing held July 22 2004

Let me get into the area of the joint US -Russian initiative that Dr Wood mentioned It just so happens that last year in our defense bill we created the establishment of the Teller-Kurchatov Alliance for Peace Edward Teller and Igor Kurchatov were the two fathers of the nuclear weapons in both the US and Russia Now the head of Kurchatov Institute Dr Evgeny Velikhov is very eager to establish a more proactive relationship for the peaceful purposes of dealing with nuclear energy Is that Dr Wood potentially a forum since Livermore is involved with that effort to begin a formal process of engaging the Russians They just changed their chief of military operations this past week General Baluevskii has now been put in the head position I had a chance to meet with him one month ago in Moscow He has now taken General Kvashnins place as the top military general and I think he has a different outlook on perhaps US American relations and the military So Dr Wood would that be perhaps a vehicle that we could begin to move aggressively into what you alluded to Dr Wood Yes Mr Weldon I believe that that is indeed the case The recent events in the Russian military to which you referred of course appear at least on the surface to be somewhat hopeful in respect to the progress of more collegial relationships between the American and Russian military establishments the potential collaboration with leaders civilian leaders then Soviet now Russian military technologists such as academicians Evgeny Velikhov the head of the Kurchatov Institute personifies I believe at least has prospects So I very much applaud the committees initiatives along these lines both with respect to the Teller-Kurchatov fellowships and the nuclear strategy forum initiative These are directions in which US policy and practice surely should go

50

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Data Sharing- Data Needed

Past US tests failed to record the necessary data

Emanuelson 9 Jerry ldquoNotes about nuclear EMPrdquo Futurescience LLC Jan 26 2009There have only been a few high altitude nuclear explosions There have been none since November 1962 At that time scientists were just beginning to understand the phenomenon well enough to even know what to try to measure This means that there is a very limited amount of data available and only a part of that data is unclassified The largest nuclear EMPs probably occurred with the Hardtack-Teak and Hardtack-Orange tests over Johnston Island in August 1958 however very little information is openly available about the EMP from these tests and it is likely that not much data was obtained due to equipment malfunctions relevant to EMP measurement and a lack of accurate understanding of the EMP phenomenon Although scientists were aware of nuclear EMP in 1958 in many critical respects it was misunderstood Those early errors in the understanding of EMP made good data acquisition very difficult Both of these August 1958 tests used the 38 megaton W39 thermonuclear warhead There have been unconfirmed reports that one or both of these 1958 tests caused power outages in Hawaii

Computer simulations are indecisive

Emanuelson 9 Jerry ldquoNotes about nuclear EMPrdquo Futurescience LLC Jan 26 2009Because of the insufficient amount of hard data scientists have tried to do mathematical calculations about the strength and effects of the different components of the EMP There has never been any clear consensus about whose calculations are correct Since more testing cannot be done there is no way to test the accuracy of the calculations made by various scientists since 1962 The United States National Laboratories have a computer code in which they have a high level of confidence since it closely matches the sparse amount of actual data that does exist

Data is key to protect critical infrastructure

Chisholm 5 Patrick ldquoProtect our electronics against EMP attackrdquo Christian Science Monitor December 19 2005

Radasky one of the worlds few experts on protecting electronics against an EMP thinks that most electronics would undergo only a temporary disruption in the event of an EMP You may just have to restart the computer and everything would be fine said Radasky But a temporary shutdown of a control system for a critical infrastructure system he said would be troublesome And if just 1 percent of all electronics failed havoc could ensue Just think about the power outage in August of 03 when a couple of wires hit a tree observed Radasky That was a single failure propagated over a huge area Now imagine at the speed of light every place in the United States some portion of electronics failing Now you have a very widespread problem The only way to know the extent to which an EMP would knock out electronics is to conduct testing with EMP simulators Unfortunately since the end of the cold war most EMP simulators in the United States have been closed according to Radasky And the few that remain open are for military use not civilian use

51

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Russia Data Sharing (Testing)

Understanding EMP effects is key to prevent testing

Farley 9 Robert is an assistant professor at the University of Kentuckyrsquos Patterson School of Diplomacy and International Commerce ldquoNeocons Salivating Over Their Next Great Exaggerated Threat Electromagnetic Pulse Attackrdquo October 22 2009

Along with their Soviet and Chinese counterparts US military planners and scientists studied the potential dangersmdashand opportunitiesmdashpresented by EMP However since only one nation the United States has ever attacked another country with an atomic bomb the precise extent of EMPrsquos power to damage electronic-dependent infrastructures is not fully understood Testing bans have also prevented the established nuclear powers from fully investigating the EMP effect (prompting some EMP awareness activists to argue for a resumption of nuclear testing)

Nuke War

Johnson 2001(Rebecca Executive Dir Acronym Institute for Disarmament Diplomacy The Guardian 7-17Then the international arms control and non-proliferation regimes collapsed Americans werent bothered at first for hadnt the government promised a super-sophisticated force field round the whole nation that no terrorist or missile would ever penetrate So nuclear testing resumed in Nevada for new warheads to improve the kill prospects of missile interceptors and to penetrate deep into enemies bunkers India had been waiting for just such a go-ahead and Pakistan soon followed both raced to test warheads to fit on to missiles upping the tension in Kashmir and along the borders with China Free now to resume its own testing China boosted its programme to modernise and increase the size of its small nuclear arsenal Somewhat reluctantly Russia followed Moscow suspended all further reductions and cooperative security and safety programmes for its still-large nuclear arsenal and facilities Within a few short years the nuclear non-proliferation treaty was just another discarded agreement Many governments with nuclear power programmes developed nuclear weapons as well while others fitted anthrax or sarin on to weapons just in case Most hadnt wanted to but fearful that their neighbours would all felt compelled Regional rivalries grew quickly into major international problems Alliances collapsed amid suspicion and recriminations The burgeoning arms races even spread into outer space threatening military surveillance as well as public communication entertainment and navigation No one knew who had what Deterrence was empty as defence analysts calculated the advantages of the pre-emptive strike In that terrified atmosphere of insecurity and mistrust someone launched first And then it was too late to speak out The Republicans hadnt yet managed to get missile defence to work Such a doomsday scenario is not so fanciful On July 7 the New York Times announced that President Bush wants to ditch the comprehensive test ban treaty A week before the administration asked nuclear laboratories to work out how quickly the US could resume testing after its nine-year moratorium If Bush were to back out of the test ban treaty or break the moratorium on nuclear testing - undertaken with China Russia Britain and France - he would also explicitly breach agreements made last May when 187 countries negotiated measures to strengthen and implement the non-proliferation treaty The test ban is no outdated cold war instrument but a fundamental tool to prevent new destabilising developments in nuclear weapons Over several decades from the Arctic to the Pacific from the capitals of Europe to the deserts of Nevada people have marched petitioned demonstrated and even sailed or hiked into test sites Many have been imprisoned and some even lost their lives trying to stop the nuclear weapons governments from polluting our oceans and earth with radioactivity from nuclear explosions conducted for one purpose only - to make better nuclear bombs It took three arduous years to complete negotiations on the comprehensive test ban treaty It isnt perfect No product of compromise ever is The verification system is very thorough but it also had to be affordable financially and politically The treaty stopped short of closing and dismantling the known test sites or banning laboratory testing which the weapon states said they needed to assure the safety and reliability of weapons in the stockpiles (pending achievement of their other treaty obligations to eliminate the nuclear arsenals completely) But it does ban all nuclear test explosions in all environments India panicked because the treaty would close off its nuclear options It refused to sign and then let off a string of nuclear explosions in May 1998 Pakistan followed to prove it could Even so the treaty held Neither government has felt able to keep testing which means their options for further developments were curbed Bush has embarked on a very slippery slope that could potentially put at risk the future of the citizens of even the most advanced military nation Mumbling and grumbling wont keep us safe It is time to speak out

52

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Russian ARMS control

Lewallen 2 John- Political Science at Whitman University organizer of the Nuclear Peace Action Group Fulbright Scholarship recipient Public Ocean Access Network ldquoHigh-Altitude Nuclear Warrdquo Nuclear Press p22-23Russia today is a collapsing superpower with an arsenal of thousands of nuclear missiles which it cannot afford to maintain Six thousand Russian strategic missiles are ready to launch today with about 2250 on high alert ldquoWhat counts most now is that Russia and United States start moving jointly or along parallel courses toward radically lowered ceilings on nuclear warheads without any holdupsrdquo Russiarsquos President Putin said on November 14 2000 Russian officials said President Putin would like to cut strategic missile arsenals to 1000 each for the US and Russia Still the Russians clearly want to maintain second-strike nuclear threat credibility against the United States

53

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Modeling Advantage 1

United States failure to reject nuclear EMP warfare has eroded the nuclear taboo surrounding high-altitude explosions and has led several states to incorporate nuclear EMP strikes into warplans

Pry 5 Dr Peter Vincent- EMP Commission Staff ldquoForeign Views Of Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP) Attackrdquo Before The United States Senate Subcommittee On Terrorism Technology And Homeland Security March 8 2005 httpwwwendtimesreportcomEMP_attackhtml

Some foreign analysts judging from open source statements and writings appear to regard EMP attack as a legitimate use of nuclear weapons because EMP would inflict no or few prompt civilian casualties EMP attack appears to be a unique exception to the general stigma attached to nuclear employment by most of the international community in public statements Significantly even some analysts in Japan and Germanyndashnations that historically have been most condemnatory of nuclear and other weapons of mass destruction in official and unofficial forumsndashappear to regard EMP attack as morally defensible For example a June 2000 Japanese article in a scholarly journal citing senior political and military officials appears to regard EMP attack as a legitimate use of nuclear weapons ldquoAlthough there is little chance that the Beijing authorities would launch a nuclear attack which would incur the disapproval of the international community and which would result in such enormous destruction that it would impede postwar cleanup and policies a serious assault starting with the use of nuclear weapons which would not harm humans animals or property would be valid If a nuclear warhead was detonated 40 kilometers above Taiwan an electromagnetic wave would be propagated which would harm unprotected computers radar and IC circuits on the ground within a 100 kilometer radius and the weapons and equipment which depend on the communications and electronics technology whose superiority Taiwan takes pride in would be rendered combat ineffective at one stroke If they were detonated in the sky in the vicinity of Ilan the effects would also extend to the waters near Yonakuni [in Okinawa] so it would be necessary for Japan too to take care Those in Taiwan having lost their advanced technology capabilities would end up fighting with tactics and technology going back to the 19th century They would inevitably be at a disadvantage with the PLA and its overwhelming military force superiorityrdquo (Su Tzu-yun Jadi 1 June 2000) An article by a member of Indiarsquos Institute of Defense Studies Analysis openly advocates that India be prepared to make a preemptive EMP attack both for reasons of military necessity and on humanitarian grounds ldquoA study conducted in the U S during the late 1980s reported that a high-yield device exploded about 500 kilometers above the ground can generate an electromagnetic pulse (EMP) of the order of 50000 volts over a radius of 2500 kilometers around the point of burst which would be collected by any exposed conductor Such an attack will not cause any blast or thermal effects on the ground below but it can produce a massive breakdown in the communications system It is certain that most of the land communication networks and military command control links will be affected and it will undermine our capability to retaliate This in fact is the most powerful incentive for a preemptive attack And a high-altitude exo-atmospheric explosion may not even kill a bird on the groundrdquo Although India Pakistan and Israel are not rogue states they all presently have missiles and nuclear weapons giving them the capability to make EMP attacks against their regional adversaries An EMP attack by any of these statesndasheven if targeted at a regional adversary and not the United Statesndashcould collaterally damage U S forces in the region and would pose an especially grave threat to U S satellites Many foreign analystsndashparticularly in Iran North Korea China and Russiandashview the United States as a potential aggressor that would be willing to use its entire panoply of weapons including nuclear weapons in a first strike They perceive the United States as having contingency plans to make a nuclear EMP attack and as being willing to execute those plans under a broad range of circumstances

54

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Modeling Advantage- Israel

The exclusion of EMP from the nuclear taboo means Israel will EMP strike Iran leading to the closure of the Strait of Hormuz and international terrorist attacks

Nagle 210 Chet- Pentagons International Security Affairs department Intel Research Corporation author of Iran Covenant ldquoItrsquos time to play the war cardrdquo The Daily Caller 021010

The world knows the US military can destroy any target in the world without using nuclear weapons But what about Israel That country with a population less than that of New York City has developed a ldquotriadrdquomdashthe capability to launch a nuclear strike from aircraft missile silos and submarines Besides Israel only the US Russia and China have that deterrent power But would Israel use nuclear weapons in a pre-emptive strike on Iran I suggest that is unlikely because as we will see below it is unnecessary in the usual sense As for a non-nuclear pre-emptive strike Israel cannot successfully attack Iran with conventional weapons or aircraft The distance is great the defenses formidable and the casualties would be very high Instead I believe Israel will use an electromagnetic pulse (EMP) weapon Whatrsquos that In 1962 the US conducted an atmospheric test called Starfish Prime In it a 14 megaton weapon was detonated 400 kilometers above Johnson Island in the Pacific The EMP from that test knocked out street lights in Hawaii 900 miles away The Soviets held similar tests and discovered EMP effects can penetrate far underground If Israel used one of its Jericho III missiles to detonate 400 kilometers above north central Iran there would be no blast or radiation effects on the ground In fact if the strike was at noon on a sunny day the people below would not know it happened except their lights would go out cars stop fridges die power line transformers short out refineries shut down and yes those uranium enrichment centrifuges in caverns stop spinning This bloodless annihilation coupled with a selective cyber attack would freeze Iran for decades What could be Iranrsquos response to such an attack If they can find a working radio they can announce they have mined the Strait of Hormuz Because of depth width and its hydrographic features the Strait cannot be mined but if Iran says it is mined it would have the same effect Lloyds will cancel insurance for any tanker transiting the Strait Then we revisit ldquoTanker Warrdquo tactics of 1985 and the US Navy would escort any ship anxious to cash in on the crisis If shore missile batteries were somehow still operational a battle group in the area together with bombers from Diego Garcia would reduce them to rubble along with associated infrastructure like military harbors A rain of missiles from Hezbollah in Syria would have to be endured by Israel unless another EMP weapon was used Terror attacks would be made on Israelis and Americans but those can be dealt with by law enforcement and military forces especially if they are forewarned Of course the price of oil and gold would spike for a while On the positive side Iranian ldquoGreenrdquo opposition forces would have an opportunity to take to the darkened streets of Tehran and rid themselves of the corrupt clerical regime So it seems the ldquowar cardrdquo is in the hands of Israel and the card has ldquoEMPrdquo on it

55

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Modeling Advantage- Israel

This shuts off the worldrsquos oil supply

Klare 2 Michael- Five Colleges professor of Peace and World Security Studies boards of directors of Human Rights Watch and the Arms Control Association ldquoResource Wars The New Landscape of Global Conflictrdquo p 72-73

Iran does not pose a direct threat to audi Arabia and the southern Gulf kingdomsmdashat least not for the time being However by building up its navy and deploying antiship missiles along its coasts Iran may imperil oil shipping in the Persian Gulf and the all-important Strait of Hormuz the Gulfs narrow opening to the Arabian Sea and the larger world beyond Although lacking major warships Iran has acquired three submarines twenty missile-armed patrol boats numerous shore-based missile batteries and a large inventory of antishipping mines This is enough General Zinni testified in 1999 to jeopardize open access to Gulf shipping lanes Only six miles wide at its narrowest point the Strait of Hormuz is described by the US Department of Energy as the worlds most important oil chokepoint because of the sheer volume of oilmdashover 15 million barrels per daymdashthat passes through it With missile batteries deployed at both entrances to the strait and a large inventory of anti-shipping mines Iran is in an ideal position to impede shipping through this vital channel Pentagon strategists suggest moreover that Iran will seek to do so in the event of a future clash with the United States Iran also seeks to extend its control over Abu Musa and both Greater and Lesser Tunb a small group of islands that guard the western approaches to the strait Iran seized the Tunbs from Ras al-Khaimah (part of the United Arab Emirates) in 1971 and has occupied them since It shared Abu Musa with Sharjah (another UAE component) until 1994 when it took control of the entire island When pressed by the UAE to submit the dispute over the islands to international mediation Tehran declared that they were an inseparable part of Iran46 Since then the Iranians have deployed antiship missiles on Abu Musa and fortified their positions on the Tunbs47

Collapses the global economy

Roberts 4 Paul- regular contributor to Harpers and NYT Magazine ldquoThe End of Oil On the Edge of a Perilous New Worldrdquo p 93-4

The obsessive focus on oil is hardly surprising given the stakes In the fast moving world of energy politics oil is not simply a source of world power but a medium for that power as well a substance whose huge importance encompasses entire nations in a global web that is sensitive to the smallest of variations A single oil event -- a pipeline explosion in Iraq political unrest in Venezuela a bellicose exchange between Russia and Saudi Arabia -- sends shockwaves through the world energy order pushes prices up or down and sets off tectonic shifts in global wealth and power In the volatile would of oil the tide could turn quickly As anxieties over the uncertainties in Iraq drove oil prices up to $40 the oil tide abruptly changed direction transferring tens of billions of dollars from the G-8 countries to the oil exporting countries and threatening the global economic recovery So embedded has oil became in todays political and economic spheres that the major Western governments now watch the oil markets as closely as they once watched the spread of communism This is because six of the last seven global recessions have been preceded by an oil price rise and fear is growing among economists and policy makers that in todays growth-dependent and energy-intensive global economy oil price volatility itself may eventually pose more risks to prosperity and stability and mere survival than terrorism or even war

56

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Modeling Advantage- China

China would love to drop a HEMP on Taiwan- lack of norm

Schneider 9 Mark- National Institute for Public Policy The Nuclear Doctrine and Forces of the Peoples Republic of China Comparative Strategy Volume 28 Issue 3 July 2009

There is also concern about Chinese preparations for a nuclear electromagnetic pulse attack on Taiwan the United States and Japan as part of its strategy to facilitate the conquest of Taiwan The Congressional Commission on the Threat to the United States from Electromagnetic Pulse reported that ldquoChina and Russia have considered limited nuclear attack options that unlike Cold War plans employ EMP as the primary or sole means of attackrdquo121 The 2005 Pentagon report on Chinese military power observed that ldquoSome PLA theorists are aware of the electromagnetic effect of using a high-altitude electromagnetic pulse (HEMP) and might consider using HEMP in an unconventional attack believing that the United States and other nations would not consider it as a use of force and a crossing of the nuclear thresholdrdquo122 A Congressional Research Service report by Ronald ORourke concluded that a US naval force coming to the aid of Taiwan against a Chinese attack would have to be prepared for use of nuclear weapons and EMP because ldquoChina could also use a nuclear-armed ballistic missile to detonate a nuclear warhead in the atmosphere to create a high-altitude electromagnetic pulse (EMP) intended to temporarily or permanently disable the electronic circuits of US or other civilian and military electronic systemsrdquo123 China expert Dr Michael Pillsbury has linked nuclear EMP attack to the Chinese ldquoassassins macerdquo concept of defeating the superior with the inferior Pillsbury has elsewhere noted that the March 2000 issue of Chinas Military Digest featured an article by Xian Fengli Lu Young and Ming Xiang which argued that ldquoEMP warheads will make it much easier to cross the nuclear thresholdrdquo124 The designers of the Chinese DF-11 SRBM ldquohave demonstrated the most interest in HEMP [high altitude nuclear EMP] weaponsrdquo125 According to the Wall Street Journal ldquoChina and Russia have the capability to launch EMP weaponsmdashand have let us know it China recently published an article on EMP in a Chinese-language technical journal To make sure the US got the message the article appeared in Englishrdquo126

This would collapse civilization

Straits Times 2k (Singapore) ldquoNo one gains in war over Taiwanrdquo June 25 lexisThe high-intensity scenario postulates a cross-strait war escalating into a full-scale war between the US and China If Washington were to conclude that splitting China would better serve its national interests then a full-scale war becomes unavoidable Conflict on such a scale would embroil other countries far and near and -horror of horrors -raise the possibility of a nuclear war Beijing has already told the US and Japan privately that it considers any country providing bases and logistics support to any US forces attacking China as belligerent parties open to its retaliation In the region this means South Korea Japan the Philippines and to a lesser extent Singapore If China were to retaliate east Asia will be set on fire And the conflagration may not end there as opportunistic powers elsewhere may try to overturn the existing world order With the US distracted Russia may seek to redefine Europes political landscape The balance of power in the Middle East may be similarly upset by the likes of Iraq In south Asia hostilities between India and Pakistan each armed with its own nuclear arsenal could enter a new and dangerous phase Will a full-scale Sino-US war lead to a nuclear war According to General Matthew Ridgeway commander of the US Eighth Army which fought against the Chinese in the Korean War the US had at the time thought of using nuclear weapons against China to save the US from military defeat In his book The Korean War a personal account of the military and political aspects of the conflict and its implications on future US foreign policy Gen Ridgeway said that US was confronted with two choices in Korea -truce or a broadened war which could have led to the use of nuclear weapons If the US had to resort to nuclear weaponry to defeat China long before the latter acquired a similar capability there is little hope of winning a war against China 50 years later short of using nuclear weapons The US estimates that China possesses about 20 nuclear warheads that can destroy major American cities Beijing also seems prepared to go for the nuclear option A Chinese military officer disclosed recently that Beijing was considering a review of its non first use principle regarding nuclear weapons Major-General Pan Zhangqiang president of the military-funded Institute for Strategic Studies told a gathering at the Woodrow Wilson International Centre for Scholars in Washington that although the government still abided by that principle there were strong pressures from the military to drop it He said military leaders considered the use of nuclear weapons mandatory if the country risked dismemberment as a result of foreign intervention Gen Ridgeway said that should that come to pass we would see the destruction of civilisation There would be no victors in such a war While the prospect of a nuclear Armaggedon over Taiwan might seem inconceivable it cannot be ruled out entirely for China puts sovereignty above everything else

57

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Modeling Advantage- Solvency

Establishing an environment that discourages EMP attacks is critical to prevent them from occurring

EMP Commission 4 Report of the Commission to Assess the Threat to the United States from Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP) Attack Volume 1 Executive Report 2004 Dr John S Foster Jr Mr Earl Gjelde Dr William R Graham (Chairman) Dr Robert J Hermann Mr Henry (Hank) M Kluepfel GEN Richard L Lawson USAF (Ret) Dr Gordon K Soper Dr Lowell L Wood Jr Dr Joan B Woodard

An EMP attack is one way for a terrorist activity to use a small amount of nuclear weaponrymdashpotentially just one weaponmdashin an effort to produce a catastrophic impact on our society but it is not the only way In addition there are potential applications of surface-burst nuclear weaponry biological and chemical warfare agents and cyber attacks that might cause damage that could reach large-scale long-term levels The first order of business is to prevent any of these attacks from occurring The US must establish a global environment that will profoundly discourage such attacks We must persuade nations to forgo obtaining nuclear weapons or to provide acceptable assurance that these weapons will neither threaten the vital interests of the United States nor fall into threatening hands

Plan resurrects the taboo

Bin amp Hongyi 9 Li- director of Arms Control Program at the Institute of International Studies and Nie- officer in the Peoplersquos Liberation Army ldquoAn Investigation of China ndash US Strategic Stabilityrdquo translation of an article published in Chinese in World Economics amp Politics 5-22-09

Damage to the nuclear taboo also comes from some pseudoscientific discussions These discussions completely ignore the effect of the nuclear taboo making casual suppositions about the use of nuclear weapons for example supposing nuclear nations after defeat in a conventional conflict must use nuclear weapons to reverse the war situation During every form of nuclear dialog between China and the United States American academics frequently engage in this type of ldquoacademicrdquo persuasion with the Chinese side The starting point is defending the US refusal to make a no first use pledge but this so-called academic propagandizing objectively weakens the confidence of Chinese scholars in the nuclear taboo During the Cold War the international anti-nuclear movement strengthened the nuclear taboo After the end of the Cold War because the large scale nuclear confrontation between the US and the Soviet Union fundamentally ended the influence of the grass roots of the international anti-nuclear movement has weakened This is not beneficial to the maintenance and strengthening of the nuclear taboo China from the perspective of protecting its own national interest should invest resources in propagandizing the danger of nuclear war oppose the first use of nuclear weapons and the threat to use nuclear weapons strengthening the nuclear taboo

58

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Israeli Strikes Bad

Israeli preemption causes conflagration

Eiland 10 Maj Gen Giora- senior researcher at the Institute for National Security Studies (INSS) in Tel Aviv former head of the Israeli National Security Council ldquoIsraels Military Optionrdquo The Washington Quarterly Volume 33 Issue 1 January 2010 pages 115 - 130

With these risks in mind Israel has made it clear that a military attack is an option The risks however are immense First an attack could fail tactically which would seriously harm Israels deterrent and provide Iran with a good excuse to attack Israel Second Iran could fight back conventionally which is more likely or even with chemical and biological weapons which would be more devastating Third an attack would mobilize Hezbollah increasing the chances of a conflict between Israel and Syria Fourth Israel will certainly lose its already minor international support More importantly Iran will no longer be seen as the bad guy Fifth Iran may choose to retaliate using Persian Gulf oil markets Closing the Strait of Hormuz or attacking the oil fields of the Persian Gulf states will create a serious worldwide crisis Sixth an attack will change the perspective of the Iranian public which currently does not have very strong negative feelings toward Israel And seventh it will increase the anti-Israel sentiment throughout the region An Israeli attack will involve other countries (Israel might need to use their air space with or without permission) This indirect and passive assistance to Israel will push Persian Gulf countries to take anti-Israel or anti-US steps The attack in fact could serve as the straw that breaks the camels back and may even provoke strong reactions from governments throughout the region

59

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Testing Advantage

Mohan 87 C Raja- Henry Alfred Kissinger Scholar in the John W Kluge Center at the Library of Congress ldquoNuclear Test Ban Receding Hopesrdquo Economic and Political Weekly Vol 22 No 7 (Feb 14 1987)The most lucrative among the nuclear weapons on the design board are the so- called third generation nuclear weapons The first generation weapons are those based on nuclear fission-the atomic bombs The second generation weapons are those designed around nuclear fusion-the hydrogen bombs The transition from the first generation to the second saw enormous increases in explosive power and tremendous design efficiency-in terms of yield-to-weight ratio that is larger explosive power for lesser overall weight of the weapons facilitating the development of a variety of nuclear weapons for different delivery systems The third generation weapons involve the development of a number of sophisticated designs which would channel a part of the nuclear explosive energy to a form more precisely tailored to the need than just blast and heat the most well known effects of nuclear weapons in the past4 The neutron bomb built in the 1970s was a precursor to the third generation nuclear weapons Among the major third generation concepts under investigation are the X-ray laser the gamma-ray laser the microwave bomb and the electomagnetic pulse (EMP) bomb The first two designs seek to convert nuclear explosive power into high energy radiation either in the X- or gamma-region of the electromagnetic spectrum It is hoped that such powerful laser weapons driven by nuclear weapons could play a central role in the proposed defence against a missile attack (star wars) Although the SDI has been advertised as a non-nuclear defence against nuclear weapons nuclear-driven exotic weapons have emerged as serious components of the programme In a microwave weapon the nuclear explosive energy is converted into microwaves Having lesser energy than the gamma- or X-ray laser the microwave beam weapons are not designed to destroy Soviet missiles in flight but would be used to debilitate the electronics of the missile and its warhead The EMP bomb is based on the observation that a nuclear explosion in the upper atmosphere would generate an intense pulse of high voltage electric charge which could put out all electric installations over a large area on the ground5 The EMP bomb would maximise the generation of this electromagnetic pulse The American nuclear weapons laboratories thus see the continuation of nuclear testing as essential for the investigation of these new concepts in the design of nuclear weapons Not only would they need to test but do a lot of it Because of the complexity of the third generation nuclear weapon design much more testing than before is required to develop these weapons According to American weapons designers the perfection of any one of the third generation designs could require 100 to 200 test explosions6 In the past only about six underground number tests on the average were required to develop a new nuclear weapon The requirements of the US nuclear strategy in coming years thus clearly demands more intensive testing of nuclear weapons A Comprehensive Test Ban which would block the new round of qualitative improvement in the design of nuclear weapons is clearly not on the American agenda

Acronym Institute 4 ldquoBallistic Missile Defence and the Weaponisation of Spacerdquo httpwwwacronymorgukspacerejintrohtmAt present any high altitude nuclear detonation would violate the provisions of the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT) Pending this treatys entry into force the ban on nuclear explosions is bolstered by moratoria undertaken by all the nuclear weapon states and by India and Pakistan Few would have the technological capacity to undertake such an explosion and it would be extremely difficult if not impossible for a perpetrator to evade detection As with a hostile missile launch the origin of a nuclear detonation can be quickly identified and would invite unified international diplomatic action or failing that overwhelming retaliation Though the technology to prevent a high altitude nuclear explosion is not available the perpetrator would incur high political costs for crossing the nuclear threshold and damaging space assets beneficial to millions around the world For a number of technological and political reasons therefore a high altitude nuclear detonation is unlikely although it cannot be ruled out altogether

60

Cornell HKHANE Aff

EMPacts Econ

Kills global econ

Riddle 4 Lieutenant Colonel Thomas C- United States Army ldquoNuclear High Altitude Electromagnetic Pulse ndash Implications For Homeland Security And Homeland Defenserdquo US Army War College 03 May 2004

Additionally the worldwide economy has grown increasingly interdependent The economic disruptions that occurred in the wake of the 2001 attacks provided a clear demonstration of this interdependence The disruption of the interdependent critical infrastructure of the United States would likely produce worldwide economic disruption The extended loss of the American consumer markets disruption of domestic manufacturing capability and chaotic financial institutions would contribute to an extended period of worldwide economic disruption

US economic collapse will destroy the global economy

Mead 4 Walter Russell- Senior Fellow at Council on Foreign Relations ldquoAmericas Sticky Powerrdquo Foreign Policy MarApr 2004

Similarly in the last 60 years as foreigners have acquired a greater value in the United States-government and private bonds direct and portfolio private investments-more and more of them have acquired an interest in maintaining the strength of the US-led system A collapse of the US economy and the ruin of the dollar would do more than dent the prosperity of the United States Without their best customer countries including China and Japan would fall into depressions The financial strength of every country would be severely shaken should the United States collapse Under those circumstances debt becomes a strength not a weakness and other countries fear to break with the United States because they need its market and own its securities Of course pressed too far a large national debt can turn from a source of strength to a crippling liability and the United States must continue to justify other countries faith by maintaining its long-term record of meeting its financial obligations But like Samson in the temple of the Philistines a collapsing US economy would inflict enormous unacceptable damage on the rest of the world That is sticky power with a vengeance

Electricity would be out for years

Emanuelson 9 Jerry ldquoNuclear Electromagnetic Pulserdquo Futurescience LLC Jan 26 2009A nuclear EMP attack would knock out most if not all of the electric power grid The extent of the electrical grid damage would depend upon the size of the bomb Full repair of the power grid would take anywhere from two months to three years or more Many components such as large transformers which are normally resistant to large voltage transients would be destroyed by the DC-like current induced by the E3 component of the pulse when they are connected to very long copper wires The design life of the transformers in the United States power grid is 40 years but the average age of these transformers is already more than 42 years If power companies were to keep adequate spare parts on hand the repair time could be kept closer to the two-month time frame Adequate parts are not currently being kept on hand and in most cases there are very long lead times for replacement parts for the electrical grid if the parts are not kept on hand by the electrical utility There is currently no United States manufacturing capability for the large power transformers in its power grid All of these extremely heavy transformers have to be manufactured and imported from other countries The current delivery time for these transformers is 3 years from the time that the order is placed but widespread destruction of these transformers would completely overwhelm the very limited worldwide production capacity

61

Cornell HKHANE Aff

EMPacts Heg

EMP attack kills heg

Riddle 4 Lieutenant Colonel Thomas C- United States Army ldquoNuclear High Altitude Electromagnetic Pulse ndash Implications For Homeland Security And Homeland Defenserdquo US Army War College 03 May 2004

To jump start national recovery efforts would likely require significant portions of the remaining overseas military resources of the United States to focus their efforts on domestic recovery The resulting lack of a viable forward presence coupled with an American government intently focused on internal recovery could result in numerous regional conflicts as nations attempted to gain advantage or to redress old grievances Several of these regional conflicts (India-Pakistan Israel-Syria China-Russia China-India) certainly have the potential to involve further use of WMD

Heg collapse results in wars around the globe

Ferguson 4 Niall Senior Fellow the Hoover Institution Stanford JulyAugust 2004 ldquoA World without Powerrdquo httpwwwforeignpolicycomstorycmsphpstory_id=2579amppage=3 ACC 91604 p online

The worst effects of the new Dark Age would be felt on the edges of the waning great powers The wealthiest ports of the global economymdashfrom New York to Rotterdam to Shanghaimdashwould become the targets of plunderers and pirates With ease terrorists could disrupt the freedom of the seas targeting oil tankers aircraft carriers and cruise liners while Western nations frantically concentrated on making their airports secure Meanwhile limited nuclear wars could devastate numerous regions beginning in the Korean peninsula and Kashmir perhaps ending catastrophically in the Middle East In Latin America wretchedly poor citizens would seek solace in Evangelical Christianity imported by US religious orders In Africa the great plagues of AIDS and malaria would continue their deadly work The few remaining solvent airlines would simply suspend services to many cities in these continents who would wish to leave their privately guarded safe havens to go there For all these reasons the prospect of an apolar world should frighten us today a great deal more than it frightened the heirs of Charlemagne If the United States retreats from global hegemonymdashits fragile self-image dented by minor setbacks on the imperial frontiermdashits critics at home and abroad must not pretend that they are ushering in a new era of multipolar harmony or even a return to the good old balance of power Be careful what you wish for The alternative to unipolarity would not be multipolarity at all It would be apolaritymdasha global vacuum of power And far more dangerous forces than rival great powers would benefit from such a not-so-new world disorder

62

Cornell HKHANE Aff

EMPacts Earthquake

Nuclear EMPs cause earthquakes

Mahler 10 William K- M2 Technologies ldquoHugo Chavez Cites Russian Sourcesrdquo Cape Cod Today January 22 2010

As for the ability to make an Earthquake Electro Magnetic Pulse has been around since the first atomic bomb tests way back during World War II It can be separated from a blast meaning it functions on its own as a tool no nuke explosions necessary (remember Hiroshima and Nagasaki) Over in Europe some years back it was around the Netherlands or a neighboring country where citizens protested a USA weapon involving EMP Why They feared (and rightfully so) that weapon would be used to hurt Russia for example How bad could it hurt Give the weapon a target such as a large building like our Empire State Building in New York once fired there would be hole clean through I suppose as clean as a light saber blade could cut in sci-fi such as Star Wars The EMP can penetrate anything to my knowledge so yes a shock jolt from an EMP could absolutely trigger an Earthquake no doubt about it and probably sans the radiation fallout guaranteed by an atomic (nuclear) blast

63

Cornell HKHANE Aff

EMPacts GPS

The EMP would disable GPS technologies

Scott 9 William B- Rocky Mountain Bureau Chief for Aviation Week amp Space Technology Michael J Coumatos- US Space Command director of wargaming William J Birnes- PhD from New York University ldquoCounterspace The Next Hours of World War IIIrdquo p 18

The high-level cram course on nuclear weapons effects Aster had received when he took over as STRATCOM chief had provided a basic understanding of electromagnetic pulse effects But that was thin knowledge at best The general needed more to assess the full spectrum of impacts nowMajor why would GPS be affected by that nuke All the Navstars are in much higher mid-Earth orbits something like twelve-thousand-plus miles right Thats too high for EMP effects cause theres no air to ionize that far outCorrect sir But that detonation created an extremely high radiation flux and its basically charging up the Van Allen Belt even though its way out there too In turn that causes what we call secondary radiation effects in electronic circuits on GPS birdsmdashthings like electronic gate latch-ups data losses and other effects It also created an ion-charged layer in the upper atmosphere which acts like a shield that blocks the weak signals from GPS and other satellites Most GPS navigation and timing signals are now prevented from reaching Earth especially out in the Pacific Probably going to affect the downlinks from some GEO birds too the major added referring to platforms in geostationary orbit 22500 miles from Earth

64

Cornell HKHANE Aff

EMPacts Satelites

A HANE would wipe out satelites

Kueter 7 Jeff- president of the George C Marshall Institute ldquoChinarsquos Space Ambitions ndash And Oursrdquo The New Atlantis Number 16 Spring 2007 pp 7-22

Another type of threat to space assets is high-altitude nuclear detonation An enemy could arm a missile with a nuclear warhead launch it and explode the warhead in space All satellites within the line of sight of the explosion would be destroyed or rendered ineffective immediately with the effects dissipating with distance from the explosion Whatrsquos more the radiation released by a single low-yield high-altitude nuclear explosion ldquocould disablemdashin weeks to monthsmdashall low-Earth orbit satellites not specifically hardened to withstand the radiation generated by that explosionrdquo according to the Defense Threat Reduction Agency Most US satellitesmdashincluding those commercial satellites that are used extensively for defense communicationsmdashare not hardened to withstand such an attack and they lack the maneuvering capabilities needed to ldquoget out of the wayrdquo of the attacking missile the explosion or the radioactive effects China certainly has the missile and nuclear capabilities required to conduct such an attack (So too do the United States Russia the United Kingdom France and possibly Israel India and Pakistan North Korea apparently lacks the missile competence and Iran probably does not have either the missile or nuclear know-howmdashas of this writing) Needless to say this most extreme measure would likely be attempted only in times of acute international crisis

Bright 2 Melanie ldquoHigh-Altitude Nuclear Explosions Blind Deaf And Dumbrdquo Janes Defence Weekly October 23 2002 httpwwwglobalsecurityorgorgnews2002nuke_explosionhtm

However blowing up targets on the Earths surface is only part of the story According to Dr Dennis Papadopoulos from the Department of Physics University of Maryland If someone were to explode a 10kT nuclear weapon at a high enough altitude over their own territory 90 of the worlds low earth orbit [LEO] satellites would be lost within a month In addition to the electromagnetic pulse (EMP) phenomenon generally understood satellites are vulnerable to the Christofilos Effect When a high-altitude nuclear explosion (HANE) is detonated at about 100km altitude the Earths magnetic field accelerates the large cloud of electrons and protons released by the blast The radiation particles speed up spread out all the while accelerating circling the globe until racing around it at speeds approaching the speed of light This effect is named after Dr Nicholas Christofilos who predicted this phenomenon The detonation produces an artificial radiation belt that within weeks to at most months delivers a lethal dose of radiation to [LEO] satellites said Dr Papadopoulos who worked with Dr Christofilos at what is now the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory The superpowers conducted six scheduled nuclear explosions in space during the Cuban Missile Crisis These HANEs damaged or destroyed all seven satellites then in orbit These tests conducted before the 1963 Atmospheric Test Ban Treaty provided the only experimental data on the vulnerability of satellites to nuclear detonation Today the implications of a HANE are far greater as millions use the 250-plus satellites in LEO

65

Cornell HKHANE Aff

EMPacts Healthcare

Ross 8 LH Jr Mihelic FM ldquoHealthcare vulnerabilities to electromagnetic pulserdquo Am J Disaster Med 2008 Nov-Dec3(6)321-5 Center for Homeland Security Studies Graduate School of Medicine University of Tennessee Knoxville Tennessee USA

The US healthcare system is particularly vulnerable to the effects of electromagnetic pulse (EMP) attack because of the systems technological sophistication but while national defense planners prepare for the considerable threat that EMP poses there has been little or no recognition of this threat within the US healthcare community and neither has there been any significant healthcare planning to deal with such an eventuality Recognition of the risk presented by EMP and advance institution of appropriate strategies to mitigate its effects on the healthcare system could enable the preservation of much of that systems function in the face of EMP-related disruptions and will greatly further all-hazards disaster preparations

66

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Morality Advantage

Wilson 8 Clay- Specialist in Technology and National Security Foreign Affairs Defense and Trade Division ldquoHigh Altitude Electromagnetic Pulse (HEMP) and High Power Microwave (HPM) Devices Threat Assessmentsrdquo Congressional Research Service March 26 2008

HEMP and HPM energy weapons primarily damage electronic systems with little or no direct effect on humans however these effects may be difficult to limit or control As HEMP or HPM energy fields instantly spread outward they may also affect nearby hospital equipment or personal medical devices such as pace-makers or other parts of the surrounding civilian infrastructure For this reason some international human rights organizations may object to the development or testing of HEMP or HPM weapons

67

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT Verifiability

Plan results in verifiable operational change and posture changes still have positive effects

Feiveson 99 Harold- Senior Research Policy Scientist at Princeton co-principal investigator of Princetons research Program on Science and Global Security ldquoChapter 4 Nuclear Strategy and Targeting Doctrinerdquo in ldquoThe Nuclear Turning Pointrdquo The Brookings Institution 1999

It will not be easy to break out of cold war thought patterns regarding the use of nuclear weapons War plans are carefully guarded secrets and changes in them can at best be verified only indirectly and over time through corresponding changes in force posture Nuclear doctrine is important however because it is the basis for force structure and operations and could largely determine how the entire nuclear command system would react in a crisis An evolving dialogue between US and Russian military leaders on this subject would be useful and could help pave the way toward very deep reductions in nuclear forces

Plan leads to removal of specific warheads although we cannot predict the exact change because the information is classified

Bernardin 99 Michael- Provost for Theoretical Institute of Thermonuclear Studies Los Alamos National Laboratory ldquoElectromagnetic Pulse Threats to US Military And Civilian Infrastructurerdquo Hearing Before The Military Research And Development Subcommittee October 7 1999

The Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) and the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) identify current and projected nuclear weapon threats and provide inputs to the Department of Energy nuclear design labs Los Alamos and Livermore National Laboratories who model foreign nuclear weapons The labs each have over 25 years of experience in performing this type of modeling The weapon models serve as a basis for associated EMP threat assessmentsFor the purpose of EMP assessment it is convenient to group the threat weapons into the following five categories One single-stage fission weapons two single-stage boosted weapons three nominal two-stage thermonuclear weapons with yields up to a few megatons four two-stage thermonuclear weapons with yields over a few megatons and five special technology thermonuclear weaponsThe reason for this grouping and the threat weapons themselves will be discussed in closed session The EMP produced by these weapons is also a topic delegated largely to closed session

Specific warhead removal is verifiable

Davis et al 10 ldquoTechnical Steps to Support Nuclear Arsenal Downsizingrdquo American Physical Society Report Commitee Jay Davis Chair John Browne Patricia Lewis Carolyn Pura Allen Sessoms Tom Shea Francis Slakey Benn Tannenbaum Jim Tape John Taylor Peter D Zimmerman Feb 18 2010

As bilateral US-Russian nuclear stockpile reductions result in arsenals that no longer dwarf those of other nuclear-armed states further reductions will require working with scientists and negotiators from a broader range of countries At some point it may be useful to monitor warhead dismantlement in such a way that the specific model (eg W88) can be determined Template methods (matching a particular radiation signature) may be useful in addition to attribute measurements (ensuring that certain measured levels exceed defined limits in order to increase confidence in the contents) and may prove to be very attractive for some applications A distinctive template would be created for each model and individual samples would then be compared to the templates on file to confirm (or reject) a declared item The templates could include for example a combination of passive radiation signatures andor radiation signatures caused by subjecting an item to a stream of neutrons andor gamma rays

68

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT Verifiability

The US has specific missiles designed to lay down an EMP attack

Lewallen 2k John- Public Ocean Access Network ldquoThe Blackout Bombrdquo North Coast Express Spring 2000 httpsonicnet~doretkIssues00-03-SPRtheblackhtml

Any future global war is likely to begin with a few Blackout Bombs China Russia the U nited S tates and other nuclear powers have several nuclear missiles and perhaps weaponized satellites designed to lay down EMP over continent-size areas instantaneously While every nation on Earth is vulnerable to attack from the United States the United States is vulnerable indeed defenseless to a secret class of nuclear weapons which has captured the attention of the major nuclear powers--China Russia Britain France and the United States itself--for the past thirty-eight years

Missile removal is verifiable

Davis et al 10 ldquoTechnical Steps to Support Nuclear Arsenal Downsizingrdquo American Physical Society Report Commitee Jay Davis Chair John Browne Patricia Lewis Carolyn Pura Allen Sessoms Tom Shea Francis Slakey Benn Tannenbaum Jim Tape John Taylor Peter D Zimmerman Feb 18 2010

Recent monitoring and inspection practices affecting the United States and Russia focused on verifying the numbers and locations of launchers and delivery platforms (and hence deducing the maximum number of warheads that could be deployed on strategic delivery systems) Modest reductions in US and Russian stockpile numbers (eg 1500) may rely primarily on these existing practices while more significant reductions in total stockpiles (1000 or fewer) will likely require the use of more intrusive techniques to verify numbers of warheads If and when reductions in all nuclear arsenals are verified by multilateral agreements the techniques employed and the inspectors must guarantee international assurance of compliance

Unilateral willingness to verify is best- formal agreements fail

Bunn 2 Matthew- the Project on Managing the Atom (MTA) Belfer Center Harvard ldquoIntroduction Monitoring Nuclear Stockpiles and Reductionsrdquo NTI October 28 2002 httpwwwntiorge_researchcnwmmonitoringindexasp

Finally it is important to understand that while most formal US-Russian transparency initiatives have been stymied by continuing secrecy concerns and the lack of strong incentives for both governments to agree to them informal measures have created an absolutely unprecedented degree of openness transparency and cooperation between the two nuclear weapons complexes As a result of a broad range of scientific and threat-reduction cooperation US and Russian experts have now visited most of the key facilities in the other nationrsquos nuclear weapons complexes and there has been a huge increase in the level of detailed understanding of what goes on at individual facilities and buildings within these complexes Some threat reduction programs have formalized this transparency with specific agreements regulating access to sensitive sites Both sides (particularly the United States ) have also unilaterally revealed a wealth of information about their nuclear stockpiles and complexes in both published reports and other sources The level of openness that now exists would have been completely unthinkable as recently as early 1994 (when it was still true that Russia was refusing to allow US experts direct access for implementing security upgrades at any facility in Russia where actual HEU or plutonium existed)

69

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Verifiability Extensions

Specific weapons are designed for EMP strikes

Schneider 7 Mark- National Institute for Public Policy The Emerging EMP Threat to the United States United States Nuclear Strategy Forum No 6 November 2007

All nuclear weapons detonated at high altitude produce EMP but some types of nuclear weapons are designed specifically to be efficient at producing EMP In 2004 Clay Wilson of the Congressional Research Service reported that ldquoA HEMP [high altitude electromagnetic pulse] attack directed against the United States might involve a one-megaton nuclear warhead or a smaller warhead that is specially-designed [to produce EMP] using a burst several hundred miles above the mid-western states to affect computers on both coastsrdquo 3

Extension- Missile removal is verifiable

WSLF 2 ldquoBanning Ballistic Missilesrdquo Western States Legal Foundation Feb 1 2002 httpwwwwslfweborgspaceMCRbriefhtm

A ban on missile flight tests would be relatively easy to verify It should include a system of inspections to assure that civilian rocket launches do not conceal efforts to develop weapons delivery systems These inspections could make it more difficult to develop and deploy weapons systems that operate through or from space If the type of inspections appropriate for controlling ballistic missiles worked well it could provide the technical and political basis for more comprehensive agreements aimed at preventing the further militarization of space

Specific warheads and their composition can be verified

Davis et al 10 ldquoTechnical Steps to Support Nuclear Arsenal Downsizingrdquo American Physical Society Report Commitee Jay Davis Chair John Browne Patricia Lewis Carolyn Pura Allen Sessoms Tom Shea Francis Slakey Benn Tannenbaum Jim Tape John Taylor Peter D Zimmerman Feb 18 2010

The techniques that have received the most attention for the purposes of warhead or material verification involve passive gamma and neutron measurements Medium resolution gamma measurements (eg by sodium iodide (NaI) detectors) could be used to indicate the presence or absence of plutonium and to match weapon template signatures High-resolution gamma measurements (eg high-purity Germanium detectors) provide in addition the ability to determine isotopic ratios indicative of weapons grade plutonium and americium content thus revealing whether the plutonium is weapons grade and the time since the last americium separation In general neutron measurement methods ranging from simple neutron counting to more complex coincidence and multiplicity techniques have been used to determine plutonium massesMeasurements of some highly-enriched uranium (HEU) characteristics and material mass using specially-developed gamma measurement techniques have been shown to be possible under some carefully-controlled conditions It is likely that high confidence measurements of HEU characteristics will require the use of active interrogation techniques Experiments and demonstrations using a range of measurement systems ndash sodium iodide highpurity germanium and helium-3 detectors as well as neutron multiplicity counters ndash have been performed to determine the feasibility and applicability of these techniques for potential verification measures

70

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT CMR

The pentagon is no longer cares about EMPs

Timmerman 2 Kenneth R- director of the Foundation for Democracy in Iran 2006 Nobel Peace Prize Nominee ldquoUS Threatened With EMP Attackrdquo Feb 1 2002

Twenty years ago only the Soviet Union had the capability to launch an EMP attack on the United States by exploding a nuclear warhead 500 kilometers (310 miles) in space Pentagon planners spent billions of dollars protecting US military equipment against EMP during the Cold War But during the last decade the military has canceled many of those protection programs alleging an end to the threat of a Soviet nuclear strike And none of our civilian infrastructure is protected because of the high cost

71

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Politics Link Answers

Congress doesnrsquot care about minor operational changes like the plan

Woolf 7 Amy F Specialist in National Defense Congressional Research Service ldquoCongress And US Nuclear Weapons Review and Oversight of Policies and Programsrdquo The Nonproliferation Review (peer-reviewed) Volume 14 Issue 3 November 2007

The US Congress charged with overseeing US nuclear weapons policy and programs usually addresses such policies and programs through the annual authorization and appropriations process focusing mostly on questions of how many and what types of weapons the United States should deploy with little attention paid to questions about nuclear weapons strategy doctrine and policy The oversight process has brought about some significant changes in the plans for US nuclear weapons including the elimination of funding for the Robust Nuclear Earth Penetrator study and the shift of that funding into a study of the Reliable Replacement Warhead But with the focus on authorizations and appropriations along with the divided jurisdiction over nuclear weapons policy and programs in congressional committees Congress has not either recently or during the Cold War and post-Cold War eras conducted a more comprehensive review of US nuclear weapons strategy policy or force structure Changes in committee jurisdictions could affect the oversight process but as long as nuclear weapons policy and programs remain a relatively low priority for most members of Congress and the country at large it is unlikely that Congress will pursue such a comprehensive debate

No link- EMP weapons donrsquot have a constituency

Forstchen 8 William R PhD Author of ldquoOne Second Afterrdquo httpwwwonesecondaftercompbwp_d10e87d9wp_d10e87d9html

EMP has managed to ldquostealthrdquo its way on to the highly dangerous list and few except for a small number of personnel in the Pentagon various research labs and men like Congressman Bartlett (R MD) who heads the Congressional Investigative Committee on EMP are aware of it For one it has a certain ldquosci-firdquo sound to it which makes many dismiss the potential before the discussion has even started Second the only way to truly evaluate the threat and demonstrate it is to detonate a nuclear weapon something we have not done since the full test ban went into effect decades ago It is therefore not ldquovisiblerdquo to us the way another airliner smashing into a skyscraper is now forever imprinted on our national psyche feared and prepared for Next with all the competing issues and threats in the world EMP simply does not have a ldquoconstituencyrdquo of influence Only a few members of Congress our military and scientific community are issuing the warnings There are no Hollywood stars placing themselves in front of cameras with this as their cause the few times it has been used in popular movies it has been portrayed inaccurately often absurdly

72

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Politics Link Answers

Congress doesnrsquot care

Matthews 8 William ldquoLittle Congressional Interest in EMP Threatrdquo Defense News Jul 10 2008Once again a congressional commission is warning that an electromagnetic pulse attack against the United States could wipe out the nations electronics-dependent civilization And again hardly anyone is listening Only a handful of the 60 members of the House Armed Services Committee showed up for a hearing on the EMP threat July 10 and most didnt stick around for the whole two-hour sessionIts obvious that theres not very much interest in it said Rep Roscoe Bartlett R-Md who asked for the hearing There are lots of seats vacant he lamented

Failure to reduce the threat of EMP strikes on the US will kill Obamarsquos capital

Kessler 9 Ronald- chief Washington correspondent of Newsmaxcom ldquoObama Democrats Expose US to EMP Attackrdquo Newsmax 17 Aug 2009

Despite polls showing that Americans overwhelmingly support missile defense President Obamarsquos administration already has cut the Pentagonrsquos missile defense budget by $14 billion or 15 percent If an EMP attack occurs we will have the Democrats to blame But without voting machines or any form of communication Americans who survive will not be able to vote them out of office

Plan prevents capital draining disputes for Obama

Hitchens 9 Theresa- Director UN Institute for Disarmament Research ldquoSaving Space Threat Proliferation and Mitigationrdquo International Commission on Nuclear Non-proliferation and Disarmament May 19 2009

While it remains to be seen what direction the new administration of President Barak Obamamdashwho spoke out against space weapons during the presidential campaign mdashwill take regarding national security in space (as well as regarding overall relations with China) it cannot be denied that the issue of how best to approach protection of space assets remains in mid-2009 a major issue in the domestic US debate over national security

73

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Politics Link Turn

Plan is a win for Obama- bolsters his agenda

New York Times 9 Christopher Drew October 28 2009 lthttpwwwnytimescom20091029business29defensehtml_r=1gt

When the Obama administration proposed canceling a host of expensive weapons systems last spring some of the military industryrsquos allies in Congress assumed as they had in the past that they would have the final say But as the president signed a $680 billion military policy bill on Wednesday it was clear that he had succeeded in paring back nearly all of the programs and setting a tone of greater restraint than the Pentagon had seen in many years Now the question is whether Mr Obama can sustain that push next year when the midterm elections are likely to make Congress more resistant to further cuts and job losses White House officials say Mr Obama took advantage of a rare political moment to break through one of Washingtonrsquos most powerful lobbies and trim more weapons systems than any president had in decades Rahm Emanuel the White House chief of staff said Wednesday that the plan was to threaten a veto over a prominent program mdash in this case the F-22 fighter jet mdash ldquoto show we were willing to expend political capital and could win on something that people thought we could notrdquo Once the Senate voted in July to stop buying F-22s Mr Emanuel said in an interview that success ldquoreverberated downrdquo to help sustain billions of dollars of cuts in Army modernization missile defense and other programs Mr Emanuel said the strategy emerged when the defense secretary Robert M Gates told Mr Obama they needed to ldquoshake up sacred cows and be seen as taking on fightsrdquo Military analysts said Mr Gates a holdover from the Bush administration also aimed at the most bloated programs And Senator John McCain of Arizona the former Republican presidential candidate who has criticized the Pentagonrsquos cost overruns provided Mr Obama with political cover to make the cuts without being seen as soft on the military ldquoThey probably get an lsquoArsquo from the standpoint of their success on their major initiativesrdquo said Fred Downey a former Senate aide who is now vice president for national security at the Aerospace Industries Association ldquoThey probably got all of them but one or maybe two and thatrsquos an extraordinarily high scorerdquo

Winners win

Pascal 9 Marc staff writer for The Moderate Voice 1052009 lthttpthemoderatevoicecom48571obamaE28099s-only-priority-get-re-electedgt

Many political leaders incorrectly confuse political capital with financial capital The first is a perpetually renewable commodity if used correctly and the latter is always finite no matter how much is amassed One cannot hoard political capital for some future battle that may or may not come It grows and shrinks directly as one uses it and it directly mirrors political fights taken and avoided Actually winning on certain core issues and major legislative battles helps increase political capital for future use But not using political capital causes it to dissolve rapidly Talking too much and never getting anything accomplished is a good recipe to dissipate valuable political capital

74

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT Geomagnetic Storms

Geomagnetic storms are predictable- prevention measures exist

PSEPC 2 Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness Canada ldquoGeomagnetic Storms - Reducing the Threat to Critical Infrastructure in Canadardquo 25 April 2002 httpwwwsolarstormsorgCanadaPipelineshtml

Preventative measures have been implemented to avoid events such as the 1989 Quebec blackout System operators in Canada have developed and implemented procedures to respond to these emergencies thereby reducing potential damage due to GICs Since 1989 Hydro-Quebec has spent more than $12 billion installing transmission line series capacitors These capacitors block GIC flow in order to prevent them from causing damage to the system Hydro-Quebec has also installed monitoring equipment that spots voltage fluctuations and immediately notifies operators so that they may redistribute the load to other parts of the network Additional protective measures include disconnecting the links between power grids desensitizing automatic control systems delaying power station maintenance and delaying the replacement of equipment Utilities are also relying on space weather forecasting to help remain operational during geomagnetic storms Operators can implement conservative operating procedures once they have received an advance warning of a storm threat

EMPs are too spontaneous- the protections fail

Survival 9 ldquoElectromagnetic Pulse (EMP) Review of One Second Afterrdquo Survival 2013 September 20 2009EMP is the energy surge that comes off a nuclear explosion If that explosion takes place in space say 300 miles above the surface we will feel only the tingling sensation thatrsquos similar to what we feel when lightning strikes nearby But all the electronics in the country will feel it and will be blown out The pulse travels down anything that serves as an antenna anything that is metal and fries all the equipment thatrsquos running Because the pulse is ldquofront-loadedrdquo therersquos no build-up or warning to allow surge protectors or circuit breakers to function It will stop cars dead in their tracks (unless yoursquore driving one of the 1965 or so models that the government wants to get off the road) and will do even more damage to airplanes (As many as a quarter million people who are flying at any given time would be killed immediately)

Geomagnetic storms pale in comparison to EMP strikes

Foster et al 8 ldquoReport of the Commission to Assess the Threat to the United States from Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP) Attackrdquo April 2008 Dr John S Foster Jr Mr Earl Gjelde Dr William R Graham (Chairman) Dr Robert J Hermann Mr Henry (Hank) M Kluepfel Gen Richard L Lawson USAF (Ret) Dr Gordon K Soper Dr Lowell L Wood Jr Dr Joan B Woodard

Geomagnetic storms represent an approximation to an E3-induced voltage effect The experience to date is of events that may be orders of magnitude smaller in scope and less severe than that expected from an EMP mdash although the Commission has also investigated the impact of a 100-year superstorm The induced geomagnetic superstorm currents in the transmission lines will cause hundreds of high voltage transformers to saturate creating a severe reactive load in the power system leading to voltage collapse in the affected area and damage to elements of the transmission system The nature of this threat did not allow for experimental testing of the E3 effect so this historical record is the best information on the effect

75

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT Geomagnetic Storms

Three times the damage

Foster et al 8 ldquoReport of the Commission to Assess the Threat to the United States from Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP) Attackrdquo April 2008 Dr John S Foster Jr Mr Earl Gjelde Dr William R Graham (Chairman) Dr Robert J Hermann Mr Henry (Hank) M Kluepfel Gen Richard L Lawson USAF (Ret) Dr Gordon K Soper Dr Lowell L Wood Jr Dr Joan B Woodard

The late time EMP or E3 follows E1 and E2 and may last for a minute or more The E3 pulse is similar in a great many respects to geomagnetic effects induced by solar storms Solar storms and their impacts on electrical systems with long lines have been thoroughly evaluated and are known to cause serious damage to major electrical system components at much lower levels than the reasonably possible E3 impact This damage has been incurred in spite of functioning in-place protective systems Given the preceding E1 and E2 pulse damage to the protective systems and other system components damage from E3 to unprotected major system components is virtually assured

EMPs worse- no ozone protection and cascading effects

Forstchen 8 William R PhD Author of ldquoOne Second Afterrdquo httpwwwonesecondaftercompbwp_d10e87d9wp_d10e87d9html

EMP is shorthand for Electro Magnetic Pulse It is a rather unusual and frightening by-product when a nuclear bomb is detonated above the earthrsquos atmosphere We all know that our atmosphere and the magnetic field which surrounds our planet is a thin layer which not only keeps us alive but also protects us from dangerous radiation from the sun On a fairly regular basis there are huge solar storms on the sunrsquos surface which emit powerful jets of deadly radiation If not for the protective layer of our atmosphere and magnetic field those storms would fry us At times though the storm is so power that enough disruptive energy reaches the earthrsquos surface that it drowns out radio waves and even shorts electrical power grids this happened several years back in CanadaView the detonation of a nuclear bomb two hundred miles straight up as the same thing but infinitely more powerful since it is so close by As the bomb explodes it emits a powerful wave of gamma rays As this energy release hits the upper atmosphere it creates a electrical disturbance know as the Compton Effect The intensity is magnified View it as a small pebble rolling down a slope hitting a larger one setting that in motion until finally you have an avalanche

EMP strikes are frontloaded- no protection

Forstchen 8 William R PhD Author of ldquoOne Second Afterrdquo httpwwwonesecondaftercompbwp_d10e87d9wp_d10e87d9html

Wouldnrsquot circuit breakers and surge protectors stop it This is where the effect of EMP starts to get complex All electricity travels of course at the speed of light The circuit breakers that are built into our electrical system or the ones you buy to plug your own computer in to are designed to ldquoreadrsquo the flow of current If it suddenly exceeds a certain level the breaker snaps and takes you off line thus protecting everything beyond it More than a few of us have found out that when you buy a cheap surge protector for ten or twenty bucks sure it will snap off but the surge has already passed through and fried your expensive pla sma television or new computer Unlike a lightning strike or other power surge an EMP surge is ldquofront loadedrdquo Meaning it doesnrsquot do a build up for a couple of mirco-seconds allowing enough time for the circuit breaker to ldquoreadrdquo that trouble is on the way and shut down It comes instead like a wall of energy without any advance wave building up as a warning It therefore slams through nearly all commercial and even military surge protectors already in place and is past the ldquosafety barrierrdquo and into the delicate electronics before the system has time to react

76

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT Blackout Alt Causes

Alt causes to blackout are not as severe

Foster et al 8 Chairman of the Board of GKN Aerospace Transparency Systems ldquoReport of the Commission to Assess the Threat to the United States from Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP) Attackrdquo April 2008 Dr John S Foster Jr Mr Earl Gjelde Dr William R Graham (Chairman) Dr Robert J Hermann Mr Henry (Hank) M Kluepfel Gen Richard L Lawson USAF (Ret) Dr Gordon K Soper Dr Lowell L Wood Jr Dr Joan B Woodard

Distinctions Past electric power blackouts provide a baseline for assessing the impact of an EMP attack on the power grid as discussed previously However there are several important factors that distinguish the EMP collapse scenario from these historical experiences 1048715 In the historical power system outages only one or a few critical elements within an entire system have been debilitated For example a power generation facility may trip because a surge of current is unexpectedly presented through a fault from a particular load Yet a substantial portion of the system may well be rendered out of service as the disruption triggers a series of cascading failures each instigating the next failure (eg first a generator trips then the frequency sags and a load trips off or a transmission line trips out with its associated loads which in turn causes the frequency to overrun and another generator trips out and it continues to oscillate until the interconnected system comes down) In the case of an EMP attack elements within many critical facility components are likely to be damaged or disrupted simultaneously over a relatively broad geographic area thus creating an almost certain cascading collapse of the remaining elements Similarly while lightning might strike a single plant transmission line or large load causing it to trip out lightning has not hit multiple locations spread over a very wide area of the system with sufficient intensity and hitting all simultaneously to the extent that would be representative of an EMP attack 1048715 During historical outages the telecommunications system and associated control systems have continued to function This provides the system operators with eyes and ears to know what was damaged where damage occurred and in some cases the range of damage While the power system may still come down it is more possible to take protective measures to minimize damage and impact in order to effectuate rapid restoration The communications and control systemsrsquo functionality are at high risk of disruption and damage themselves during an EMP attack A minimum communications capability is needed to support immediate responses to isolate parts for continued operation and to implement necessary measures to restore the electrical system 1048715 In the early stages of the EMP attack even before the disruptions could be sensed and trips could occur that would lead to collapse some or many of the protective devices will be damaged that have ensured critical system components are safe to allow fast recovery As a result some and perhaps much of the electrical system would not be able to protect itself from the effects of multiple simultaneous and cascading failures Widespread damage to the generation transmission and distribution infrastructures and equipment are probable Rather than simply restoring power to an intact infrastructure with only a very few damaged components the recovery task would be to replace an extensively damaged system under very difficult and decaying circumstances and then proceeding to restoration 1048715 The control systems would be damaged to some extent as opposed to remaining fully operational as in historical outages The operations and dispatch centers where the vast interconnected system is controlled and managed would probably have damaged and disrupted components the readings from the system would be fragmented and in many cases false or nonexistent and communication by whatever means would be difficult to impractical to impossible Control and knowledge would range from unreliable at best to simply nonexistent Finding what and where damage has occurred and getting it repaired would be very problematic in any reasonable time frame even within the control centers themselves let alone out over the vast network with millions of devices 1048715 Skilled labor for a massive and diverse repair effort is not currently available if allocated over a large geographic area with great numbers of components and devices to check and repair where necessary This scope of damage could cover perhaps 70 percent or possibly more of the continental United States as well as a significant part of Canadarsquos population This is far too large to bring in the limited skilled labor from very distant points outside the affected area in any reasonable time even if one could coordinate them and knew where to send them and they had the means to get there Thus the extensive support from nearby fringe areas used so effectively in historical outages is likely to be unavailable as a practical matter as they themselves would be affected The blackout resulting from Hurricane Katrina an event comparable to a small EMP attack overtaxed the ability of the Nation to quickly restore electric power a failure that contributed to the slow recovery of the afflicted region 1048715 Other infrastructures would be similarly impacted simultaneously with the electrical system such as transportation communication and even water and food to sustain crews The ability to find and get spare parts and components or purchase services would be severely hampered by lack of normal financial systems in addition to communication transportation and other factors The Hurricane Katrina blackout caused precisely such problems 1048715 Fuel supplies for the power generation would be interrupted First the SCADA and DCS systems used in delivery of the fuel would be adversely impacted In addition much of the fuel supply infrastructure is dependent upon the electrical system For example natural gas-fired plants (which make up such a large share of the domestic generation) would be rendered inoperable since their fuel is delivered just in time for use Coal plants have stockpiles that variously might be adequate for a week to a month The few remaining oil-fired plants similarly have a limited storage of fuel Nuclear plants would reasonably be expected to still have fuel but they would have to forego protective regulations to continue to operate Many renewable fueled resources would still have their fuel supply but EMP effects on controls may still render them inoperable

77

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT Alternative EMP forms

Nuclear EMPs affect the whole continental US Other HPMs only travel a mile

Wilson 8 Clay- Specialist in Technology and National Security Foreign Affairs Defense and Trade Division ldquoHigh Altitude Electromagnetic Pulse (HEMP) and High Power Microwave (HPM) Devices Threat Assessmentsrdquo Congressional Research Service March 26 2008

HEMP is produced when a nuclear weapon is detonated high above the Earthrsquos surface creating gamma-radiation that interacts with the atmosphere to create an intense electromagnetic energy field that is harmless to people as it radiates outward but which can overload computer circuitry with effects similar to but causing damage much more swiftly than a lightning strike6 The effects of HEMP became fully known to the United States in 1962 during a high-altitude nuclear test (code named ldquoStarfish Primerdquo) over the Pacific Ocean when radio stations and electronic equipment were disrupted 800 miles away throughout Hawaii The HEMP effect can span thousands of miles depending on the altitude and the design and power of the nuclear burst (a single device detonated at an appropriate altitude over Kansas reportedly could affect all of the continental United States)7 and can be picked up by metallic conductors such as wires or power cables acting as antennas to conduct the energy shockwave into the electronic systems of cars airplanes and communications equipment Description of High-Power Microwave HPM is a non-nuclear radio frequency energy field It can be produced as a weapon when a powerful chemical detonation is instantly transformed by a special coil device called a flux compression generator into a strong electromagnetic field of microwave energy8 Other methods such as powerful batteries can also be used to create a reusable HPM weapon HPM energy can be focused using a speciallyshaped antenna or emitter to produce effects similar to HEMP but only within a very limited range Unlike HEMP however HPM radiation is comprised of shorter wave forms at higher-frequencies which make it highly effective against electronic equipment and more difficult to harden against A mechanically simple suitcasesized device using a chemical explosive and special focusing antenna might theoretically produce a one-time instantaneous HPM shockwave that could disrupt many computers within a 1-mile range9 Also HPM energy at higher power levels (megawatts) and powered for a longer time interval reportedly could cause physical harm to persons near the source emitter or possibly in the path of a narrowly focused energy beam10

HPMs donrsquot effect a large area

Wilson 8 Clay- Specialist in Technology and National Security Foreign Affairs Defense and Trade Division ldquoHigh Altitude Electromagnetic Pulse (HEMP) and High Power Microwave (HPM) Devices Threat Assessmentsrdquo Congressional Research Service March 26 2008

Electromagnetic energy characterized as weapon potentially threatening to national security can be created as a pulse traditionally by two methods overhead nuclear burst and microwave emission High-Altitude Electromagnetic Pulse (HEMP) is an instantaneous electromagnetic energy field produced in the atmosphere by the power and radiation of a nuclear explosion and that is damaging to electronic equipment over a very wide area depending on the design of the nuclear device and altitude of the burst High-Power Microwave (HPM) electromagnetic energy can be produced as an instantaneous pulse created through special electrical equipment that transforms battery power or powerful chemical reaction or explosion into intense microwaves that are very damaging to electronics within a much smaller area

78

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT Protective Measures

The blast zaps through hardened electronics

Wilson 8 Clay- Specialist in Technology and National Security Foreign Affairs Defense and Trade Division ldquoHigh Altitude Electromagnetic Pulse (HEMP) and High Power Microwave (HPM) Devices Threat Assessmentsrdquo Congressional Research Service March 26 2008

Electronic equipment may be hardened by surrounding it with protective metallic shielding which routes damaging electromagnetic fields away from highly sensitive electrical components This method known as Faraday cage protection is traditionally used to protect electronic equipment from a lightning strike However power surges HEMP or HPM weapons could possibly involve peak currents of tens of millions of amps which can pass through a protective Faraday cage Additionally equipment placed within a Faraday cage may also be made vulnerable by any wires running into to the cage which can conduct the electromagnetic shockwave into the equipment Depending on the power level involved points of entry into the shielded cages can sometimes be protected from electromagnetic pulse by using specially designed surge protectors special wire termination procedures screened isolated transformers spark gaps or other types of specially-designed electrical filters Critical systems may also be protected by increasing the number of backup units and by keeping these units dispersed and out of range of the electromagnetic pulse source emitter26

The second stage of the EMP blast eats through protective barriers

Wilson 8 Clay- Specialist in Technology and National Security Foreign Affairs Defense and Trade Division ldquoHigh Altitude Electromagnetic Pulse (HEMP) and High Power Microwave (HPM) Devices Threat Assessmentsrdquo Congressional Research Service March 26 2008

A high altitude nuclear explosion (that creates HEMP) produces three major energy components that arrive in sequence and which have measurably different effects that can be cumulatively damaging to electronic equipment The first energy component is the initial energy shockwave which lasts about one microsecond and is similar to extremely intense static electricity that can overload circuitry for every electronic device that is within line of sight of the burst A secondary energy component then arrives which has characteristics that are similar to a lightning strike By itself this second energy component might not be an issue for some critical infrastructure equipment if anti-lightning protective measures are already in place However the rise time of the first component is so rapid and intense that it can destroy many protective measures allowing the second component to further disrupt the electronic equipment The third energy component is a longer-lasting magnetic signal from about one microsecond to one full second in duration This geomagnetic signal causes an effect that is damaging primarily to long-lines electronic equipment A localized magnetic effect builds up throughout the length of the transmission lines and then quickly collapses producing a magnetohydrodynamic (MHD) ldquoheaverdquo or ldquolate-timerdquo power surge that overloads equipment connected to the power and telecommunications infrastructure This latetime effect adds to the initial HEMP effect and systems connected to long-lines power and communications systems may be further disrupted by the combined effects Smaller isolated systems do not collect so much of this third energy component and are usually disrupted only by the first energy component of HEMP

79

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT Protective Measures

Commercial surge protectors will fail

Wilson 8 Clay- Specialist in Technology and National Security Foreign Affairs Defense and Trade Division ldquoHigh Altitude Electromagnetic Pulse (HEMP) and High Power Microwave (HPM) Devices Threat Assessmentsrdquo Congressional Research Service March 26 2008

Some assert that little has been done by the private sector to protect against the threat from electromagnetic pulse and that commercial electronic systems in the United States could be severely damaged by either HEMP or smaller-scale HPM8 Commercial electronic surge arresters used for lightning strikes reportedly do not clamp fast enough to protect against the instantaneous effects of electromagnetic pulse9 In March 2007 a survey of state Adjutants General who oversee National Guard units throughout the country found that most state-based emergency responders are not actively preparing against an attack on the United States by electromagnetic pulse The survey entitled Missile Defense and the Role of the States was conducted jointly by the Anchorage-based Institute of the North and the Claremont Institute of Claremont California Survey questions were sent to Adjutants General of all 50 states with more than half responding Although 96 of state Adjutants General indicated significant concern over an EMP attack the majority had done little or no analysis of the effects of an overhead EMP attack and little or no training or preparation to harden electronic equipment None of the Adjutants General surveyed indicated that they were actively involved in a formal planning process for response to an EMP attack10

80

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT Low Altitude Nuclear Explosions

Low altitude nuclear explosions do no cause any of the dangerous EMP effects

Johnston 9 Robert Wm- PhD in physics from UT-Dallas ldquoHigh-altitude nuclear explosionsrdquo 28 January 2009

Several effects are relatively unique to high altitude bursts Electromagnetic pulse (EMP) is important only for high altitude bursts For such detonations ionization

of the upper atmosphere can produce a brief intense pulse of radio frequency radiation which can damage or disrupt electronic devices For explosions above most of the atmosphere EMP can affect large areas

Ionization of the atmosphere from explosions in the atmosphere can interfere with radar and radio communications for short periods

Charged particles produced by explosions above the Earths atmosphere can be captured by the Earths magnetic field temporarily creating artificial radiation belts that can damage spacecraft and injure astronautscosmonauts in orbit

Ground attacks do not destroy satellites in LEO

Kueter 7 Jeff- president of the George C Marshall Institute ldquoChinarsquos Space Ambitions ndash And Oursrdquo The New Atlantis Number 16 Spring 2007 pp 7-22

There are numerous ways our space assets could be disabled or destroyed One likely threat to US space assets resides in a very terrestrial environment strikes against ground stations and launch systems Such attacks could constrain the usefulness of our existing satellites or reduce our ability to put new satellites into orbit But such ground attacks would probably at worst only diminish our ability to use our space assets since the data transmitted from orbiting satellites could in most cases be rerouted to other receiving stations on the ground and since our launch systems are (somewhat) redundant Of more concern is the possibility of attacks that directly destroy or damage satellites since they cannot at present be replaced quickly easily or cheaply Without a reorientation of the way it acquires space hardware the United States faces substantial barriers to repairing or replacing damaged satellites

81

Cornell HKHANE Aff

CP Theories

Conditionality is a voter and justifies the aff capturing the perma) Time skew ndash the aff has to invest time in multiple worlds that the neg can just kickb) Strat skew ndash the neg can run multiple contradictory worldviews that prevent us from making our best

argumentsc) in-depth education is impossible when the neg can just kick any position that we really press them on

PICs are a voting issuea) Strat skew- by mooting the 1AC they deprive the aff of a third of speech timeb) Vague plan writing- trading off with more educational negative groundc) Aff contradiction ndash PICs force us to argue against ourselves Our strike plans not verifiable card could

be used against usd) Inifintely regressive- justifying any single pic opens up the floodgates for menial one word pics

International fiat is abusive and a voting issue1 Not Predictable- There are an infinite number of international actors that the aff can never be ready to

debate2 Literature- The negative should have to produce solvency evidence that speaks to the exact mandates

of the plan in context to their international actor so that they can ensure predictability within the literature

3 Bad Advocacy Model- The judge is supposed to be a US policy maker not have international jurisdiction These types of counterplans make world peace CPs and utopia CPs legitimate

4 Infinitely regressive- they can have as many actors as they want as well as the ability to fiat the object of resolution That allows them to literally fiat out our advantages and win on a small risk of disads meaning debate is never fair or predictable

5 International organizations are uniquely abusive- they compromise multiple countries including the US which makes them plan-plus and not competitive because US action is involved

82

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT Hardening CP

Perm do both

CP alone signals a new race and causes escalation

Lewallen 2 John- Political Science at Whitman University organizer of the Nuclear Peace Action Group Fulbright Scholarship recipient Public Ocean Access Network ldquoHigh-Altitude Nuclear Warrdquo Nuclear Press p48

If a US national effort to defend vital systems against nuclear EMP attack is done in the context of moving away from national missile defense and space weapons in general and toward cooperation for disarmament and non-proliferation of nuclear weapons with Russia China and other nations it will be viewed by US adversaries as a prudent defensive move to protect American civilization However if the United States starts to harden civilian electronics against EMP in the current context of a military domination of space and invulnerability to missile attack it will send an aggressive and offensive signal that the US is preparing to fight World War Three This is a war we well all lose

Guidelines will not be implemented

Sirak 4 Michael- JDW Staff Reporter ldquoUS vulnerable to EMP attackrdquo Janersquos Defence Weekly 26 July 2004While the US military has grown increasingly dependent on computers electronics and information systems it has relaxed requirements for EMP-hardened systems since the end of the Cold War and its overall record of adherence to its guidelines for such robust equipment has been spotty they said This trend continues in the wrong direction the panel noted Similarly the US civilian critical infrastructure is not adequately prepared to deal with the effects of an EMP attack according to the panel which is known formally as the Commission to Assess the Threat to the United States from Electromagnetic Pulse Attack Congress created the panel in 2000 out of concern that this issue was not receiving enough attention

Even CP protects military infrastructure the military will be undermined because they rely on commercial electronics

Wilson 8 Clay- Specialist in Technology and National Security Foreign Affairs Defense and Trade Division ldquoHigh Altitude Electromagnetic Pulse (HEMP) and High Power Microwave (HPM) Devices Threat Assessmentsrdquo Congressional Research Service March 26 2008

The US military has adopted a policy where commercial electronic equipment is now used extensively in support of complex US weapons systems For example a large percentage of US military communications during Operation Iraqi Freedom was reportedly carried by commercial satellites and much military administrative information is currently routed through the civilian Internet43 Many commercial communications satellites particularly those in low earth orbit reportedly may degrade or cease to function shortly after a high altitude nuclear explosion44 However some observers believe that possible HEMP and HPM vulnerabilities of military information systems are outweighed by the benefits gained through access to innovative technology and increased communications flexibility that come from using state-of-the-art electronics and from maintaining connections to the civilian Internet and satellite systems

Bright 2 Melanie ldquoHigh-Altitude Nuclear Explosions Blind Deaf And Dumbrdquo Janes Defence Weekly October 23 2002 httpwwwglobalsecurityorgorgnews2002nuke_explosionhtm

The most obvious solution to HANEs is to harden civilian satellites In fact this is not an option with current technology More shielding means more weight

83

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT Hardening CP

Hardening sends threatening signals

Lewallen 99 John- Public Ocean Access Network ldquoThe Blackout Bomb What It Means To Yourdquo httpnonuclearnettheblackoutbombhtm

However I respectfully disagree with Dr Woods recommendation that any civilian hardening to protect us from EMP be done After a flirtation with civil defense and bomb shelters Americans have realized that nuclear attack against the United States is not something they are willing to prepare for because there is no rational way to prepare for it I believe Russia China and the United States form a Nuclear Triangle with constant low-to high-key nuclear weapons confrontation in the air If we start hardening our civilian infrastructure to withstand EMP it will signal to the Russians and Chinese that we are moving toward the brink of nuclear war

CP links to politics

Chisholm 5 Patrick ldquoProtect our electronics against EMP attackrdquo Christian Science Monitor December 19 2005

It is a thorny question as to whether the FCC should revise its standards to require electronics manufacturers to build in EMP protection This could be prohibitively expensive for the manufacture of individual components But businesses and government agencies should install EMP protection at the system level (This also would provide protection against other electromagnetic disturbances such as lightning)

84

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT NMD CP

Lewallen 2 John- Political Science at Whitman University organizer of the Nuclear Peace Action Group Fulbright Scholarship recipient Public Ocean Access Network ldquoHigh-Altitude Nuclear Warrdquo Nuclear Press p9-10

Dr Graham noted that a nuclear missile could have ldquosympatheticrdquo or ldquosalvagerdquo fusing which means it could be detonated when attacked by a missile defense system In other words US national missile defense if effective could cause a high-altitude nuclear EMP burst

Lewallen 2 John- Political Science at Whitman University organizer of the Nuclear Peace Action Group Fulbright Scholarship recipient Public Ocean Access Network ldquoHigh-Altitude Nuclear Warrdquo Nuclear Press Pg45The Chinese weapon to trump the National Missile Defense is a missile satellite or fractional orbiting nuclear bomb either intended for high-altitude nuclear EMP or fused to detonate when attacked by a hit-to-kill National Missile Defense system As noted by William Graham at the Weldon Hearings ldquoone of the ways an offensive nuclear weapon on a missile can be armed is in what is called a sympathetic or a salvage fusing mode so that even if you intercepted above the atmosphere before it reaches its target once it knows it is being attacked once the offensive nuclear warhead knows it is being attacked its fusing system may choose to detonate itself there to get at least the EMP and space radiation effect of the weaponrdquoIn short Clintonrsquos hit-to-kill National Missile Defense if effective could cause high-altitude nuclear explosions Laser missile defense systems in earlier stages of research and development are coming to be focused on shooting down missiles in their boost phase before they achieve high altitude The Russians and Chinese are very unlikely to allow effective boost-phase missile attack systems to be set up by the United StatesAll attempts by the United States or any other nuclear power to develop homeland missile defense systems suffer from three fatal flaws First counter-measures to any system can be developed much more cheaply than the system itself Secondly missile defense systems will take years to deploy at best while the Russians and Chinese have high-altitude and low-altitude nuclear weapons deployed and ready to strike the United States nowThirdly a credibly effective national missile defense of the United States poses much greater threat of nuclear missile attack against the US than do the incredibly ineffective systems now publicly visible The imminent deployment of a missile defense system that would work (or that an adversary believes would work or even believes that the United States commanders believe would work) poses Russia or China with an ugly choice submit to US military domination or launch a preemptive nuclear strike against the US before its defenses are set up

Doesnrsquot solve spaceLewallen 2 John- Political Science at Whitman University organizer of the Nuclear Peace Action Group Fulbright Scholarship recipient Public Ocean Access Network ldquoHigh-Altitude Nuclear Warrdquo Nuclear Press Pg33On Feb 4 2001 Sergei Ivanov Russian President Putinrsquos closest military advisor got up at a Munich meeting of defense ministers from many nations and said that any US national missile defense system would by definition abolish the 1972 Antiballistic Missile Treaty (ABM)ldquoAndrdquo Mr Ivanov added ldquothe destruction of the ABM treaty we are quite confident will result in the annihilation of the whole structure of strategic stability and create prerequisites for a new arms race ndash including one in spacerdquo

85

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT PAROS CP

Perm do both Curbing Chinese space ambitions is a prerequisite for a successful PAROS

Hitchens 9 Theresa- Director UN Institute for Disarmament Research ldquoSaving Space Threat Proliferation and Mitigationrdquo International Commission on Nuclear Non-proliferation and Disarmament May 19 2009

Finally the test also reverberated in the diplomatic arena calling into question the credibility of Chinarsquos longstanding efforts to push forward a treaty on the Prevention of an Arms Race in Outer Space (PAROS) and threatening to further weaken already shaky chances for negotiations on such a treaty to commence at the Conference on Disarmament (CD) in Geneva Disagreement on starting PAROS negotiations had been at the center of the CDrsquos 12-year standstill blocking the acceptance of a formal program of work and most specifically preventing negotiations on a Fissile Material Cutoff Treaty (FMCT)mdashdue to the standoff between the US and China on whether one set of talks should go forward without the other Although Russia and China dropped the demand for simultaneous negotiations in 2003 (instead calling for ldquodiscussionsrdquo of PAROS) at the time the Bush administration was not interested in a deal on either FMCT or PAROS With the May 29 agreement by the CD on a new program of work that includes both FMCT negotiations and PAROS discussions progress toward nuclear disarmament and nonproliferation looking more achievable than it has in many years Certainly this momentous shift is largely due to the dramatic change in US policy emerging from the Obama administration Nonetheless there remain major obstacles to a PAROS treaty (elaborated below)

86

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT Asteroids PIC

Quantitatively even if we only win 11000 probability for the solvency deficit it outweighs the risk of an asteroid hitting Earth even assuming the nuclear weapon works

Anissimov 9 [Michael Media Director for the Singularity Institute and Fundraising Director North America for the Lifeboat Foundation consultant for a variety of future-oriented non-profit organizations and for-profit companies including the Methuselah Foundation Center for Responsible Nanotechnology and Kurzweil Technologies ldquoEurekalert How to deflect asteroids and save the Earthrdquo Thursday Apr 16 httpwwwacceleratingfuturecommichaelblog200904eurekalert-how-to-deflect-asteroids-and-save-the-earth]

The asteroid risk is a great one to get people acquainted with the concept of catastrophic risk in general because it is statistically pinned down very well However according to some calculations the risk of a civilization-ending asteroid hitting Earth in the next 100 years is only 15000 leading to a 1500000 annual probability Say we give a 1500 annual probability estimate of the end of civilization due to nuclear war (Seems like quite the underestimate) According to standard cost-benefit analysis we should assign roughly 1000 times more importance to the task of minimizing the chance of catastrophic nuclear war than to deflecting asteroids We may see some common miscalculations on this score as asteroids are new and exciting and nuclear war is the same boring old risk that has been around for over half a century

PICs are a voting issuee) Strat skew- by mooting the 1AC they deprive the aff of a third of speech timef) Vague plan writing- trading off with more educational negative groundg) Aff contradiction ndash PICs force us to argue against ourselves Our strike plans not verifiable card could

be used against ush) Inifintely regressive- justifying any single pic opens up the floodgates for menial one word pics

Conditionality is a voter and justifies the aff capturing the permd) Time skew ndash the aff has to invest time in multiple worlds that the neg can just kicke) Strat skew ndash the neg can run multiple contradictory worldviews that prevent us from making our best

argumentsf) in-depth education is impossible when the neg can just kick any position that we really press them on

87

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT Japan Rearm

Japan likes the plan ndash they think US EMP attacks would damage Japan

Birdnow 6 Timothy contributor to American Daily Review writer for The American Thinker ldquoEMP and the Unfought Victoryrdquo July 1 httpwwwamericanthinkercom200607emp_and_the_unfought_victoryhtml

Couple an EMP attack on the West Coast with a terrorist strike and you have a recipe for chaos Here is one simple scenario send men into the CaliforniaArizonaNevada scrubland and light fires Without aircraft or water those fires could engulf the entire west This would be an easy lowmdashtech way to maximize damage while keeping operational costs to a minimum Of course the usual terrorist methods mdash bombs sniper attacks etc would also work well You could light natural gas wells oil wells and other combustible facilities on fire and watch the black smoke pour into the sky You could take steps to poison water sources so that people would die from drinking tainted water The point is nobody will be able to stop sleeper cells from acting after such an attack and the terrorists would know the best ways to strike to maximize their damage The real question is how would the United States respond to such an attack Will we launch a nuclear strike against North Korea killing millions and poisoning the entire region (including our friends in Japan and South Korea) An EMP attack against the DPRK would be the equivalent of embargoing gasoline on Sitting Bull they have so few high tech gadgets it would be pointless

88

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT Consult Japan

Japan says no ndash they fear an EMP attack

a) China

Pry 5 Dr Peter Vincent- EMP Commission Staff ldquoForeign Views Of Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP) Attackrdquo Before The United States Senate Subcommittee On Terrorism Technology And Homeland Security March 8 2005 httpwwwendtimesreportcomEMP_attackhtml

Some foreign analysts judging from open source statements and writings appear to regard EMP attack as a legitimate use of nuclear weapons because EMP would inflict no or few prompt civilian casualties EMP attack appears to be a unique exception to the general stigma attached to nuclear employment by most of the international community in public statements Significantly even some analysts in Japan and Germanyndashnations that historically have been most condemnatory of nuclear and other weapons of mass destruction in official and unofficial forumsndashappear to regard EMP attack as morally defensible For example a June 2000 Japanese article in a scholarly journal citing senior political and military officials appears to regard EMP attack as a legitimate use of nuclear weapons ldquoAlthough there is little chance that the Beijing authorities would launch a nuclear attack which would incur the disapproval of the international community and which would result in such enormous destruction that it would impede postwar cleanup and policies a serious assault starting with the use of nuclear weapons which would not harm humans animals or property would be valid If a nuclear warhead was detonated 40 kilometers above Taiwan an electromagnetic wave would be propagated which would harm unprotected computers radar and IC circuits on the ground within a 100 kilometer radius and the weapons and equipment which depend on the communications and electronics technology whose superiority Taiwan takes pride in would be rendered combat ineffective at one stroke If they were detonated in the sky in the vicinity of Ilan the effects would also extend to the waters near Yonakuni [in Okinawa] so it would be necessary for Japan too to take care Those in Taiwan having lost their advanced technology capabilities would end up fighting with tactics and technology going back to the 19th century They would inevitably be at a disadvantage with the PLA and its overwhelming military force superiorityrdquo (Su Tzu-yun Jadi 1 June 2000)

b) North Korea

Weldon 99 Curt Weldon A Representative From Pennsylvania Chairman Military Research And Development Subcommittee Electromagnetic Pulse Threats To US Military And Civilian Infrastructure House of Representatives Committee on Armed Services Military Research and Development Subcommittee Washington DC Thursday October 7 1999 httpcommdocshousegovcommitteessecurityhas280010000has280010_0HTM

The EMP threat may have acquired new and urgent relevance as the proliferation of nuclear weapons and missile technology accelerates North Korea for example is assessed as already having developed one or two atomic weapons and is on the verge of testing an Inter-Continental Ballistic Missiles (ICBM) capable of delivering a nuclear warhead to the United States North Korea already has missiles capable of delivering a nuclear warhead against US regional allies and US forces based in Japan and South Korea

89

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT Primacy DA

Primacy collapse is inevitable in the status quo- rogue states will achieve EMP capability that can decimate the US Their primacy good cards assume that the US will be the only country capable of a first strike And This is impossible because Primacy leads other nations to seek asymmetric warfighting tactics like EMP

Calleo 3 David P- Currently director of the European Studies Program and Professor of The Johns Hopkins University Taught at Brown Yale and Columbia ldquoEurope and America Different Geopolitical Wavelengthsrdquo Annual Foreign Policy Conference Heinrich Boumlll Stiftung - November 13th 2003

Military superiority is frequently vulnerable to what might be called the ldquoLaw of Asymmetrical Deterrencerdquo In the Cold War for example despite the huge nuclear arsenals of the superpowers anyone else with a ldquosecond-strikerdquo capability could have a reasonable deterrent with only a few hundred missiles Nothing has changed in that realm since the Soviet collapse ndash except that there are a few more nuclear powers Nuclear deterrence still seems a cheap way for the weak to counter the strong This seems true of weapons of mass destruction in general Not only are they relatively cheap equalizers but the presence of a superpower actively exercising its military superiority is a great inducement for others to acquire these equalizing weapons

EMP warfare shatters US primacy since the consequences are so huge and the US is the most vulnerable

Lewallen 2 John- Political Science at Whitman University organizer of the Nuclear Peace Action Group Fulbright Scholarship recipient Public Ocean Access Network ldquoHigh-Altitude Nuclear Warrdquo Nuclear Press Pg38

The United States has overwhelming military superiority and a gargantuan vulnerability to high-altitude nuclear EMP attack Russia and China have had several decades to fill their weapons bag with specialized nuclear EMP weapons and to prepare to sling them over the American homeland by missile by satellite or in a fractional orbiting bomb flung into orbit with a Scud or other short-range missile David knew that Goliath had a soft spot in his forehead just as the Russians and Chinese are perfectly aware that the United States in the words of Representative Weldon is the ldquomost vulnerable nation on Earth to electronic warfarerdquo

Primacy via EMP weapons makes nuclear apocalypse inevitable

Lewallen 2 John- Political Science at Whitman University organizer of the Nuclear Peace Action Group Fulbright Scholarship recipient Public Ocean Access Network ldquoHigh-Altitude Nuclear Warrdquo Nuclear Press Pg43

If it comes the next global war almost certainly will begin with high-altitude nuclear EMP Anything done or refrained from to reduce international conflict and promote international cooperation will help humanity avoid the awesome setback of global war The nation-state system itself is perhaps the most dangerous factor auguring high-altitude nuclear war It is perhaps amazing that we humans have gone the past fifty-five years without anyone blowing up a nuclear bomb How much longer can we tickle the dragonrsquos tail before the fundamental flaw of competing armies with nuclear weapons finishes us off The United States fond of calling itself the worldrsquos only superpower has the same tendency as past military empires (although not a self-acknowledged empire) a strong and perhaps inevitable drive to move from world preeminence to world domination The US military-industrial complex is set up to endlessly conceive design produce and deploy new strategic weaponry

90

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT Primacy DA

Extend our CDI and Schorr evidence that EMP primacy causes dangerous crisis escalation and accidental nuclear war

Nuclear primacy causes uncontrollable crisis dynamics

Schwarz 6 Benjamin- literary editor and the national editor of The Atlantic foreign policy analyst at the RAND Corporation ldquoThe Perils of Primacyrdquo The Atlantic JanuaryFebruary httpwwwtheatlanticcomdoc200601primacy

Lieber and Press emphasize that their analysis doesnt prove that a US first strike would succeed but it highlights a development that is grave if only because its one that prudent planners in Russia and China who conduct similar analyses are no doubt already surmising that their countries can no longer be confident of having a viable deterrent Surely adding to their alarm is the realization that the nuclear imbalance troubling enough already will only grow in the coming years Washingtons withdrawal from the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty and its concomitant pursuit of a national missile-defense system will greatly enhance its offensive nuclear capabilities because although critics of missile defense correctly argue that it could never shield America from a massive full-scale nuclear attack it could quite plausibly deal with the very few missiles an adversary might have left to deploy after a US first strike Whats more the United States is actively pursuing a series of initiativesmdashincluding further advances in anti-submarine and anti-satellite warfare in missile accuracy and potency and in wide-area remote sensing aimed at finding relocatable targets such as mobile ICBMsmdashthat will render Russias and Chinas nuclear forces all the more vulnerable To be sure Americas emerging nuclear hegemony could bring benefits including potential leverage vis-agrave-vis our superpower counterparts in such areas of competition as the Balkans and Taiwan It will also force China to divert defense resources from its power-projection efforts in East Asia (This however would be both a blessing and a curse We should expect a new prolonged and intense nuclear arms race Lieber and Press conclude) But whether or not America has deliberately pursued the ability to win a nuclear conflict that capability will increase the risk of great-power war US-Chinese relations are bound to be edgy or worse for the foreseeable future and although relations between Washington and Moscow are nowhere near their Cold War nadir actual and potential strains remain formidable Each country has nuclear-armed missiles that can be delivered against the other within minutesmdashand in Americas nuclear-war plans the overwhelming number of targets remain inside Russia Most important any shift in the nuclear balance itself will engender a volatility that could cause seemingly small conflicts between countries to quickly spiral Confronted with the growing nuclear imbalance Russia and China will be forced to try to redress it but given Americas advantages that effort as Lieber and Press note could take well over a decade Until a nuclear stalemate is restoredmdashif it ever ismdashMoscow and Beijing will surely buy deterrence by spreading out their nuclear forces decentralizing their command-and-control systems and implementing launch on warning policies If more than half a century of analyzing nuclear dangers and crisis stability has taught us anything it is that all these steps can cause crises to escalate uncontrollably They could trigger the unauthorized or accidental use of nuclear weapons this could lead to inadvertent nuclear war American military preponderance now embraces the entire spectrum of conflict as Pentagon planners put it That is to say were miles ahead of everyone in every type of warfare But if that preponderance is leading to a world in which Russian and Chinese launch commanders are fingering nuclear hair triggers the game may not be worth the candle Without any public scrutiny or debate the United States has emerged as the nuclear hegemon in possession of a destabilizing first-strike capability It does not matter whether this has come about by accident or design or whether Americas motives are worthy or malign the condition itself is the problem The ramifications of this state of affairs are of the gravest significance to Americas securitymdashand the worlds Its time for scrutiny and debate to begin

91

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT Damage Limitation

The ability to engage in various levels of nuclear war is key to damage limitation

Gray amp Payne 80 Colin S and Keith ldquoVictory is Possiblerdquo Foreign Policy Summer 1980 pp 14-27Nuclear war is unlikely to be an essentially meaningless terminal event Instead it is likely to be waged to coerce the Soviet Union to give up some recent gain Thus a president must have the ability not merely to end a war but to end it favorably The United States would need to be able to persuade desperate and determined Soviet leaders that it has the capability and the determination to wage nuclear war at even higher levels of violence until an acceptable outcome is achieved For deterrence to function during a war each side would have to calculate whether an improved outcome is possible through further escalation An adequate US deterrent posture is one that denies the Soviet Union any plausible hope of success at any level of strategic conflict offers a likely prospect of Soviet defeat and offers a reasonable chance of limiting damage to the United States Such a deterrence posture is often criticized as contributing to the arms race and causing strategic instability because it would stimulate new Soviet deployments However during the 1970s the Soviet Union showed that its weapon development and deployment decisions are not dictated by American actions Western understanding of what determines Soviet defense procurement is less than perfect but it is now obvious that Soviet weapon decisions cannot be explained with reference to any simple action-reaction model of arms-race dynamics In addition highly survivable US strategic forces should insure strategic stability by denying the Soviets an attractive first-strike target set

EMP warfare undermines our ability to perform limited nuclear war

Burnham 83 David- co-director of the Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse (TRAC) ldquoUS Fears One Bomb Could Cripple The Nationrdquo The New York Times

Another reason for the recent concern in the Government is the adoption by both the Carter and Reagan Administrations of a nuclear strategy that includes the possibility that this country might have to wage a prolonged limited nuclear war For a nation to conduct such a war military analysts stress much would depend on its ability to organize an effective civil defense that would enable a large part of the population to continue to house and feed itself CONTINUES The potential chaos that may be created by high altitude EMP has national security implications the Energy Department said in a statement explaining why it had started the new research program During a period of national crisis electrical power will be required to operate military installations civil defense facilities and critical industries In addition if EMP caused a disruption of the financial manufacturing retail transportation and communication industries as well as basic utilities serious economic and social consequences would result Disruption of the nations electrical power supply has grave implications In an article in Spectrum the authoritative magazine of the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers Eric J Lemer a contributing editor expressed similar concerns Power Grids Vulnerability The potential impact on the national power grid of a small number of high altitude EMP bursts would be comparable to that produced by large lightning bolts hitting every power line segment in the country he said When it is considered that two ordinary lightning bolts were the proximate cause of the 1977 New York City blackout it is easy to see why many analysts believe that a complete shutdown of the national power grid could be achieved by a handful of EMP detonations

92

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT Damage Limitation

Non Nuclear Pulse devices allow for damage limitation without undermining the escalation ladder

Wilson 8 Clay- Specialist in Technology and National Security Foreign Affairs Defense and Trade Division ldquoHigh Altitude Electromagnetic Pulse (HEMP) and High Power Microwave (HPM) Devices Threat Assessmentsrdquo Congressional Research Service March 26 2008

DOD research on pulsed-power HPM electromagnetic weapons is currently being done at Kirtland Air Force Base in Albuquerque New Mexico Weapons now being developed by the US military for electronic warfare can disrupt the trajectory of missiles while in flight and can overpower or degrade enemy communications telemetry and circuitry Other HPM weapons being tested by the military are portable and re-usable through battery-power and many are effective when fired miles away from a target These weapons can also be focused like a laser beam and tuned to an appropriate frequency in order to penetrate electronics that are heavily shielded against a nuclear attack The deepest bunkers with the thickest concrete walls reportedly are not safe from such a beam if they have even a single unprotected wire reaching the surface29 During Operation Iraqi Freedom many Iraqi command bunkers and suspected chemical-biological weapons bunkers were deeply buried underground and thought to be difficult to disable using conventional explosives New HPM weapons were reportedly considered for possible use in attacks against these targets because the numerous communications and power lines leading into the underground bunkers offered pathways for conducting powerful surges of electromagnetic energy that could destroy the computer equipment inside30 Because instantaneous HPM energy can reflect off the ground and possibly affect piloted aircraft above much testing currently involves HPM devices on Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs) and on the Air Force Conventional Air Launched Cruise Missile system By 2010 DOD reportedly will field several airlaunched UAVs using disposable and reusable HPM weapons designed to disrupt enemy computers31

93

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT Damage Limitation

A HEMP destroys US military capability and damage limitation

Graham 4 Dr William R- Deputy Administrator of NASA The report of the Commission to Assess the Threat to the United States From Electromagnetic Pulse Attackrdquo July 22 2004

Mr Langevin In the event that an EMP event threatened or damaged the GPS system what would happen to battlefield information and communications systems such as FBCB2 (Force XXI Battle Command Brigade-and-Below) Blue Force Tracker (BFT) and Movement Tracking System (MTS) Are there backup systems available if our situational awareness provided by GPS input is taken away Dr Graham Army battlefield information and communication systems such as FBCB2 (Force XXI Battle Command Brigade-and-Below) Blue Force Tracker (BFT) and Movement Tracking System (MTS) provide position location communication capability and force tracking-situational awareness These information and communication systems use the Global Positioning System (GPS) as a component Loss of a GPS signal would negate MTSs and BFTs ability to identify position location and to conduct force tracking While high Altitude EMP (HEMP) is not likely to directly damage the satellites that broadcast GPS signals because of the height of their orbits the ground-based systems that receive and make use of GPS information would be at risk unless protected against HEMP effects MTS and BFT transmit data via a communications satellite that would not be affected by loss of a GPS signal Certain ground platforms which use FBCB2 and BFT such as the Bradley Paladin and Ml have an inertial navigation unit (INU) which is a redundant capability for deternining position lacation Having to resort to using the INU would result in a degradation of performance and possible delay of missions due to reinitializing position data every 20-26 kilometers depending on the platform and the INU system used INUs do not rely on GPS signals The location data from the INU is transmitted via FBCB2 communications which again is not affected by loss of GPS signal The location data can then be used by FBCB2 for force tracking Situational awareness of any system on the battlefield which relies soley on GPS will no longer appear in the FBCB2 situational awareness display HEMP survivability is a requirement for the GPS receivers in MTS BFT and FBCB2 FBCB2 has been tested in many vehicles such as the HMMWV M1A2 SEP Tank STRYKER and LOSAT over the last four years There are no known HEMP survivability issues or concerns resulting from these tests BFT was tested on a HMMWV in April 04 and passed MTS evaluation on the Family of Medium Tactical Vehicles (FMTV) has been delayed due to asset availability However MTS relies on many of the same components as BFT so no major problems are anticipated It should also be noted that nuclear weapon effects other than HEMP could damage GPS or interfere with the transmission of GPS signals through the atmosphere bull In a high-altitude nuclear event loss of a GPS signal will degrade the ability of ground systems such as FBCB2 BFT and MTS to self-locate and track forces

94

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT Deterrence DA

1) Nuclear deterrent in trouble now

Kyl amp Perle 9 Jon Richard June 30 2009 ldquoOur Decaying Nuclear Deterrentrdquo Mr Kyl is a Republican senator from Arizona Mr Perle a fellow at the American Enterprise Institute was assistant secretary of defense in the Reagan administration lthttponlinewsjcomarticleSB124623202363966157htmlgt

Thus in his Prague speech Mr Obama announced that the US would immediately and aggressively pursue ratification of the comprehensive ban on the testing of nuclear weapons The administration believes without evidence that ratification of the test-ban treaty will discourage other countries from developing nuclear weapons Which countries does it have in mind Iran North Korea Syria Countries alarmed by the nuclear ambitions of their enemies Allies who may one day lose confidence in our nuclear umbrella There are good reasons why the test-ban treaty has not been ratified The attempt to do so in 1999 failed in the Senate mostly out of concerns about verification -- it simply is not verifiable It also failed because of an understandable reluctance on the part of the US Senate to forgo forever a test program that could in the future be of critical importance for our defense and the defense of our allies Robert Gates who is now Mr Obamas own secretary of defense warned in a speech last October that in the absence of a nuclear modernization program even the most modest of which

Congress has repeatedly declined to fund [a]t a certain point it will become impossible to keep extending the life of our arsenal especially in light of our testing moratorium Suppose future problems in our nuclear arsenal emerge that cannot be solved without testing Would our predicament

discourage nuclear proliferation -- or stimulate it For the foreseeable future the US and many of our allies rely on our nuclear deterrent And as long as the US possesses nuclear weapons they must be -- as Mr Obama recognized in Prague -- safe secure and effective Yet his proposed 2010 budget fails to take the necessary steps to do that Those steps have been studied extensively by the Perry-Schlesinger Commission (named for co-chairmen William Perry secretary of defense under President Bill Clinton and James R Schlesinger secretary of defense under Presidents Richard Nixon and Gerald Ford) Its consensus report released in May makes numerous recommendations to increase the funding for and improve the effectiveness of the deteriorating nuclear weapons laboratory complex (eg the Los Alamos facility in New Mexico the Pantex plant in Texas and the dangerously neglected Y-12 plant in Tennessee) that has become the soft underbelly of our deterrent force The commission also assessed the nuclear weapons infrastructure that is essential to a safe secure and effective deterrent and declared it in serious need of transformation It looked at our laboratory-based scientific and technical expertise and concluded that the intellectual

infrastructure is in serious trouble A major cause is woefully inadequate funding The commission rightly argued that we must exercise the full range of laboratory skills including nuclear weapon design skills Skills that are not exercised will atrophy The president and the Congress must heed these recommendations There are some who believe that failing to invest

adequately in our nuclear deterrent will move us closer to a nuclear free world In fact blocking crucial modernization means unilateral disarmament by unilateral obsolescence This unilateral disarmament will only encourage nuclear proliferation since our allies will see the danger and our adversaries the opportunity By neglecting -- and in some cases even opposing -- essential modernization programs arms-control proponents are actually undermining the prospect for further reductions of the US nuclear arsenal As our nuclear weapons stockpile ages and concern about its reliability increases we will have to compensate by retaining more nuclear weapons than would otherwise be the case This reality will necessarily influence future arms-control negotiations beginning with the upcoming Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty follow-on For these negotiations the Russians are insisting on a false linkage between nuclear weapons and missile defenses They are

demanding that we abandon defenses against North Korean or Iranian missiles as a condition for mutual reductions in American and Russian strategic forces As the president cuts the budget for missile defense and cedes ground to the Russians on our planned defense sites in Poland and the Czech Republic we may end up abandoning a needed defense of the US and our European allies from the looming Iranian threat There is a fashionable notion that if only we and the Russians reduced our nuclear forces other nations would reduce their existing arsenals or abandon plans to acquire nuclear weapons altogether This idea an article of faith of the soft power approach to halting nuclear proliferation assumes that the nuclear ambitions of Kim Jong Il or Mahmoud Ahmadinejad would be curtailed or abandoned in response to reductions in the American and Russian deterrent forces -- or that India Pakistan or China would respond with reductions of their own

Non Nuclear Pulse devices solve

Wilson 8 Clay- Specialist in Technology and National Security Foreign Affairs Defense and Trade Division ldquoHigh Altitude Electromagnetic Pulse (HEMP) and High Power Microwave (HPM) Devices Threat Assessmentsrdquo Congressional Research Service March 26 2008

DOD research on pulsed-power HPM electromagnetic weapons is currently being done at Kirtland Air Force Base in Albuquerque New Mexico Weapons now being developed by the US military for electronic warfare can disrupt the trajectory of missiles while in flight and can overpower or degrade enemy communications telemetry and circuitry Other HPM weapons being tested by the military are portable and re-usable through battery-power and many are effective when fired miles away from a target These weapons can also be focused like a laser beam and tuned to an appropriate frequency in order to penetrate electronics that are heavily shielded against a nuclear attack The deepest bunkers with the thickest concrete walls reportedly are not safe from such a beam if they have even a single unprotected wire reaching the surface29 During Operation Iraqi Freedom many Iraqi command bunkers and suspected chemical-biological weapons bunkers were deeply buried underground and thought to be difficult to disable using conventional explosives New HPM weapons were reportedly considered for possible use in attacks against these targets because the numerous communications and power lines leading into the underground bunkers offered pathways for conducting powerful surges of electromagnetic energy that could destroy the computer equipment inside30 Because instantaneous HPM energy can reflect off the ground and possibly affect piloted aircraft above much testing currently involves HPM devices on Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs) and on the Air Force Conventional Air Launched Cruise Missile system By 2010 DOD reportedly will field several airlaunched UAVs using disposable and reusable HPM weapons designed to disrupt enemy computers31

95

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT Deterrence DA

US EMP strikes are not used to deter EMPs

Riddle 4 Lieutenant Colonel Thomas C- United States Army ldquoNuclear High Altitude Electromagnetic Pulse ndash Implications For Homeland Security And Homeland Defenserdquo US Army War College 03 May 2004

Similarly the decision to implement an earlier deployment of an initial ground-based interceptor and improved ballistic missile tracking capabilities will support the improved passive and active defenses called for in the NSS 50 Also the convincing demonstration of the continuing efficiency and effectiveness of Americarsquos global precision strike capabilities during Operation IRAQI FREEDOM is a clear indication that multi-dimensional counterforce capabilities remain a viable element of Americarsquos counter-proliferation capabilities that may be used if required to prevent a HEMP attack on the United States Finally the United Statesrsquo demonstrated willingness to conduct preemptive strikes to neutralize WMD under the concept of imminent defense adds an unmistakable dimension to the concept of deterrence for those seeking to acquire weapons of mass destruction51

EMPs have no deterrent effect against the majority of countries because they are less reliant on electronic systems

Timmerman 2 Kenneth R- director of the Foundation for Democracy in Iran 2006 Nobel Peace Prize Nominee ldquoUS Threatened With EMP Attackrdquo Feb 1 2002

The more backward the country the more attractive EMP becomes as a weapon against the United States Bartlett explains ldquoIf North Korea were to launch a missile straight up and explode a nuclear weapon 500 kilometers over their own territory it wouldnrsquot do them a lot of damage because they have very little dependence on electronic systems But it would have a devastating impact on South Korea as well as on our 37000 troops stationed there With North Korearsquos million soldiers they could just walk all over us with impunityrdquo

Deterrence against EMP strikes fails now- lack of clear response

Spencer 4 Jack- Senior Policy Analyst for Defense and National Security in the Kathryn and Shelby Cullom Davis Institute for International Studies at The Heritage Foundation ldquoThe Electromagnetic Pulse Commission Warns of an Old Threat with a New Facerdquo Heritage Foundation Backgrounder 1784 August 3 2004

The difficulty of developing a clear response to EMP is due primarily to the unique nature of the threat It is unclear for example what would constitute a proportional response to an explosion that takes place in space without being seen or heard yet instantaneously devastates society or a military force while resulting in no initial loss of life or physical destruction Furthermore there is a dearth of academic or legal analysis by which to guide such policies because until very recently few took the threat seriously This is especially so in the context of rogue states or transnational groups

96

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT Deterrence DA

EMP attacks cannot be deterred

Wilson 8 Clay- Specialist in Technology and National Security Foreign Affairs Defense and Trade Division ldquoHigh Altitude Electromagnetic Pulse (HEMP) and High Power Microwave (HPM) Devices Threat Assessmentsrdquo Congressional Research Service March 26 2008

The threat of an EMP attack against the United States is hard to assess but some observers indicate that it is growing along with worldwide access to newer technologies and the proliferation of nuclear weapons In the past the threat of mutually assured destruction provided a lasting deterrent against the exchange of multiple high-yield nuclear warheads However now even a single specially designed low-yield nuclear explosion high above the United States or over a battlefield can produce a large-scale EMP effect that could result in a widespread loss of electronics but no direct fatalities and may not necessarily evoke a large nuclear retaliatory strike by the US military This coupled with the possible vulnerability of US commercial electronics and US military battlefield equipment to the effects of EMP may create a new incentive for other countries to develop or acquire a nuclear capability

Canrsquot deter EMP threats

EMP Commission 4 Report of the Commission to Assess the Threat to the United States from Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP) Attack Volume 1 Executive Report 2004 Dr John S Foster Jr Mr Earl Gjelde Dr William R Graham (Chairman) Dr Robert J Hermann Mr Henry (Hank) M Kluepfel GEN Richard L Lawson USAF (Ret) Dr Gordon K Soper Dr Lowell L Wood Jr Dr Joan B Woodard]

EMP effects from nuclear bursts are not new threats to our nation The Soviet Union in the past and Russia and other nations today are potentially capable of creating these effects Historically this application of nuclear weaponry was mixed with a much larger population of nuclear devices that were the primary source of destruction and thus EMP as a weapons effect was not the primary focus Throughout the Cold War the United States did not try to protect its civilian infrastructure against either the physical or EMP impact of nuclear weapons and instead depended on deterrence for its safety What is different now is that some potential sources of EMP threats are difficult to determdashthey can be terrorist groups that have no state identity have only one or a few weapons and are motivated to attack the US without regard for their own safety Rogue states such as North Korea and Iran may also be developing the capability to pose an EMP threat to the United States and may also be unpredictable and difficult to deter Certain types of relatively low-yield nuclear weapons can be employed to generate potentially catastrophic EMP effects over wide geographic areas and designs for variants of such weapons may have been illicitly trafficked for a quarter-century China and Russia have considered limited nuclear attack options that unlike their Cold War plans employ EMP as the primary or sole means of attack Indeed as recently as May 1999 during the NATO bombing of the former Yugoslavia high-ranking members of the Russian Duma meeting with a US congressional delegation to discuss the Balkans conflict raised the specter of a Russian EMP attack that would paralyze the United States

97

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT Deterrence DA

EMP Strikes will be used for catalytic wars

Lewallen 2 John- Political Science at Whitman University organizer of the Nuclear Peace Action Group Fulbright Scholarship recipient Public Ocean Access Network ldquoHigh-Altitude Nuclear Warrdquo Nuclear Press Pg36

The Soviet Union no longer exists Now many nations and even several corporations potentially have nuclear bombs in satellites In 1984 the US President knew right away where the nuclear attack was coming from Today any nuclear attack against the American homeland is almost sure to be anonymous How does one deter an adversary who can strike without attribution perhaps choosing a moment of crisis between its two nuclear adversaries to make it look like the other guy did it

98

Cornell HKHANE Aff

No US Second Strike

An EMP attack would decimate our sub deterrent- they would be unable to receive orders

Graham 4 Dr William R- Deputy Administrator of NASA The report of the Commission to Assess the Threat to the United States From Electromagnetic Pulse Attackrdquo July 22 2004

Mr Langevin Have you assessed the threat of EMP to our surface fleet and submarines Do submarines have a greater likelihood of retaining operational capabilities if they are underwater during an EMP strike Dr Graham The EMP Commission did consider the threat of EMP to surface vessels and submarines Ballistic Missile Submarines are designed and built to survive an EMP attack Care is taken when the ship is modified or equipment added or upgraded to insure that survivability is maintained Particular attention is paid to the potential vulnerability introduced when the ship is at periscope depth or trailing a wire antenna Submarines do have a greater likelihood of retaining operational capabilities if they are underwater during an EMP attack and not trailing an antenna which can couple energy into the submerged vessel However if land-based communications are impacted the ship may survive but not be capable of receiving orders and therefore accomplishing its mission because the sender cant send The survivability of the surface fleet is uncertain without testing and a submarine in port is a surface ship

An EMP strike would destroy communications

Wilson 8 Clay- Specialist in Technology and National Security Foreign Affairs Defense and Trade Division ldquoHigh Altitude Electromagnetic Pulse (HEMP) and High Power Microwave (HPM) Devices Threat Assessmentsrdquo Congressional Research Service March 26 2008

During the Cold War the US Military designed an innovative communications system to relay emergency messages between strategic military areas in the continental United States using signals that travel by means of low frequency ground waves mdash electromagnetic fields that hug the ground mdash rather than by radiating into the atmosphere The Ground Wave Emergency Network or GWEN system was intended to allow continuous communications despite EMP disruptions However the hardware was reportedly transistor based leaving the system with some level of vulnerability to EMP In addition the fixed locations of GWEN sites were known to adversaries and thus vulnerable to direct attack40

Even if military infrastructure is protected critical civilian infrastructure is not

Wilson 8 Clay- Specialist in Technology and National Security Foreign Affairs Defense and Trade Division ldquoHigh Altitude Electromagnetic Pulse (HEMP) and High Power Microwave (HPM) Devices Threat Assessmentsrdquo Congressional Research Service March 26 2008

The US military has adopted a policy where commercial electronic equipment is now used extensively in support of complex US weapons systems For example a large percentage of US military communications during Operation Iraqi Freedom was reportedly carried by commercial satellites and much military administrative information is currently routed through the civilian Internet43 Many commercial communications satellites particularly those in low earth orbit reportedly may degrade or cease to function shortly after a high altitude nuclear explosion44 However some observers believe that possible HEMP and HPM vulnerabilities of military information systems are outweighed by the benefits gained through access to innovative technology and increased communications flexibility that come from using state-of-the-art electronics and from maintaining connections to the civilian Internet and satellite systems

99

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Yes US Second Strike

EMPs cannot endanger our ability to retaliate

Critchlow 6 Robert D- National Defense Fellow Foreign Affairs Defense and Trade Division ldquoNuclear Command and Control Current Programs and Issuesrdquo CRS Report for Congress May 3 2006

Nuclear Command and Control Platforms The lead elements of the NCCS form the National Military Command System (NMCS) The NMCS is ldquothe priority component of the Global Command and Control System designed to support the Secretary of Defense and Joint Chiefs of Staff in the exercise of their responsibilitiesrdquo5 It provides the National Command Authorities (NCA)6 and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff (CJCS) with command and control of the armed forces both nuclear and conventional7 The NMCS includes the following command nodes and supporting components

National Military Command Center (NMCC) The NMCC is the primary location for national command and control on a day to day basis This center is staffed around-the-clock and each ldquowatch teamrdquo is led by a General or Admiral known as the ldquoDeputy Director for Operationsrdquo Located in a shielded room in the Pentagon the NMCC is responsible for monitoring nuclear forces and ongoing conventional military operations and can be augmented by additional response cells in the event of a crisis

National Airborne Operations Center (NAOC) If ground based command centers are destroyed the NAOC can serve as a survivable airborne backup to the NMCCrsquos command and control capabilities A NAOC aircraft is always on alert and the mobility of this airborne platform contributes to its survivability The NAOCs are a fleet of modified Boeing 747-200B aircraft each of which can include a crew of up to 114 people and are based at Offutt AFB in Nebraska Its communications which include both Extremely High Frequency (EHF) and Very Low Frequency-Low Frequency (VLFLF) links are hardened against Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP) Although the Joint Staff tasks the aircraft US Strategic Command (USSTRATCOM)9 provides personnel and day-to-day administration while the Air Forcersquos Air Combat Command serves as the programrsquos resource manager

Site-R Located at Fort Ritchie Maryland Site-R can be activated from a ldquocoldrdquo status to serve as an alternate NMCC location11

USSTRATCOM Global Operations Center (GOC) Located underneath the USSTRATCOM Headquarters at Offutt AFB Nebraska the GOC can serve as a back up element to the NMCS for essential emergency actions This center also serves as the command center for the USSTRATCOM Commander one of the four- star-general Unified Combatant Commanders for the day-to-day management of his forces and for providing situational awareness The facility is protected against EMP and has its own emergency power supply to enable extended operations This facility is staffed 24 hours a day 365 days a year with each team led by a Senior Controller who is always a full Colonel (Air Force Army or Marine Corps) or Captain (Navy)12

USSTRATCOM Airborne Command Post (ABNCP) Should the USSTRATCOM GOC be unable to fulfill its role the E-6B ABNCP can serve as a survivable airborne backup The ABNCPs are a fleet of modified Boeing 707 aircraft each of which carries a crew of 22 which includes aircrew communications operators and battlestaff personnel Historically each battle staff has been led by a General or Admiral known as the Airborne Emergency Action Officer (AEAO) This aircraft fulfills two additional key missions As the Airborne Launch Control System (ALCS) the aircraft has the ability to communicate launch codes directly to ICBM launch facilities to command launch in the event that their launch control centers are unable to perform that function Also the E-6B can serve as the Take Charge And Move Out (TACAMO) relay for Navy ballistic missile submarines The airplane can deploy a 2frac12-mile-long trailing wire antenna and communicate directives to the submarines over its VLFLF system In addition to the VLFLF the ABNCP can communicate using Ultra-High Frequency (UHF) or EHF satellite systems While USSTRATCOM provides the battlestaff personnel the aircraft aircrew and communications operators are from the Navyrsquos Strategic Communications (STRATCOMM) Wing One based at Tinker AFB Oklahoma13 USSTRATCOM Mobile Consolidated Command Center (MCCC) The MCCC is a convoy of trucks that can deploy during a crisis to serve as a survivable road-mobile backup to the USSTRATCOM GOC or ABNCP

100

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Yes US Second Strike

Strat nukes remain operable

Riddle 4 Lieutenant Colonel Thomas C- United States Army ldquoNuclear High Altitude Electromagnetic Pulse ndash Implications For Homeland Security And Homeland Defenserdquo US Army War College 03 May 2004

Additionally the military forces of the United States have been increasingly based in the continental United States (CONUS) and would also be affected Although the strategic nuclear forces (and portions of their supporting infrastructure) were designed to resist the effects of EMP the general purpose forces have not received the same focus After a successful HEMP attack the posts camps bases and stations throughout the country might not be able to provide the services necessary to function as power projection platforms Although some military programs have incorporated EMP resistance as part of the design and acquisition process increasingly the military forces have turned to commercial-off-the-shelf equipment that has little or no EMP protection

Military communication would survive

Wilson 4 Clay- Specialist in Technology and National Security Foreign Affairs Defense and Trade Division ldquoHigh Altitude Electromagnetic Pulse (HEMP) and High Power Microwave (HPM) Devices Threat Assessmentsrdquo Congressional Research Service August 20 2004

As the Cold War ended the US military took steps to reduce its nuclear arsenal and associated infrastructure32 After 1998 the USAF decommissioned GWEN assets and replaced the entire system with the Single Channel Anti-Jam Man-Portable (SCAMP) Terminal SCAMP uses extremely high frequency (EHF) technology is resistant to EMP and offers more flexibility than GWEN because the equipment is lightweight transportable and interoperable with DOD satellite networks33

101

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT Security Kritik

Russia data sharing solves the impact

Farley 9 Robert is an assistant professor at the University of Kentuckyrsquos Patterson School of Diplomacy and International Commerce ldquoNeocons Salivating Over Their Next Great Exaggerated Threat Electromagnetic Pulse Attackrdquo October 22 2009

The fact that EMP is poorly researched and not well understood works in its favor as a scare tactic Since evidence of EMPrsquos allegedly lasting impact is purely theoretical EMP awareness advocates can make outlandish claims regarding the threat that even the smallest nuclear arsenal poses They can also point to allegations made by the official EMP Commission ignoring the fact that many outside experts dispute its findings The Niagara conferencersquos emphasis on strategic and policy considerations shows that alarmist predictions about EMP attacks serve as fodder for promotion of a larger nuclear weapons stockpile for missile defense and for preventive attacks

Ignoring the threat results in disaster

Dunn 6 JR- editor of the International Military Encyclopedia ldquoThe EMP Threat ElectroMagnetic Pulse Warfarerdquo American Thinker April 21 2006

Above all we cant allow the problem to slip past without being addressed always a danger in a confusing and urgent time Threats have a way of sneaking up on democracies Back in the 70s an American president on the promise of the Soviet premier that no aerial attack would be carried out on the US decided to shut down the Aerospace Defense Command and its US Army equivalent responsible for air defense of the country The bases were closed the assets either scrapped or turned over to the National Guard Two decades later on a fine morning in September there were no alert squadrons longmdashrange interceptors or surfacemdashtomdashair missiles to defend New York and Washington The presidents name was Jimmy Carter We can do better

102

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT Kritiks

Informing the public is key to challenging the industrial military complex

Lewallen 2 John- Political Science at Whitman University organizer of the Nuclear Peace Action Group Fulbright Scholarship recipient Public Ocean Access Network ldquoHigh-Altitude Nuclear Warrdquo Nuclear Press p9-10

Certainly we are courting disaster by leaving all thought about high-altitude nuclear war to a tiny group of military-industrial-complex insiders Everyone testifying at the Congressional EMP hearings has an axe to grind weapons systems to promote a reputation to make a job to do a grim reality to deny

Engaging in the debate over high altitude nuclear weapons is crucial to curbing nuclear madness

Lewallen 2 John- Political Science at Whitman University organizer of the Nuclear Peace Action Group Fulbright Scholarship recipient Public Ocean Access Network ldquoHigh-Altitude Nuclear Warrdquo Nuclear Press p9-10

I humbly offer the following commentary as my initial thoughts on the strategic implications of high-altitude nuclear electromagnetic pulse weapons I invite peer review Today we are all peers beneath the sword of looming nuclear catastrophe I believe the global human network of love empathy and respect is ultimately superior to the forces pushing toward global nuclear war But we cannot afford to ignore nuclear weapons In the psychological darkness of reality denial they grow and grow Help cast the light which will dissipate nuclear madness

103

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT Religion K

Lewallen 2 John- Political Science at Whitman University organizer of the Nuclear Peace Action Group Fulbright Scholarship recipient Public Ocean Access Network ldquoHigh-Altitude Nuclear Warrdquo Nuclear Press Pg38

ldquoAnd David proceeded to take his staff in his hand and to choose for himself the five smoothest stones from the torrent valley and to place them in his shepherdsrsquo bag that served him as a receptacle and in his hand was his sling And he began approaching the PhilistineldquoAnd the Philistine began to come coming nearer and nearer to David and the man carrying the large shield was ahead of himhellipldquoThen David thrust his hand into his bag and took a stone from there and slung it so that he struck the Philistine in his forehead and the stone sank into his forehead and he went falling upon his face to the earth So David with a sling and a stone proved stronger than the Philistine and struck the Philistine down and put him to death and there was no sword in Davidrsquos handrdquo

- The Old Testament I Samuel 1740-50As Russia and China face the onslaught of the United States advancing militarily toward them behind a missile shield still in research and development their military position is similar to that of the young shepherd David confronting the giant and mighty Philistine warrior GoliathThe United States has overwhelming military superiority and a gargantuan vulnerability to high-altitude nuclear EMP attack Russia and China have had several decades to fill their weapons bag with specialized nuclear EMP weapons and to prepare to sling them over the American homeland by missile by satellite or in a fractional orbiting bomb flung into orbit with a Scud or other short-range missileDavid knew that Goliath had a soft spot in his forehead just as the Russians and Chinese are perfectly aware that the United States in the words of Representative Weldon is the ldquomost vulnerable nation on Earth to electronic warfarerdquo

104

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT Psychoanalysis

An EMP attack would cause serious psychological trauma

Foster et al 8 ldquoReport of the Commission to Assess the Threat to the United States from Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP) Attackrdquo April 2008 Dr John S Foster Jr Mr Earl Gjelde Dr William R Graham (Chairman) Dr Robert J Hermann Mr Henry (Hank) M Kluepfel Gen Richard L Lawson USAF (Ret) Dr Gordon K Soper Dr Lowell L Wood Jr Dr Joan B Woodard

The human consequences of such a scenario include the social and psychological reactions to a sudden loss of stability in the modern infrastructure over a large area of the country Loss of connectivity between the government and its populace would only exacerbate the consequences of such a scenario This analysis is based largely on selected case studies including major blackouts natural disasters and terrorist incidents in recent US history These incidents served as approximate analogs in order to best predict the sociological and psychological effects of an EMP attack Impact of an EMP AttackWhile no single event serves as a model for an EMP scenario with incidence of long lasting widespread power outage communications failure and other effects the combined analysis of the following case studies provides useful insight in determining human reactions following an EMP attackBlackouts

1048715 Northeast (1965)1048715 New York (1977)1048715 Hydro Quebec (1989)1048715 Western states (1996)1048715 Auckland New Zealand (1998)1048715 Northeast (2003)Natural Disasters1048715 Hurricane Hugo (1989)1048715 Hurricane Andrew (1992)1048715 Midwest floods (1993)Terrorist Incidents1048715 World Trade Center attack (2001)1048715 Anthrax attacks (2001)

BlackoutsIn 1965 a blackout occurred over the northeastern United States and parts of Canada New Hampshire Vermont Massachusetts Connecticut Rhode Island New York including metropolitan New York City and a small part of Pennsylvania were in the dark after operators at Consolidated Edison were forced to shut down its generators to avoid damage Street traffic was chaotic and some people were trapped in elevators but there were few instances of antisocial behavior while the lights were out5 It was a ldquolong night in the darkrdquo but the recovery proceeded without incident and citizens experienced relative civility TIME Magazine described New Yorkrsquos next blackout in 1977 as a ldquoNight of Terrorrdquo 6 Widespread chaos reigned in the city until power was restored mdash entire blocks were looted and set ablaze people flipped over cars and vans on the streets the city was in pandemonium That night 3776 arrests were made and certainly not all looters thieves and arsonists were apprehended or arrested7 While this is a dramatic example of antisocial behavior following a blackout sociologists point to extraordinary demographic and historical issues that contributed to the looting For instance extreme poverty and socioeconomic inequality plagued New York neighborhoods and many of the looters originated from the poorer sections of the city engaging in ldquovigilante redistributionrdquo by looting consumer goods and luxuries Racial tensions were high and a serial killer known as Son of Sam had recently terrorized New Yorkers

105

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Negative

106

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Not Topical

US doesnrsquot do EMP targeting

Citizendium 9 ldquoSingle Integrated Operational Planrdquo httpencitizendiumorgwikiSingle_Integrated_Operational_Plan

It is known that nuclear explosions produce varying intensities of electromagnetic pulse (EMP) which has the potential to damage electronic equipment Effective power coverage and frequencies of the electromagnetic pulse are dependent at a minimum on the yield of the nuclear weapon and the altitude of the burst[7] While general US planning and engineering documents specify means of EMP protection [8] no unclassified references suggest that any weapons targeted under SIOP are intended principally to produce EMP

EMP nukes have already been removed

Berry 8 Ken Research Coordinator ICNND ldquoNew Weapons Technologyrdquo International Commission on Nuclear Non-proliferation and Disarmament

Generally speaking the shorter pulse wave forms such as microwaves are far more effective against electronic equipment and more difficult to devise hardened protection against45 For maximum effect the electromagnetic burst must be in the upper atmosphere Thus such a weapon stationed in space could in theory knock out electrical systems including computers and communications across continent-wide distances With this in mind the Soviet Union developed nuclear weapons designed for detonations in the upper atmosphere The United States and the United Kingdom also carried out similar research It is believed that most of the nuclear EMP weapons were disarmed following the ReaganGorbachev arms talks in the 1980s

Kristensen 98 Hans M- Director of the Nuclear Information Project at the Federation of American Scientists ldquoNuclear Futures Proliferation of Weapons of Mass Destruction and US Nuclear Strategy British American Security Information Council Basic Research Report 982

It is still too early to predict whether these exotic designs will mature into actual nuclear weapons modifications But these and a wide range of other nuclear projects are clear indicators that US nuclear weapons are here to stay113 And the expansion of US nuclear doctrine is an increasingly prominent justification for new weapons

107

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Tix Links

Partisan issue

Weinberger 2-17 Sharon- CarnegieNewhouse School Legal Reporting Fellow International Reporting Project fellow at the Johns Hopkins University School of Advanced International Studies ldquoThe Boogeyman Bomb How afraid should we be of electromagnetic pulse weaponsrdquo Foreign Policy February 17 2010

But unlike some of the other national security threats on the horizon the e-bomb has emerged as a partisan issue with a core group of conservative supporters Gingrich has been among the most outspoken On Capitol Hill Rep Roscoe Bartlett (R-Md) has been one of the most ardent supporters of those pushing for an EMP defense establishing the investigatory commission and warning of a catastrophe on a scale far greater than Hurricane Katrina Despite EMPACTs claims of nonpartisanship liberals have largely dismissed the idea as conservative fear-mongering EMPs were even derisively labeled the Newt Bomb by New Republic senior editor Michael Crowley The real debate is not so much over whether EMP is a real phenomenon -- even critics of the commissions findings agree it exists -- but how much of a threat it poses to the nations infrastructure how likely it is that a group or country might build and use such a weapon and what should be done about it

Weinberger 2-17 Sharon- CarnegieNewhouse School Legal Reporting Fellow International Reporting Project fellow at the Johns Hopkins University School of Advanced International Studies ldquoThe Boogeyman Bomb How afraid should we be of electromagnetic pulse weaponsrdquo Foreign Policy February 17 2010

In the end advocates for EMP preparation could end up being their own worst enemy The unlikely scenarios they peddle lend themselves to caricature And though there are certainly some intellectual heavyweights among those who have warned about the effects of EMP -- like Johnny Foster the former head of Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory -- critics have derided EMP defense supporters for relying on the likes of science fiction writer William R Forstchen to help bolster their case By talking about time machines and turning the EMP bomb into something that goes bump in the night those advocating for better defenses risk pushing the issue further into the margins of science fiction

108

Cornell HKHANE Aff

GOP Link

GOP would support any measure to reduce EMP dangers

Smith 9 George ldquoNot Soiling Yourself Over an EMP Attack You mustrsquove voted for Obamardquo 62909The electromagnetic pulse attack lobby is now exclusively the property of the GOP Itrsquos a dumping ground for a rich a variety of Republican crazies a constituency which DD mapped for many years Like those who believe global warming to be a hoax the Republican right has electromagnetic pulse fear all locked up If one thinks about this paradox it has a neatly confounding internal anti-logic If something is backed up by hard science and poses a real danger for everyone on the planet the Republican party denies its existence If however the threat is something rather abstract to almost all Americans rests almost entirely on theoretical prediction is something not likely to ever occur at all and then only in the context of what would promise to be an all out nuclear war the GOP believes in it very strongly To paraphrase Paul Krugman characterizing GOP attitudes towards global warming You could call this crazy conspiracy theory but doing so would actually be unfair to crazy conspiracy theorists ldquoThe nightmare scenario of [EMP attack] is this A rogue nation like North Korea or a stateless terrorist like Bin Laden gets hold of a nuclear weapon and decides not to drive it into a large city but rather to launch it on a Scud-type missile straight into the atmosphere from a barge off the East Coastrdquo wrote one brilliant theoretician at Slate a couple years ago ldquoIn fact [a congressionally chartered commission] discovered that knowledge about EMP is widespread in such places as China Cuba Egypt India Iran Saddam Husseinrsquos Iraq North Korea Pakistan and Russiardquo wrote defense hawk and EMP crazy Frank Gaffney for the Washington Times also a couple of years ago

109

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT Terrorist EMP

Terrorists using EMPs is impossible

Butt 10 Yousaf M- Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics ldquoThe EMP threat fact fiction and response (part 2)rdquo The Space Review February 1 2010 httpwwwthespacereviewcomarticle15531

Thus it is not at all a simple matter even for countries with considerable resources and focused decades-long effort to build such weapons let alone pair them to reliable delivery systems As carefully argued by John Mueller in his new book Atomic Obsession it is virtually impossible for a terrorist cell to obtain the raw materials needed for a nuclear device and assemble it correctly themselves [Ref 22 p 172ndash198] Even a ldquocruderdquo U-type device is not all that ldquocruderdquo and requires the concerted effort of skilled scientists and engineers Any weapon produced by a terrorist cell would likely be a one of a kind and would have to remain untested For a terrorist group to then mate this weapon to a ballistic missile and successfully carry out an EMP strike beggars belief As John Pike director of GlobalSecurityorg has said ldquoIt is just very difficult to imagine how terrorists are going to be able to lay hands on a nuclear-tipped missile and launch it and reprogram it in such a way that it would be a high-altitude burst like thatrdquo Dr Philip Coyle former Pentagon director of operational test and evaluation has stated that the EMP commissionrsquos report appeared to ldquoextrapolate calculations of extreme weapons effects as if they were a proven fact and further to puff up rogue nations and terrorists with the capabilities of giantsrdquo The 2009 Strategic Posture Commission puts it more delicately by saying that ldquothe Commission is divided over how imminent a threat this ishelliprdquo If a terrorist cell miraculously built such a weapon they are likely to explode their ldquocrown jewelrdquo in a simple spectacular ground-burst that will destroy a large part of a city and not risk the complicationsmdashand likely failuremdashof a lofted EMP strike that will if all goes according to their plan cause casualties via unpredictable secondary effects upon a limited part of some of the nationrsquos infrastructure The risk versus reward calculation for both terrorists cells and so-called ldquoroguerdquo states would almost certainly force their hand to a spectacular and direct ground burst in preference to a unreliable and uncertain EMP strike A weapon of mass destruction is preferable to a weapon of mass disruption

Terrorists will use HPMs instead

Wilson 4 Clay- Specialist in Technology and National Security Foreign Affairs Defense and Trade Division ldquoHigh Altitude Electromagnetic Pulse (HEMP) and High Power Microwave (HPM) Devices Threat Assessmentsrdquo Congressional Research Service August 20 2004

In addition while HEMP weapons are large in scale and require a nuclear capability along with technology to launch high altitude missiles HPM weapons are smaller in scale involve a much lower level of technology and may be within the capability of many non-state organizations HPM can cause damage to computers similar to HEMP although the effects are limited to a much smaller area The technical accessibility lower cost and the apparent vulnerability of US civilian electronic equipment could make small-scale HPM weapons attractive for terrorist groups in the future

110

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT State EMP

States wouldnrsquot use EMPs

Butt 10 Yousaf M- Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics ldquoThe EMP threat fact fiction and response (part 2)rdquo The Space Review February 1 2010 httpwwwthespacereviewcomarticle15531

A state would be highly unlikely to launch an EMP strike from their own territory because the rocket could be traced to the country of origin and would probably result in nuclear or massive conventional retaliation by the US The EMP commission also considers adversarial nations carrying out a shipborne EMP attack that would be less traceable However even so there would some small risk of trace-back that would give the leadership in such nations pause While nuclear forensics are not well enough developed to assuredly ascribe the origin of a nuclear explosion even their current state of development would in some measure dissuade the leaders of a nation from seriously contemplating such an attack Furthermore the US certainly has data via its DSP satellites on the infrared (IR) signatures of the rocket exhausts from the missiles of various countries Though these signatures are probably virtually identical for the ScudShahabNo-dong family of missiles the nations which may entertain such attacks do not necessarily know whether eg the DSP data can discriminate between a NK Nodong versus an Iranian Shahabs perhaps due to differences in fuel andor subtle design idiosyncrasies This is data only the US has and it has an inherent deterrent value to nations thinking about launching an EMP strike via a ship-launched ballistic missile This is almost certainly the case if say Iran were to use its solid rocket motor technology to launch such a strikemdashif and when Iran obtains nuclear weapons of course In such a case the burn time-profile and solid-motor IR signatures could probably be used to tie the missile to a nation Furthermore the leaders of a nation contemplating such an attack would have to carefully consider what would happen in case the warhead was not delivered properly If it fell short andor did not explode it may be possible for US engineers and scientists to ascribe a national origin given the forensic material For the leadership of any nation to chance such an attack they must be almost suicidally optimistic they would have to presume that everything would go perfectly Even so it may still be possible to identify the country of origin which would invite massive US retribution

States wouldnrsquot give terrorists EMPs

Butt 10 Yousaf M- Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics ldquoThe EMP threat fact fiction and response (part 2)rdquo The Space Review February 1 2010 httpwwwthespacereviewcomarticle15531

What about an adversarial nation ldquosub-contractingrdquo its dirty work to a terrorist cell Again there would be substantial doubt in the nationrsquos leadership as to whether or not forensic evidence (whether the device exploded or not) could tie them to the weapon In any case as argued by Mueller [Ref 22 p 163] it is highly unlikely that a nation would give one of its crown jewels to an unpredictable terrorist cell At least in the case of Iran this view is supported by in-depth research done by authors at the National Defense University who conclude ldquo[W]e judge and nearly all experts consulted agree that Iran would not as a matter of state policy give up its control of such weapons to terrorist organizations and risk direct US or Israeli retributionrdquo

111

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT RussiaChina EMP

China and Russia would never EMP attack the US

Butt 10 Yousaf M- Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics ldquoThe EMP threat fact fiction and response (part 2)rdquo The Space Review February 1 2010 httpwwwthespacereviewcomarticle15531

Though they possess the technological know-how to fabricate a powerful EMP device the possibility of China or Russia carrying out such an attack is virtually nil Not only for the regular military deterrent reasons but also post-Cold War our economies are intimately linked which amounts to an inherent economic deterrent The latter is likely the more relevant deterrent [Ref 22 p 65] We owe China tremendous sums of money they need us as a market and both the US and China require Russian oil via intertwined world markets Although the EMP commissioners have offered a Chinese-language PowerPoint presentation outlining the effects of EMP devices as evidence that China has an interest in such weapons this presentation is actually of Taiwanese origin [ldquoElectromagnetic Pulse Attack and Defenserdquo by Dr Chien Chung] and it is not pertinent to any official Chinese military doctrine

112

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT Proliferators EMP

New nuclear states will not carry out EMP attacks

Butt 10 Yousaf M- Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics ldquoThe EMP threat fact fiction and response (part 2)rdquo The Space Review February 1 2010 httpwwwthespacereviewcomarticle15531

More importantly the DoD itself has weighed in on the issue in its ldquoMilitarily Critical Technologies Listrdquo This is a detailed compendium of the technologies the DoD assesses as critical to maintaining superior United States military capabilities Part II ldquoWeapons of Mass Destruction Technologiesrdquo addresses those technologies required for development integration or employment of biological chemical or nuclear weapons and their means of delivery against the US This document states that ldquoHEMP can pose a serious threat to US military systems when even a single high-altitude nuclear explosion occurs In principle even a new nuclear proliferator could execute such a strike In practice however it seems unlikely that such a state would use one of its scarce warheads to inflict damage which must be considered secondary to the primary effects of blast shock and thermal pulse Furthermore a HEMP attack must use a relatively large warhead to be effective (perhaps on the order of one megaton) and new proliferators are unlikely to be able to construct such a device much less make it small enough to be lofted to high altitude by a ballistic missile or space launcherrdquo Lastly General Robert T Marsh former Chairman of the Presidentrsquos Commission on Critical Infrastructure Protection concluded (in 1997) that he did not ldquosee any evidence that suggests capabilities seriously threatening our critical infrastructurehellip There are many easier less costly and more dramatic ways for terrorists to use nuclear weapons than delivery to a high altitude Such an event is so unlikely and difficult to achieve that I do not believe it warrants serious concern at this timerdquo

Attacks will be deterred now

Riddle 4 Lieutenant Colonel Thomas C- United States Army ldquoNuclear High Altitude Electromagnetic Pulse ndash Implications For Homeland Security And Homeland Defenserdquo US Army War College 03 May 2004

Similarly the decision to implement an earlier deployment of an initial ground-based interceptor and improved ballistic missile tracking capabilities will support the improved passive and active defenses called for in the NSS 50 Also the convincing demonstration of the continuing efficiency and effectiveness of Americarsquos global precision strike capabilities during Operation IRAQI FREEDOM is a clear indication that multi-dimensional counterforce capabilities remain a viable element of Americarsquos counter-proliferation capabilities that may be used if required to prevent a HEMP attack on the United States Finally the United Statesrsquo demonstrated willingness to conduct preemptive strikes to neutralize WMD under the concept of imminent defense adds an unmistakable dimension to the concept of deterrence for those seeking to acquire weapons of mass destruction51

113

Cornell HKHANE Aff

EMPacts False

Impacts of high altitude nuclear explosions are overstated

Ruppe 4 David ldquoPlausibility of EMP Threat Classified Expert Saysrdquo Global Security Newswire September 24 2004

Philip Coyle who was the assistant secretary of defense and Pentagon director of operational test and evaluation during the Clinton administration however questioned the certainty of the reportrsquos conclusion that smaller kiloton-scale nuclear weapons could be developed to produce the catastrophic consequences described by the report ldquoThe US military does not know how to do this today and has no way of demonstrating the capability in the future without returning to nuclear testingrdquo he said by e-mail ldquoThe fact is that a rogue nation or terrorists that tried this would be very unsure of the results and would risk massive retaliation from the United States for having achieved nothingrdquo he wrote Coyle who also worked at the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory for more than 30 years also said it is uncertain that even a massive nuclear weapon would cause the scale of destruction the commission predicted

Transportation would survive

Chisholm 5 Patrick ldquoProtect our electronics against EMP attackrdquo Christian Science Monitor December 19 2005

Unlike what was depicted in the 1983 movie The Day After automobiles may keep functioning after an EMP attack The electronics within automobiles enjoy robust shielding because of the harsh electromagnetic environment on existing roadways Aircraft have even stronger electromagnetic shielding so they are unlikely to fall out of the sky Some of the [aircrafts] equipment may not work but the propulsion and control system usually is pretty robust said Dr William A Radasky president of Metatech Corp a consulting firm specializing in electromagnetic environment analysis

114

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT Strait of Hormuz

The US would restore oil within days

Klare 2 Michael- Five Colleges professor of Peace and World Security Studies boards of directors of Human Rights Watch and the Arms Control Association ldquoResource Wars The New Landscape of Global Conflictrdquo p 73

Just as it would resist any new Iraqi assault on Kuwait the United States would greet any Iranian move to impede Persian Gulf shipping with an immediate and crushing military response Tomahawk cruise missiles and radar-guided bombs would most likely be used to demolish Iranian ships missile batteries airfields and communications facilities Ships and aircraft already deployed in the region would carry out most of the attacks backed up by additional units sent in from the United States and Europe And while the Iranians might succeed in damaging a number of tankers their ability to imperil the oil flow would quickly be eliminated by superior American firepower4s

115

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Alt Cause- Geomagnetic Storms

Geomagnetic storms make the impact inevitable

Butt 10 Yousaf M- Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics ldquoThe EMP threat fact fiction and response (part 2)rdquo The Space Review February 1 2010 httpwwwthespacereviewcomarticle15531

For the reasons outlined above it is highly unlikely that any adversary would choose tomdashor in the case of a terrorist cell even be remotely capable ofmdashcarrying out a nuclear EMP strike against the US However it is virtually guaranteed that a powerful geomagnetic storm capable of knocking out a significant section of the US electrical grid will occur within the next few decades In fact this may well happen even within next few years as we approach the next period of elevated solar activity known as ldquosolar maximumrdquo which is forecast to peak in 2013 Geomagnetic storms are E3-like low-intensity but long-lasting and low-frequency coupling to long-lines The first recorded evidence of space weather effects on technology was in 1847 when currents were registered in electric telegraph wires Later in 1859 a major failure of telegraph systems in New England and Europe coincided with a large solar flare called the ldquoCarrington Eventrdquo after astronomer Richard Carrington who witnessed the instigating flare However the real modern-era wakeup call to geomagnetic susceptibility of our infrastructure was the (moderate intensity) geomagnetic storm that shut down the entire Hydro Quebec grid in March 1989 There were also reports of computer failures in August of that year in Toronto Canada (which possibly indicate that the associated geomagnetic activity had considerably faster components than just E3) Geomagnetically induced currents (GICs) in long-line power delivery systems are caused by the rate-of-change of the geomagnetic field just as in an E3 pulse Thus the severity of such geomagnetic field disturbances is measured in nanotesla per minute (nTmin) Experience with modern-day infrastructure indicates failures can result even at relatively low-threat intensities For example the instigating activity associated with the Hydro Quebec collapse mentioned above only reached an intensity of ~480 nTmin Solar storms on other occasions have been known to produce geomagnetic disturbances of ~2000 nTmin and a solar storm on May 14ndash15 in 1921 may have produced a disturbance of 4800 nTmin [23] As Mr Kappenman states [23] ldquoanalysis indicates that storms withexcursions of ~2800 nTmin have been observed at geomagnetic latitudes of concern for modern day infrastructures Further anecdotal evidence suggests that ~5000 nTmin may have occurred during the Great Geomagnetic Storm of May 1921rdquo To understand the effects of such GIC on the electric grid we may examine the August 2003 Northeast Blackout which was not geomagnetically induced (It reportedly originated when high-voltage power lines came in contact with ldquoovergrown treesrdquo) This outage affected the Northeast US and parts of Canada and more than 200 power plants including several nuclear plants were shut down as a result of the electricity cutoff Other effects included loss of water pressure possible sewage contamination gridlock various other transportation problems (because of secondary effects on railways airlines and gas stations) and disruption of oil refineriesrsquo operations Phone service was stressed due to the high call volume and several radio and television stations went off the air It is estimated that the one-day blackout cost $7ndash10 billion in spoiled food lost production overtime wages and other related expenses inflicted on more than one-seventh of the US population [24] A similar vegetation-induced outage in Europe occurred on September 28 2003 when ldquoat 301 am one of the main north-south transit lines ndash the Lukmanier transmission line ndash shut down following a flash-over between a conductor cable and a treerdquo The blackout affected about 56 million people although electricity was restored gradually (about 3ndash6 hours) in most places and in most cities electricity were powered on again during the morning Rolling blackouts reportedly continued to affect about 5 of the population for the next two days as repairs were being made Although the August and September 2003 outage was not geomagnetic in origin solar outbursts during late October and early November 2003 triggered severe geomagnetic storms with wide-ranging effects that were described as follows in a 2008 National Academy of Sciences (NAS) study [25] The Sydkraft utility group in Sweden reported that strong geomagnetically induced currents (GIC) over Northern Europe caused transformer problems and even a system failure and subsequent blackout Radiation storm levels were high enough to prompt NASA officials to issue a flight directive to the [International Space Station] astronauts to take precautionary shelter Airlines took unprecedented actions in their high latitude routes to avoid the high radiation levels and communication blackout areas Rerouted flights cost airlines $10000 to $100000 per flight Numerous anomalies were reported by deep space missions and by satellites at all orbits GSFC Space Science Mission Operations Team indicated that approximately 59 of the Earth and Space science missions were impacted The storms are suspected to have caused the loss of the $640 million ADEOS-2 spacecraft On board the ADEOS-2 was the $150 million NASA SeaWinds instrument Due to the variety and intensity of this solar activity outbreak most industries vulnerable to space weather experienced some degree of impact to their operations Even more serious effects can be expected during future powerful geomagnetic storms To quote the NAS study [25] Because of the interconnectedness of critical infrastructures in modern society the impacts of severe space weather events can go beyond disruption of existing technical systems and lead to short-term as well as to long-term collateral socioeconomic disruptionshellip Collateral effects of a longer-term outage would likely includehellip disruption of the transportation communication banking and finance systems and government services the breakdown of the distribution of potable water owing to pump failure and the loss of perishable foods and medications because of lack of refrigeration The resulting loss of services for a significant period of time in even one region of the country could affect the entire nation and have international impacts as well Our electric power grid has continued to become more vulnerable to disruption from geomagnetic storms For example the power delivery system is now operating closer to margin than in the past As Kappenman states ldquomany of the things that we have done to increase operational efficiency and haul power long distances have inadvertently and unknowingly escalated the risks from geomagnetic stormsrdquo [25] The possible extent of a power system collapse from a 4800 nTmin geomagnetic storm (centered at 50deg geomagnetic latitude) is shown in Figure 2 Similar levelsmdash10 times those experienced during the March 1989 stormmdashwere reached during the great magnetic storm of May 14ndash15 1921 A nuclear weapon would need to be a ~multi-megaton size to cause the equivalent E3 damage [15] The most serious outcome of such power delivery system failures is damage to the transformers although other critical systems on the grid are also at risk As the NAS study points out transformers experience ldquoexcessive levels of internal heating brought on by stray flux when GICs cause a transformerrsquos magnetic core to saturate and to spill flux outside the normal core steel magnetic circuithellip previous well-documented cases have involved heating failures that caused melting and burn-through of large-amperage copper windings and leads in these transformers These multi-ton apparatus generally cannot be repaired in the field and if damaged in this manner they need to be replaced with new units which have manufacture lead times of 12 months or morerdquo Metatech Corp estimates that more than 300 large extra-high voltage (EHV) transformers would be exposed to levels of GIC sufficiently high to place these units at risk of failure or permanent damage requiring replacement [25] Figure 3 shows an estimate of percent loss of EHV transformer capacity by state for a 4800 nTmin threat environment such as might occur during a storm of the magnitude of the May 1921 event As a recent article in the journal Science states ldquoThe surging power-line currents induced by a severe solar storm could push the grid into uncharted territoryrdquo [26] In summary current US grid operational procedures are based largely on limited experience generally do not reduce GIC flows and are unlikely to be adequate for historically large disturbance events Historically large storms have a potential to cause power grid blackouts and transformer damage of unprecedented proportions long-term blackouts and lengthy restoration times and chronic shortages for multiple years are possible [25]

116

Cornell HKHANE Aff

China Turn

High Altitude Nuclear Explosions are key to dissuade China

Castle 6 Colonel Douglas A ldquoShaping Chinarsquos Rise Through Strategic Frictionrdquo USAWC Strategy Research Project March 2006

Continued strengthening of the US military can also decelerate Chinarsquos expanding potency Washington must not allow China to outpace Americarsquos conventional or nuclear capabilities and must maintain its clear technological advantages If the US can stay significantly ahead of China in weapons technology ndash such as advanced missile defense electromagnetic pulse (EMP) weapons and space utilization systems ndash then China would be forced to spend inordinate amounts of money to develop a costly defense infrastructure thereby further delaying its power build-up However this plan depends upon safeguarding technology from espionage corporate transmission and allied governmental transfers to prevent a free ride for China Chinarsquos military growth is disconcerting given that it faces no real regional challenge128 Its development of intercontinental nuclear missiles as well as land- and sea-launched weapons poses a significant threat to the continental US as well as forward-based land and maritime US forces Although China has publicly endorsed a ldquono first-strikerdquo strategic nuclear policy 129 its ldquocult of defenserdquo predilection increases the likelihood of a first-strike scenario130 America is especially vulnerable to the effects of a high-altitude EMP-producing detonation Such an attack would cripple Americarsquos economy and infrastructure yet the US has no publicly-stated policy of response131 An effective operational US anti-missile defense shield and credible EMP deterrence are thus essential to American security

Tellis 7 Ashley J- Senior Associate at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace ldquoChinas Military Space Strategyrdquo Survival Volume 49 Issue 3 September 2007

This has led some observers such as US Senator Jon Kyl to conclude that the solution to redressing emerging American space vulnerabilities in the context of competition with China lies in developing among other things US offensive counterspace capabilities90 These will almost certainly be required if for no other reason than to deter Beijings use of anti-space weaponry and to hold at risk its own emerging assets in space which are likely to become even more important for both economic and military purposes as China evolves into a great power91 Offensive American counterspace instruments serve the limited but critical purpose of raising the costs of Chinas evolving space-denial strategy increasing the probability that Beijing will desist from asymmetric attacks on US space assets

117

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT PGS Prolif

Conventional strike doesnrsquot lead to prolif

Guthe 2 Kurt- Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments ldquoThe Nuclear Posture Review How Is the ldquoNew Triadrdquo Newrdquo 2002

Some argue that greater US reliance on long-range precision-guided conventional weapons will increase the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction They claim that adversaries unable to match US nonnuclear strike capabilities will acquire weapons of mass destruction as an asymmetric counter This reasoning ignores the facts The first major demonstration of the operational effectiveness of US precision-guided weapons was the Gulf War of 1991 Foreign militaries were greatly impressed by the key contribution of precision weapons to the US victory Those hostile to the United States recognized the need for strategies tactics and capabilities to offset the US advantage Weapons of mass destruction have been seen as one response44 But every potential adversary of the United States had or was pursuing nuclear biological or chemical weapons well before 199145 While adversaries may see weapons of mass destruction as counters to US precision-guided weapons US nonnuclear strike capabilities have not been the cause of proliferation which results from political military and technological factors that vary with each country Abandoning this advantage would not reverse proliferation but would seriously impair the ability of the United States to defend itself and others Were certain allies and friends to lose confidence in US defense commitments those countries might seek security in nuclear weapons of their own increasing nuclear proliferation The long-range precision guided weapons of the New Triad offer options for deterring or otherwise preventing WMD use thus contributing to US efforts to deal with the existing problem of proliferation

118

Cornell HKHANE Aff

No Solvency- Conventional EMPs

No Solvency- the US has conventional EMPs that are just as powerful

Muumlller amp Schoumlrnig 1 Harald and Niklas- United Nations Institute for Disarmament Research ldquoRMA and nuclear weapons A calamitous link for arms controlrdquo Disarmament Forum 2001(4)

An alternative way to disrupt the opponentrsquos communication is the use of an Electro-Magnetic Pulse (EMP) weapon which produces a short wave of an intense electromagnetic pulse ruining basic electronic components in communication gear (and of course all electronically based equipment) Until recently a high altitude nuclear explosion was the only means to generate an EMP strong enough to seriously harm electronic devices in enemy territory Tests performed in the early 1960s confirmed that a detonation of a 14 megaton bomb 400 kilometres in orbit resulted in failures of electronic systems 1300 kilometres away13 The effects would be even more severe today as low powered electronic equipment tends to be more sensitive to voltage swings Up to now these scenarios based on nuclear weapons were banned by the Outer Space Treaty (OST) of 1967 signed by virtually all nations with certain and potential nuclear capabilities (with the exception of North Korea) However according to unconfirmed sources recent scientific progress in the United States has led to the design of workable conventional EMP weapons generating a less far reaching but similar shockwave14 With this development severe consequences for the OST are inevitable as nuclear-capable countries may feel the need to deploy nuclear EMP weapons in space as a counter-deterrent

119

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Conventional EMPs Shift

Military leaders would shift to HPM weapons ndash worse than an EMP because itrsquos just as dangerous but more usable

Global Security 5[ldquoHigh-power microwave (HPM) E-Bombrdquo httpwwwglobalsecurityorgmilitarysystemsmunitionshpmhtm]

High-power microwave (HPM) sources have been under investigation for several years as potential weapons for a variety of combat sabotage and terrorist applications Due to classification restrictions details of this work are relatively unknown outside the military community and its contractors A key point to recognize is the insidious nature of HPM Due to the gigahertz-band frequencies (4 to 20 GHz) involved HPM has the capability to penetrate not only radio front-ends but also the most minute shielding penetrations throughout the equipment At sufficiently high levels as discussed the potential exists for significant damage to devices and circuits For these reasons HPM should be of interest to the broad spectrum of EMC practitioners Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP) and High Powered Microwave (HMP) Weapons offer a significant capability against electronic equipment susceptible to damage by transient power surges This weapon generates a very short intense energy pulse producing a transient surge of thousands of volts that kills semiconductor devices The conventional EMP and HMP weapons can disable non-shielded electronic devices including practically any modern electronic device within the effective range of the weapon The effectiveness of an EMP device is determined by the power generated and the characteristic of the pulse The shorter pulse wave forms such as microwaves are far more effective against electronic equipment and more difficult to harden against Current efforts focus on converting the energy from an explosive munitions to supply the electromagnetic pulse This method produces significant levels of directionally focused electromagnetic energy Future advances may provide the compactness needed to weaponize the capability in a bomb or missile warhead Currently the radius of the weapon is not as great as nuclear EMP effects Open literature sources indicate that effective radii of ldquohundreds of meters or morerdquo are possible EMP and HPM devices can disable a large variety of military or infrastructure equipment over a relatively broad area This can be useful for dispersed targets A difficulty is determining the appropriate level of energy to achieve the desired effects This will require detailed knowledge of the target equipment and the environment (walls buildings) The obvious counter-measure is the shielding or hardening of electronic equipment Currently only critical military equipment is hardened eg strategic command and control systems Hardening of existing equipment is difficult and adds significant weight and expense As a result a large variety of commercial and military equipment will be susceptible to this type of attack The US Navy reportedly used a new class of highly secret non-nuclear electromagnetic pulse warheads during the opening hours of the Persian Gulf War to disrupt and destroy Iraqi electronics systems The warheads converted the energy of a conventional explosion into a pulse of radio energy The effect of the microwave attacks on Iraqi air defense and headquarters was difficult to determine because the effects of the HPM blasts were obscured by continuous jamming the use of stealthy F-117 aircraft and the destruction of Iraqs electrical grid The warheads used during the Gulf War were experimental warheads not standard weapons deployed with fielded forces Col William G Heckathorn commander of the Phillips Research Site and the deputy director of the Directed Energy Directorate of the Air Force Research Laboratory was presented the Legion of Merit medal during special retirement ceremonies in May 1998 In a citation accompanying the medal Col Heckathorn was praised for having provided superior vision leadership and direct guidance that resulted in the first high-power microwave weapon prototypes delivered to the warfighter The citation noted that Col Heckathorn united all directed energy development within Army Navy and Air Force which resulted in an efficient focused warfighter-oriented tri-service research program In December of 1994 he came to Kirtland to become the director of the Advanced Weapons and Survivability Directorate at the Phillips Laboratory Last year he became the commander of the Phillips Laboratory while still acting as the director of the Advanced Weapons and Survivability Directorate As with a conventional munition a microwave munition is a single shot munition that has a similar blast and fragmentation radius However while the explosion produces a blast the primary mission is to generate the energy that powers the microwave device Thus for a microwave munition the primary kill mechanism is the microwave energy which greatly increases the radius and the footprint by in some cases several orders of magnitude For example a 2000-pound microwave munition will have a minimum radius of approximately 200 meters or footprint of approximately 126000 square meters Studies have examined the incorporation of a high power microwave weapon into the weapons bay of a conceptual uninhabited combat aerial vehicle The CONOPS electromagnetic compatibility and hardening (to avoid a self-kill) power requirements and potential power supplies and antenna characteristics have been analyzed Extensive simulations of potential antennas have been performed The simulations examined the influence of the aircraft structure on the antenna patterns and the levels of leakage through apertures in the weapons bay Other investigations examined issues concerning the electromagnetic shielding effectiveness of composite aircraft structures Collateral damage from E-bombs is dependent on the size and design of the specific bomb An E-bomb that utilizes explosive power to obtain its damaging microwaves will result in typical blast and shrapnel damage Ideally an E-Bomb would be designed to minimize and dissipate most of the mechanical collateral damage Human exposure to microwave radiation is hazardous within several meters of the epicenter However there is a relatively low risk of bodily damage at further distances Any non-military electronics within range of the E-bomb that have not been protected have a high probability of being damaged or destroyed The best way to defend against E-bomb attack is to destroy the platform or delivery vehicle in which the E-bomb resides Another method of protection is to keep all essential electronics within an electrically conductive enclosure called a Faraday cage This prevents the damaging electromagentic field from interacting with vital equipment The problem with Faraday cages is that most vital equipment needs to be in contact with the outside world This contact point can allow the electromagentic field to enter the cage which ultimately renders the enclosure useless There are ways to protect against these Faraday cage flaws but the fact remains that this is a dangerous weakpoint In most circumstances E-bombs are categorized as non-lethal weapons because of the minimal collateral damage they create The E-bombs non-lethal categorization gives military commanders more politically-friendly options to choose from

120

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Conventional EMPs Shift

HPM triggers all your impacts

Danchev 6 Dancho Independent Security Consultancy Threat Intelligence Analysis (OSINTCyber Counter Intelligence) and Competitive Intelligence researcher ldquoEMP Attacks - Electronic Domination in Reverserdquo httpddanchevblogspotcom200605emp-attacks-electronic-domination-inhtml]

Why wouldnt a reported sponsor of terrorist nations wage EMP warfare or even try to over the US Because they would have the US in their backyard in less than a day but the opportunity to balance the powers or achieve temporary military advantage given the attack remains undetected is a tempting factor for future developments -- the ongoing miniaturization and the fact that intense energy effects can be can be produced without an A-Bomb makes it even worse Surgical HPM and EMP attacks without fear of retaliation is what possible adversaries could be aiming at and of course portability Other HPM weapons being tested by the military are portable and re-usable through battery-power and are effective when fired miles away from a target These weapons can also be focused like a laser beam and tuned to an appropriate frequency in order to penetrate electronics that are heavily shielded against a nuclear attack The deepest bunkers with the thickest concrete walls reportedly are not safe from such a beam if they have even a single unprotected wire reaching the surface

HPM or conventional EMP will be substituted

Krepinevich 1 Andrew- defense policy analyst executive director of the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments ldquoBeyond the Two-MTW Posturerdquo Testimony before the House Committee on Armed Services on June 20 2001

Strategic Strike The United States military is capable of moving beyond near-total reliance on nuclear weapons for prompt effective strategic strike operations Precision munitions have a significant substitution potential with respect to nuclear weapons Various forms of electronic attack (ie IW strikes conventionally generated EMP and HPM strikes) may also possess a significant substitution potential Such weapons are far more ldquouseablerdquo than nuclear weapons and may better deter an enemyrsquos attempts at coercion or aggression They can enable us to reduce the size of our nuclear arsenal (while encouraging others to follow suit)

121

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT Warfighting Advantage

Their warfighting advantage is logically flawed

Burnham 83 David- co-director of the Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse (TRAC) ldquoUS Fears One Bomb Could Cripple The Nationrdquo The New York Times

Many experts question the likelihood that any nuclear war would be limited to the exchange of a handful of nuclear explosions My personal feeling is that if an attack ever came it would be a massive one on our cities and military bases and the effect of EMP on the civilian economy would be irrelevant said Dr Gordon K Soper a senior scientist in the Defense Nuclear Agency But there has been a good deal of talk about the possibility of a protracted nuclear war Mr Latham the Pentagon official expressed the same kind of ambivalence I dont think a cheap shot is likely but there is no way we can know for sure The possibility of using EMP as a oneshot weapon is not considered likely because of impossibility of predicting the exact response

122

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Nuclear Winter Imagery Good

Forecasts of nuclear winter spur change to abandon nuclear madness

Robock amp Toon 10 Alan- Department of Environmental Sciences Rutgers University and Owen Brian- Director and Professor Department of Atmospheric and Oceanic Sciences University of Colorado ldquoLocal Nuclear War Global Sufferingrdquo Scientific American January 2010

Twenty-five years ago international teams of scientists showed that a nuclear war between the US and the Soviet Union could produce a ldquonuclear winterrdquo The smoke from vast fires started by bombs dropped on cities and industrial areas would envelop the planet and absorb so much sunlight that the earthrsquos surface would get cold dark and dry killing plants worldwide and eliminating our food supply Surface temperatures would reach winter values in the summer International discussion about this prediction fueled largely by astronomer Carl Sagan forced the leaders of the two superpowers to confront the possibility that their arms race endangered not just themselves but the entire human race Countries large and small demanded disarmament Nuclear winter became an important factor in ending the nuclear arms race Looking back later in 2000 former Soviet Union leader Mikhail S Gorbachev observed ldquoModels made by Russian and American scientists showed that a nuclear war would result in a nuclear winter that would be extremely destructive to all life on earth the knowledge of that was a great stimulus to us to people of honor and morality to actrdquo Why discuss this topic now that the cold war has ended Because as other nations continue to acquire nuclear weapons smaller regional nuclear wars could create a similar global catastrophe New analyses reveal that a conflict between India and Pakistan for example in which 100 nuclear bombs were dropped on cities and industrial areasmdashonly 04 percent of the worldrsquos more than 25000 warheadsmdashwould produce enough smoke to cripple global agriculture A regional war could cause widespread loss of life even in countries far away from the conflict

123

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Regional Nuclear War

Newest studies indicate small scale nuclear wars would lead to extinction

Robock amp Toon 10 Alan- Department of Environmental Sciences Rutgers University and Owen Brian- Director and Professor Department of Atmospheric and Oceanic Sciences University of Colorado ldquoLocal Nuclear War Global Sufferingrdquo Scientific American January 2010

By deploying modern computers and modern climate models the two of us and our colleagues have shown that not only were the ideas of the 1980s correct but the effects would last for at least 10 years much longer than previously thought And by doing calculations that assess decades of time only now possible with fast current computers and by including in our calculations the oceans and the entire atmosphere mdash also only now possiblemdashwe have found that the smoke from even a regional war would be heated and lofted by the sun and remain suspended in the upper atmosphere for years continuing to block sunlight and to cool the earth India and Pakistan which together have more than 100 nuclear weapons may be the most worrisome adversaries capable of a regional nuclear conflict today But other countries besides the US and Russia (which have thousands) are well endowed China France and the UK have hundreds of nuclear warheads Israel has more than 80 North Korea has about 10 and Iran may well be trying to make its own In 2004 this situation prompted one of us (Toon) and later Rich Turco of the University of California Los Angeles both veterans of the 1980s investigations to begin evaluating what the global environmental effects of a regional nuclear war would be and to take as our test case an engagement between India and Pakistan The latest estimates by David Albright of the Institute for Science and International Security and by Robert S Norris of the Natural Resources Defense Council are that India has 50 to 60 assembled weapons (with enough plutonium for 100) and that Pakistan has 60 weapons Both countries continue to increase their arsenals Indian and Pakistani nuclear weapons tests indicate that the yield of the warheads would be similar to the 15-kiloton explosive yield (equivalent to 15000 tons of TNT) of the bomb the US used on Hiroshima Toon and Turco along with Charles Bardeen now at the National Center for Atmospheric Research modeled what would happen if 50 Hiroshimasize bombs were dropped across the highest population-density targets in Pakistan and if 50 similar bombs were also dropped across India Some people maintain that nuclear weapons would be used in only a measured way But in the wake of chaos fear and broken communications that would occur once a nuclear war began we doubt leaders would limit attacks in any rational manner This likelihood is particularly true for Pakistan which is small and could be quickly overrun in a conventional conflict Peter R Lavoy of the Naval Postgraduate School for example has analyzed the ways in which a conflict between India and Pakistan might occur and argues that Pakistan could face a decision to use all its nuclear arsenal quickly before India swamps its military bases with traditional forces Obviously we hope the number of nuclear targets in any future war will be zero but policy makers and voters should know what is possible Toon and Turco found that more than 20 million people in the two countries could die from the blasts fires and radioactivitymdasha horrible slaughter But the investigators were shocked to discover that a tremendous amount of smoke would be generated given the megacities in the two countries assuming each fire would burn the same area that actually did burn in Hiroshima and assuming an amount of burnable material per person based on various studies They calculated that the 50 bombs exploded in Pakistan would produce three teragrams of smoke and the 50 bombs hitting India would generate four (one teragram equals a million metric tons) Satellite observations of actual forest fires have shown that smoke can be lofted up through the troposphere (the bottom layer of the atmosphere) and sometimes then into the lower stratosphere (the layer just above extending to about 30 miles) Toon and Turco also did some ldquoback of the enveloperdquo calculations of the possible climate impact of the smoke should it enter the stratosphere The large magnitude of such effects made them realize they needed help from a climate modeler It turned out that one of us (Robock) was already working with Luke Oman now at the NASA Goddard Space Flight Center who was finishing his PhD at Rutgers University on the climatic effects of volcanic eruptions and with Georgiy L Stenchikov also at Rutgers and an author of the first Russian work on nuclear winter They developed a climate model that could be used fairly easily for the nuclear blast calculations Robock and his colleagues being conservative put five teragrams of smoke into their modeled upper troposphere over India and Pakistan on an imaginary May 15 The model calculated how winds would blow the smoke around the world and how the smoke particles would settle out from the atmosphere The smoke covered all the continents within two weeks The black sooty smoke absorbed sunlight warmed and rose into the stratosphere Rain never falls there so the air is never cleansed by precipitation particles very slowly settle out by falling with air resisting them Soot particles are small with an average diameter of only 01 micron (μm) and so drift down very slowly They also rise during the daytime as they are heated by the sun repeatedly delaying their elimination The calculations showed that the smoke would reach far higher into the upper stratosphere than the sulfate particles that are produced by episodic volcanic eruptions Sulfate particles are transparent and absorb much less sunlight than soot and are also bigger typically 05 μm The volcanic particles remain airborne for about two years but smoke from nuclear fires would last a decade Killing Frosts in Summer The climatic response to the smoke was surprising Sunlight was immediately reduced cooling the planet to temperatures lower than any experienced for the past 1000 years The global average cooling of about 125 degrees Celsius (23 degrees Fahrenheit) lasted for several years and even after 10 years the temperature was still 05 degree C colder than normal The models also showed a 10 percent reduction in precipitation worldwide Precipitation river flow and soil moisture all decreased because blocking sunlight reduces evaporation and weakens the hydrologic cycle Drought was largely

124

Cornell HKHANE Aff

concentrated in the lower latitudes however because global cooling would retard the Hadley air circulation pattern in the tropics which produces a large fraction of global precipitation In critical areas such as the Asian monsoon regions rainfall dropped by as much as 40 percent The cooling might not seem like much but even a small dip can cause severe consequences Cooling and diminished sunlight would for example shorten growing seasons in the midlatitudes More insight into the effects of cooling came from analyses of the aftermaths of massive volcanic eruptions Every once in a while such eruptions produce temporary cooling for a year or two The largest of the past 500 years the 1815 Tambora eruption in Indonesia blotted the sun and produced global cooling of about 05 degree C for a year 1816 became known as ldquoThe Year without a Summerrdquo or ldquoEighteen Hundred and Froze to Deathrdquo In New England although the average summer temperature was lowered only a few degrees crop-killing frosts occurred in every month After the first frost farmers replanted crops only to see them killed by the next frost The price of grain skyrocketed the price of livestock plummeted as farmers sold the animals they could not feed and a mass migration began from New England to the Midwest as people followed reports of fertile land there In Europe the weather was so cold and gloomy that the stock market collapsed widespread famines occurred and 18-year-old Mary Shelley was inspired to write Frankenstein Certain strains of crops such as winter wheat can withstand lower temperatures but a lack of sunlight inhibits their ability to grow In our scenario daylight would filter through the high smoky haze but on the ground every day would seem to be fully overcast Agronomists and farmers could not develop the necessary seeds or adjust agricultural practices for the radically different conditions unless they knew ahead of time what to expect In addition to the cooling drying and darkness extensive ozone depletion would result as the smoke heated the stratosphere reactions that create and destroy ozone are temperature-dependent Michael J Mills of the University of Colorado at Boulder ran a completely separate climate model from Robockrsquos but found similar results for smoke lofting and stratospheric temperature changes He concluded that although surface temperatures would cool by a small amount the stratosphere would be heated by more than 50 degrees C because the black smoke particles absorb sunlight This heating in turn would modify winds in the stratosphere which would carry ozone-destroying nitrogen oxides into its upper reaches Together the high temperatures and nitrogen oxides would reduce ozone to the same dangerous levels we now experience below the ozone hole above Antarctica every spring Ultraviolet radiation on the ground would increase significantly because of the diminished ozone Less sunlight and precipitation cold spells shorter growing seasons and more ultraviolet radiation would all reduce or eliminate agricultural production Notably cooling and ozone loss would be most profound in middle and high latitudes in both hemispheres whereas precipitation declines would be greatest in the tropics The specific damage inflicted by each of these environmental changes would depend on particular crops soils agricultural practices and regional weather patterns and no researchers have completed detailed analyses of such agricultural responses Even in normal times however feeding the growing human population depends on transferring food across the globe to make up for regional farming deficiencies caused by drought and seasonal weather changes The total amount of grain stored on the planet today would feed the earthrsquos population for only about two months [see ldquoCould Food Shortages Bring Down Civilizationrdquo by Lester R Brown Scientific American May] Most cities and countries have stockpiled food supplies for just a very short period and food shortages (as well as rising prices) have increased in recent years A nuclear war could trigger declines in yield nearly everywhere at once and a worldwide panic could bring the global agricultural trading system to a halt with severe shortages in many places Around one billion people worldwide who now live on marginal food supplies would be directly threatened with starvation by a nuclear war between India and Pakistan or between other regional nuclear powers Typically scientists test models and theories by doing experiments but we obviously cannot experiment in this case Thus we look for analogues that can verify our models Burned cities Unfortunately firestorms created by intense releases of energy have pumped vast quantities of smoke into the upper atmosphere San Francisco burned as a result of the 1906 earthquake and whole cities were incinerated during World War II including Dresden Hamburg Tokyo Hiroshima and Nagasaki These events confirm that smoke from intense urban fires rises into the upper atmosphere The seasonal cycle In actual winter the climate is cooler because the days are shorter and sunlight is less intense the simple change of seasons helps us quantify the effects of less solar radiation Our climate models re-create the seasonal cycle well confirming that they properly reflect changes in sunlight Eruptions Explosive volcanic eruptions such as those of Tambora in 1815 Krakatau in 1883 and Pinatubo in 1991 provide several lessons The resulting sulfate aerosol clouds that formed in the stratosphere were transported around the world by winds The surface temperature plummeted after each eruption in proportion to the thickness of the particulate cloud After the Pinatubo eruption the global average surface temperature dropped by about 025 degree C Global precipitation river flow and soil moisture all decreased Our models reproduce these effects Forest fires Smoke from large forest fires sometimes is injected into the troposphere and lower stratosphere and is transported great distances producing cooling Our models perform well against these effects too Extinction of the dinosaurs An asteroid smashed into Mexicorsquos Yucataacuten Peninsula 65 million years ago The resulting dust cloud mixed with smoke from fires blocked the Sun killing the dinosaurs Massive volcanism in India at the same time may have exacerbated the effects The events teach us that large amounts of aerosols in the earthrsquos atmosphere can change climate drastically enough to kill robust species

125

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Regional Nuclear War

Prefer our evidence- only current research

Robock amp Toon 10 Alan- Department of Environmental Sciences Rutgers University and Owen Brian- Director and Professor Department of Atmospheric and Oceanic Sciences University of Colorado ldquoLocal Nuclear War Global Sufferingrdquo Scientific American January 2010

Some people think that the nuclear winter theory developed in the 1980s was discredited And they may therefore raise their eyebrows at our new assertion that a regional nuclear war like one between India and Pakistan could also devastate agriculture worldwide But the original theory was thoroughly validated The science behind it was supported by investigations from the National Academy of Sciences by studies sponsored within the US military and by the International Council of Scientific Unions which included representatives from 74 national academies of science and other scientific bodies Our current work has appeared in leading peer-reviewed journals Still we seem to be the only ones pursuing research into the global environmental risks of nuclear exchanges We urge others to evaluate and repeat the calculations both for the effects of a superpower conflagration and for more regional nuclear wars

126

Cornell HKHANE Aff

No EMP- Norms Now

Berry 8 Ken Research Coordinator ICNND ldquoNew Weapons Technologyrdquo International Commission on Nuclear Non-proliferation and Disarmament

However it is unlikelymdashthough unfortunately not impossiblemdashthat any nuclear armed state these days would use EMP generated by nuclear weapons Using an atmospheric nuclear blast would attract international opprobrium both for its proliferation implications and also increasingly important for its effects on the environment As has been discussed above the same widespread effects of shutting down a nationrsquos power grid production lines water utilities chemical plants financial institutions telecommunications and transportation routes could be achieved by cyber attack Moreover given the difficulty of tracing the perpetrators of cyberwarfare responsibility for such an attack would be deniable44

No risk of EMP use now

Arquilla and Ronfeldt 2k[John and David RAND ldquoSwarming and the Future of Conflictrdquo]

One of the most effective means of breaking down communications is by an airburst of a nuclear weapon at a high altitude This generation of a highly disruptive electromagnetic pulse (EMP) would temporarily disable most communications in the battlespace it would also damage the many embedded information systems that make modern weapons systems able to fire with accuracy (eg the optical sights of a main battle tank) The fact that the EMP is generated by a nuclear detonationmdashagainst which there are strong normative inhibitionsmdashsuggests that there are few actors who might actually be able to undertake such an action Yet we note the frequent discussion of EMP as a likely threat in cold warndashera ruminations on nuclear strategy44 Further the high-altitude nature of the burst means that there would be virtually no collateral damage Finally it should be noted that the Russian militaryrsquos declaratory stance with respect to nuclear weapons has moved in recent years from ldquono first userdquo to a willingness to engage in ldquofirst userdquo It may be that their inability to match American advances in conventional warfighting will impel the Russians to try to make up for any deficiencies in this manner Indeed the recently announced new Russian military doctrine is clearly more permissive of the use of nuclear weapons from the tactical to the strategic level

127

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Russia CMR Link

Russian military doctrine supports the potential use of EMP

Arquilla and Ronfeldt 2k[John and David RAND ldquoSwarming and the Future of Conflictrdquo]

One of the most effective means of breaking down communications is by an airburst of a nuclear weapon at a high altitude This generation of a highly disruptive electromagnetic pulse (EMP) would temporarily disable most communications in the battlespace it would also damage the many embedded information systems that make modern weapons systems able to fire with accuracy (eg the optical sights of a main battle tank) The fact that the EMP is generated by a nuclear detonationmdashagainst which there are strong normative inhibitionsmdashsuggests that there are few actors who might actually be able to undertake such an action Yet we note the frequent discussion of EMP as a likely threat in cold warndashera ruminations on nuclear strategy44 Further the high-altitude nature of the burst means that there would be virtually no collateral damage Finally it should be noted that the Russian militaryrsquos declaratory stance with respect to nuclear weapons has moved in recent years from ldquono first userdquo to a willingness to engage in ldquofirst userdquo It may be that their inability to match American advances in conventional warfighting will impel the Russians to try to make up for any deficiencies in this manner Indeed the recently announced new Russian military doctrine is clearly more permissive of the use of nuclear weapons from the tactical to the strategic level

128

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Infrastructure CP

The United States federal government should implement the findings of the EMP Commission

Solvency ndash

EMP Commissionrsquos findings havenrsquot yet been implemented

Treadwell and Thompson 9[Mead Treadwell is a Senior Fellow in Security and Defense and Jeremy Thompson is a Research Associate in Security and Defense both at the Institute of the North ldquoEMP Attacks Infrastructure amp Public Policy Concernsrdquo Inside ALEC NovDec]

Yet the dots are not being connected The Department of Homeland Security has made no official move to implement or even accept the recommendations of the EMP Commission report on critical national infrastructures While some members of Congress understand the threat and wish to do something about it most of the ire has been directed at power industry figures as a Congressional hearing earlier this summer illustrates

Solves vulnerability to EMP

EMP Commission 4[ Report of the Commission to Assess the Threat to the United States from Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP) Attack Volume 1 Executive Report 2004 Dr John S Foster Jr Mr Earl Gjelde Dr William R Graham (Chairman) Dr Robert J Hermann Mr Henry (Hank) M Kluepfel GEN Richard L Lawson USAF (Ret) Dr Gordon K Soper Dr Lowell L Wood Jr Dr Joan B Woodard]

The Nationrsquos vulnerability to EMP that gives rise to potentially large-scale long-term consequences can be reasonably and readily reduced below the level of a potentially catastrophic national problem by coordinated and focused effort between the private and public sectors of our country The cost for such improved security in the next 3 to 5 years is modest by any standardmdashand extremely so in relation to both the war on terror and the value of the national infrastructures involved The appropriate response to this threatening situation is a balance of prevention protection planning and preparations for recovery Such actions are both rational and feasible A number of these actions also reduce vulnerabilities to other serious threats to our infrastructures thus giving multiple benefits

129

Cornell HKHANE Aff

NMD CP

McNeill amp Weitz 8 Jena Baker- homeland security policy analyst at The Heritage Foundation and Richard- Senior Fellow and Director of the Center for Political-Military Analysis at Hudson Institute ldquoElectromagnetic Pulse (EMP) Attack A Preventable Homeland Security Catastropherdquo Heritage Foundation Backgrounder 2199 httpwwwheritageorgresearchhomelandsecuritybg2199cfm_ftn19

Build a Comprehensive Missile Defense System The most likely method of EMP attack would be a ballistic missile armed with a nuclear warhead Building a comprehensive missile defense system would allow the US to intercept and destroy a missile bound for the United States The mere implementation of such a system would go a long way to prevent an attack by dissuading those who wish to carry out such actions and sending a clear message that the US takes this threat seriously

Those opposed to missile defense in Congress and elsewhere have attempted to paint such an endeavor as a waste of resources that does nothing to further American security 33 Minutes Protecting America in the New Missile Age A Reader a collection of essays by pre-eminent defense scholars emphasized the need for such measures and recent missile testing by Iran demonstrates that other countries are actively involved in developing missile programsmdashwhich could be used against the US[21]

130

Cornell HKHANE Aff

LoW key to Stability

Hair trigger alert serves as a warning light not to push conflicts too far Plan leads to dangerous confrontations

Perry amp Millot 98 Walter L- Senior Information Scientist and Marc Dean ldquoChapter Three Issues from the Winter Wargamerdquo Issues from the 1997 Army After Next Winter Wargame RAND Corporation 9

The possible exception to the above statement is strategic nuclear war In this instance the technology supporting military operations outstrips the timelines of political decision During the Cold War a Soviet SLBM launched off the eastern seaboard of the United States would have given a President less than 10 minutes to decide whether to order a limited number of response options contained in the Single Integrated Operational Plan or leave that decision to a successor The flight time of Soviet ICBMs allowed the United States less than 45 minutes to execute what might well turn out to be a single retaliatory response The damage done by Soviet nuclear strikes might conceivably deny the United States the capacity to retaliate with weapons other than SLBMs if national leaders chose to decide on a response only after ldquoriding outrdquo the attack and would probably lead to an incoherent response But the damage done by even an incoherent US retaliation would have decimated the Soviet Union and destroyed large portions of its structures for controlling war A Soviet nuclear attack would have left the fate of the United States indeed the world solely in the hands of the President He wouldmdashat bestmdashhave perhaps minutes to confer with his closest advisors and literally no time for consultation or even communication with the Congress the people allies or even the Soviets The requirement to ldquouse it or lose itrdquo would have left no room for a political leaderrsquos wellhoned techniques of crisis management The Soviet leadership faced the same problem and the symmetry provided a powerful incentive for the two superpowers to avoid direct confrontation engage in measures designed to control the risks and consequences of nuclear war and enter into vastly expensive efforts to buy their NCAs and successors some ability to control the conduct of war including limited nuclear options effective means of nuclear attack assessment as well as tactical warning continuity of operations and ultimately strategic defenses

131

• EMP AFF Index
• 1AC Plan
• Solvency
• Future Wars Adv
• Future Wars Adv
• Accidents Adv
• Accidents Adv
• Accidents Adv
• Rogue EMP Adv
• Rogue EMP Adv
• Rogue EMP Adv
• Rogue EMP Adv
• Rogue EMP Adv
• China Advantage
• China Advantage
• General Topicality 12
• General Topicality 22
• General Topicality 1AR 12
• General Topicality 1AR 22
• More Topicality
• Future Wars Conflicts Likely
• Future Wars Ext
• AT Limited War Winter
• Accidents- LoW Bad
• AT FS Remains - Russia
• AT FS Remains - China
• AT FS Remains - Subs
• Rogue- Seeking
• China Solves NoKo
• Rogue Satelites
• Rogue- AT No Tech
• Rogue- AT No Long Range Missiles
• Rogue- AT Uncertain Effects
• Rogue- AT Attribution
• Iran Ev
• NoKo Ev
• Terrorism Adv
• Terrorism Adv
• Terrorism Ext
• China- AT Attribution
• Space Militarization Adv 1
• Space Militarization Adv 2
• Space Militarization Adv 3
• Space Ext
• Data Sharing Adv
• Data Sharing Adv
• Data Sharing Adv
• Data Sharing- Uniqueness
• Data Sharing- Data Needed
• Russia Data Sharing (Testing)
• Russian ARMS control
• Modeling Advantage 1
• Modeling Advantage- Israel
• Modeling Advantage- Israel
• Modeling Advantage- China
• Modeling Advantage- Solvency
• Israeli Strikes Bad
• Testing Advantage
• EMPacts Econ
• EMPacts Heg
• EMPacts Earthquake
• EMPacts GPS
• EMPacts Satelites
• EMPacts Healthcare
• Morality Advantage
• AT Verifiability
• AT Verifiability
• Verifiability Extensions
• AT CMR
• Politics Link Answers
• Politics Link Answers
• Politics Link Turn
• AT Geomagnetic Storms
• AT Geomagnetic Storms
• AT Blackout Alt Causes
• AT Alternative EMP forms
• AT Protective Measures
• AT Protective Measures
• AT Low Altitude Nuclear Explosions
• CP Theories
• AT Hardening CP
• AT Hardening CP
• AT NMD CP
• AT PAROS CP
• AT Asteroids PIC
• AT Japan Rearm
• AT Consult Japan
• AT Primacy DA
• AT Primacy DA
• AT Damage Limitation
• AT Damage Limitation
• AT Damage Limitation
• AT Deterrence DA
• AT Deterrence DA
• AT Deterrence DA
• AT Deterrence DA
• No US Second Strike
• Yes US Second Strike
• Yes US Second Strike
• AT Security Kritik
• AT Kritiks
• AT Religion K
• AT Psychoanalysis
• Negative
• Not Topical
• Tix Links
• GOP Link
• AT Terrorist EMP
• AT State EMP
• AT RussiaChina EMP
• AT Proliferators EMP
• EMPacts False
• AT Strait of Hormuz
• Alt Cause- Geomagnetic Storms
• China Turn
• AT PGS Prolif
• No Solvency- Conventional EMPs
• Conventional EMPs Shift
• Conventional EMPs Shift
• AT Warfighting Advantage
• Nuclear Winter Imagery Good
• Regional Nuclear War
• Regional Nuclear War
• No EMP- Norms Now
• Russia CMR Link
• Infrastructure CP
• NMD CP
• LoW key to Stability

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Solvency

Plan eliminates electromagnetic pulse warfare

Johnston 9 Robert Wm- PhD in physics from UT-Dallas ldquoHigh-altitude nuclear explosionsrdquo 28 January 2009

Several effects are relatively unique to high altitude bursts Electromagnetic pulse (EMP) is important only for high altitude bursts For such detonations ionization

of the upper atmosphere can produce a brief intense pulse of radio frequency radiation which can damage or disrupt electronic devices For explosions above most of the atmosphere EMP can affect large areas

Ionization of the atmosphere from explosions in the atmosphere can interfere with radar and radio communications for short periods

Charged particles produced by explosions above the Earths atmosphere can be captured by the Earths magnetic field temporarily creating artificial radiation belts that can damage spacecraft and injure astronautscosmonauts in orbit

5

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Future Wars Adv

Future great power wars will be initiated with EMP strikes

Lewallen 2 John- Political Science at Whitman University organizer of the Nuclear Peace Action Group Fulbright Scholarship recipient Public Ocean Access Network ldquoHigh-Altitude Nuclear Warrdquo Nuclear Press p30

ldquoIn all the war games in which I have been present and all the ones which I have studied when I have not been present the attack the red attack always begins with an EMP laydown on blue that is a Soviet laydown on the continental United States by multiple megaton high-altitude burstsrdquo-Dr Lowell Wood Nuclear EMP Hearings p173Any major nuclear war these days seems sure to be a two-stage affair First one or several high-altitude nuclear explosions will occur wiping out all unprotected and imperfectly- protected military and civilian electronics within line of sight of the burst If Dr Lowell Wood and Mr William Graham are correct in their 1999 assessment of US nuclear strategic EMP hardening there might not be much left of the US nuclear retaliatory system after the initial EMP attack 35 The second stage low-altitude nuclear war might or might not coincide with or follow the initial high-altitude nuclear EMP strike Certainly all national leaders should have an EMP-hardened communication system to compare notes after the first high-altitude nuclear bomb goes off

In the absence of EMP strikes mutual interest would de-escalation nuclear war

Quinlan 9 Michael- Director of the Ditchley Foundation former British defence strategist and former Permanent Under-Secretary of State ldquoThinking about nuclear weapons principles problems prospectsrdquo p63

There are good reasons for fearing escalation These include the confusion of war its stresses anger hatred and the desire for revenge reluctance to accept the humiliation of backing down the desire to get further blows in first Given all this the risks of escalation are grave in any conflict between advanced powers and Western leaders during the cold war were rightly wont to emphasize them in the interests of deterrence But this is not to say that they are virtually certain or even necessarily odds-on still less that they are so for all the assorted circumstances in which the situation might arise in a nuclear world to which past experience is only a limited guide It is entirely possible for example that the initial use of nuclear weapons breaching a barrier that has held since 1945 might so horrify both sides in a conflict that they recognized an overwhelming common interest in composing their differences The human pressures in that direction would be very great Even if initial nuclear use did not quickly end the fighting the supposition of inexorable momentum in a developing exchange with each side rushing to overreaction amid confusion and uncertainty is implausible It fails to consider what the situation of the decision-makers would really be Neither side could want escalation Both would be appalled at what was going on Both would be desperately looking for signs that the other was ready to call a halt Both given the capacity for evasion or concealment which modern delivery platforms and vehicles can possess could have in reserve significant forces invulnerable enough not to entail use-or-lose pressures (It may be more open to question as noted earlier whether newer nuclear-weapon possessors can be immediately in that position but it is within reach of any substantial state with advanced technological capabilities and attaining it is certain to be a high priority in the development of forces) As a result neither side can have any predisposition to suppose in an ambiguous situation of fearful risk that the right course when in doubt is to go on copiously launching weapons And none of this analysis rests on any presumption of highly subtle or pre-concerted rationality The rationality required is plain

6

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Future Wars Adv

Nuclear planners know that EMP strikes make limited war impossible and are therefore forced to launch a full out nuclear strike at the onset of conflict

CDI 2 Center for Defense Information ldquoRethinking the Unthinkablerdquo The Washington Post July 28 2002 httpwwwcdiorgnuclearrethinking-prcfm

Yet counterforce theories to Blair were equally removed from operational reality The notion that a nuclear war might be rationally fought over an extended periodmdashthat it might involve a number of nuclear exchanges yet result in negotiations before things really got out of handmdashwas never more than pie-in-the-sky academic nonsense The main reason Blair saysmdashas military leaders have always understood in spadesmdashwas that in the early stages of a nuclear war command and control systems on both sides would be extremely vulnerable to what was called decapitation The pilots and battle staff responsible for the airborne SAC command post known at the time as Looking Glass were acutely aware of the decapitation problem Blair says Once the bombs start falling they used to tell him were totally screwed To make matters worse in the early 70s it was discovered that a single high-altitude nuclear explosion would release an intense pulse of electromagnetic energy that would massively disrupt communications and avionics Planes would be falling out of the sky Some aspects of the command and control system could bemdashand subsequently weremdashhardened against attack But some could not And the systems overall vulnerability Blair says meant that no matter how much concrete was packed around a Minuteman missile riding out a first strike was not a viable basis for strategy So what were the military planners to do The answer was to gear the whole war plan to launch on warning This was not acknowledged publiclymdashit was too controversial Blair saysmdashbut insiders knew that the system was designed to force a quick decision and get the missiles out of their silos as soon as possible after learning of an enemy attack Both sides were prepared to do this though the Soviets didnt put their launch-on-warning system in place Blair learned until that scary period in the early Reagan years Call this deterrence if you want Youve certainly got two sides facing off with each armed so heavily as to give the other pause Or call it counterforce All those missiles can be aimed at military targets and fired preemptively at any time But to Blair the label is beside the point What matters is the decision to place thousands upon thousands of potential Hiroshimas on hair-trigger alert in systems within which even a minor error carries the potential for unimaginable horror With a missile taking only 30 minutes to travel from the Soviet Union to the United Statesmdashand far less if delivered from an offshore submarinemdashthe launch-on-warning timetable is impossibly tight In the North American Aerospace Defense Commands bombproof bunker beneath Colorados Cheyenne Mountain they have three minutes from the time the first sensor report comes in to the time they have to say Were under attack Blair says Three minutes Then comes an emergency conference and an officer in Omaha briefs the president And do you know how much time hes allowed to give that briefing Thirty seconds

Plan solves EMP first-strike paranoia and nullifies the benefits of an all out nuclear war

Lewallen 99 John- Public Ocean Access Network ldquoThe Blackout Bomb What It Means To Yourdquo httpnonuclearnettheblackoutbombhtm

Major Stokes did not connect this statement to high-altitude EMP nuclear weaponry In fact his study of Chinarsquos real and imagined electronic weaponry has only cursory mention of EMP Is the Blackout Bomb so secret and potentially panic-causing that even many military strategists are in the dark about its true significance Dr Lowell Wood noted in verbal testimony at the 1997 EMP hearing in Congress that nuclear strategists in the United States do war simulations based on the presumption that a capable enemy would begin hostilities with high-altitude EMP weaponry Since the Russians and Chinese know that we are ready to lay heavy EMP on them at the outset of hostilities they try to be prepared to do the same to us preferably first Therefore if we careen closer to nuclear conflict with Russia or China the advantage of first-strike EMP escalates rapidly

7

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Accidents Adv

EMP warplans force adversaries to adopt a launch on warning policy creating intense time pressure

Schnurr 9 Avi- Executive Director of Israels Missile Defense Association reviewed US technology policy for the the Department of Defense the White House Homeland Security Council Congress and the National Academy of Sciences ldquoThe EMP Threat A Strategic Review of Geopolitical Risk Scenariosrdquo 27th July 2009 httpwwwhenryjacksonsocietyorgstoriesaspid=1227

When scientists saw this it began a new race in the Cold War in which a nuclear exchange would start with an attack intended to disable or destroy infrastructure During the Cold War the U nited S tates had engineers whose entire professions were simply to do EMP testing either in laboratories or with underground nuclear blasts They also protected hardware and command and control systems from these kinds of effects An example of EMP as a Cold War tactic actually came after the Cold War In 19 95 Norway decided it wanted to do an upper atmosphere weather test so they asked NASA to use one of its decommissioned nuclear boosters Norway notified the countries in the area including Russia that they were going to launch this weather test but the person in Russia responsible for taking this information to the defence authorities was sick and his replacement did not understand the protocol In Russia there are three individuals who can recommend a nuclear attack to the president the Prime Minister the Defense Minister and the Interior Minister each of whom could do so independently On this occasion all three were together meeting with the Russian president when someone ran into the room interrupting that they saw a launch coming from the North Sea The Defense Minister turned to Boris Yeltsin and said ldquoDo it Do it now This is it this is the attack Launch all of our missilesrdquo Yeltsin opened his little black box but did nothing When I first heard this story it made no sense to me Why would all of the warheads be launched with one missile coming in before itrsquos even clear that itrsquos heading toward Russia Obviously if they had waited a little bit longer they would have seen that it was only heading in the general direction but this harkens back to the Cold War mindset Both sides were so worried about the possibility of their infrastructures being destroyed by EMP and that they would not be able to launch a counter strike that the protocol said that if there was one missile coming in and it looked as if it could be an attack a response must be made very early This is the reason there is so little time Fear of an EMP attack in 19 95 almost launched World War III The EMP threat is the reason the US president still walks around with someone following him everyday carrying what they call the presidential ldquofootballrdquo The EMP was a primary focus of the US military during the Cold War Thereafter with a sense that the nuclear threat was diminishing the focus on EMP also diminished However in more recent times the Pentagon is beginning again to take it seriously by hardening infrastructure and adopting all of the EMP Commissionrsquos recommendations

8

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Accidents Adv

Launch on warning coupled with the intense time pressure results in massive nuclear war

Cirincione 9 Joseph- President of the Ploughshares Fund ldquoThe Continuing Threat of Nuclear Warrdquo in Global Catastrophic Risks by Nick Bostrom Milan M Ćirković p 383-4

Although much was made of the 1994 joint decision by Presidents Bill Clinton and Boris Yeltsin to no longer target each other with their weapons this announcement had little practical consequences Target coordinates can be uploaded into a warheads guidance systems within minutes The warheads remain on missiles on a high alert status similar to that they maintained during the tensest moments of the Cold War This greatly increases the risk of an unauthorized or accidental launch Because there is no time buffer built into each states decision-making process this extreme level of readiness enhances the possibility that either sides president could prematurely order a nuclear strike based on flawed intelligence Bruce Blair a former Minuteman launch officer now president of the World Security Institute says If both sides sent the launch order right now without any warning or preparation thousands of nuclear weapons ndash the equivalent in explosive firepower of about 70000 Hiroshima bombs ndash could be unleashed within a few minutes4 Blair describes the scenario in dry but chilling detail If early warning satellites or ground radar detected missiles in flight both sides would attempt to assess whether a real nuclear attack was under way within a strict and short deadline Under Cold War procedures that are still in practice today early warning crews manning their consoles 247 have only three minutes to reach a preliminary conclusion Such occurrences happen on a daily basis sometimes more than once per day if an apparent nuclear missile threat is perceived then an emergency teleconference would be convened between the president and his top nuclear advisers On the US side the top officer on duty at Strategic Command in Omaha Neb would brief the president on his nuclear options and their consequences That officer is allowed all of 30 seconds to deliver the briefing Then the US or Russian president would have to decide whether to retaliate and since the command systems on both sides have long been geared for launch-on-warning the presidents would have little spare time if they desired to get retaliatory nuclear missiles off the ground before they and possibly the presidents themselves were vaporized On the US side the time allowed to decide would range between zero and 12 minutes depending on the scenario Russia operates under even tighter deadlines because of the short flight time of US Trident submarine missiles on forward patrol in the North Atlantic Russias early warning systems remain in a serious state of erosion and disrepair making it all the more likely that a Russian president could panic and reach a different conclusion than Yeltsin did in 19956 As Russian capabilities continue to deteriorate the chances of accidents only increase Limited spending on the conventional Russian military has led to greater reliance on an ageing nuclear arsenal whose survivability would make any deterrence theorist nervous Yet the missiles remain on a launch status begun during the worst days of the Cold War and never turned off As Blair concludes Such rapid implementation of war plans leaves no room for real deliberation rational thought or national leadership Former chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee Sam Nunn agrees We are running the irrational risk of an Armageddon of our own making The more time the United States and Russia build into our process for ordering a nuclear strike the more time is available to gather data to exchange information to gain perspective to discover an error to avoid an accidental or unauthorized launch

9

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Accidents Adv

This causes extinction

Helfand amp Pastore 9 Ira- President of Physicians for Social Responsibility and John- Former President of Physicians for Social Responsibility ldquoUS-Russia nuclear war still a threatrdquo

President Obama and Russian President Dimitri Medvedev are scheduled to Wednesday in London during the G-20 summit They must not let the current economic crisis keep them from focusing on one of the greatest threats confronting humanity the danger of nuclear war Since the end of the Cold War many have acted as though the danger of nuclear war has ended It has not There remain in the world more than 20000 nuclear weapons Alarmingly more than 2000 of these weapons in the US and Russian arsenals remain on ready-alert status commonly known as hair-trigger alert They can be fired within five minutes and reach targets in the other country 30 minutes later Just one of these weapons can destroy a city A war involving a substantial number would cause devastation on a scale unprecedented in human history A study conducted by Physicians for Social Responsibility in 2002 showed that if only 500 of the Russian weapons on high alert exploded over our cities 100 million Americans would die in the first 30 minutes An attack of this magnitude also would destroy the entire economic communications and transportation infrastructure on which we all depend Those who survived the initial attack would inhabit a nightmare landscape with huge swaths of the country blanketed with radioactive fallout and epidemic diseases rampant They would have no food no fuel no electricity no medicine and certainly no organized health care In the following months it is likely the vast majority of the US population would die Recent studies by the eminent climatologists Toon and Robock have shown that such a war would have a huge and immediate impact on climate world wide If all of the warheads in the US and Russian strategic arsenals were drawn into the conflict the firestorms they caused would loft 180 million tons of soot and debris into the upper atmosphere mdash blotting out the sun Temperatures across the globe would fall an average of 18 degrees Fahrenheit to levels not seen on earth since the depth of the last ice age 18000 years ago Agriculture would stop eco-systems would collapse and many species including perhaps our own would become extinct

10

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Rogue EMP Adv

Iran is on the brink of achieving EMP capability to be used against the US

Timmerman 8 Kenneth R- director of the Foundation for Democracy in Iran 2006 Nobel Peace Prize Nominee ldquoUS Intel Iran Plans Nuclear Strike on USrdquo News Max 29 Jul 2008

Iran has carried out missile tests for what could be a plan for a nuclear strike on the United States the head of a national security panel has warned In testimony before the House Armed Services Committee and in remarks to a private conference on missile defense over the weekend hosted by the Claremont Institute Dr William Graham warned that the US intelligence community ldquodoesnrsquot have a storyrdquo to explain the recent Iranian tests One group of tests that troubled Graham the former White House science adviser under President Ronald Reagan were successful efforts to launch a Scud missile from a platform in the Caspian Sea ldquoTheyrsquove got [test] ranges in Iran which are more than long enough to handle Scud launches and even Shahab-3 launchesrdquo Dr Graham said ldquoWhy would they be launching from the surface of the Caspian Sea They obviously have not explained that to usrdquo Another troubling group of tests involved Shahab-3 launches where the Iranians detonated the warhead near apogee not over the target area where the thing would eventually land but at altituderdquo Graham said ldquoWhy would they do thatrdquo Graham chairs the Commission to Assess the Threat to the United States from Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP) Attack a blue-ribbon panel established by Congress in 2001 The commission examined the Iranian tests ldquoand without too much effort connected the dotsrdquo even though the US intelligence community previously had failed to do so Graham said ldquoThe only plausible explanation we can find is that the Iranians are figuring out how to launch a missile from a ship and get it up to altitude and then detonate itrdquo he said ldquoAnd thatrsquos exactly what you would do if you had a nuclear weapon on a Scud or a Shahab-3 or other missile and you wanted to explode it over the United Statesrdquo Several participants in last weekendrsquos conference in Dearborn Mich hosted by the conservative Claremont Institute argued that Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was thinking about an EMP attack when he opined that ldquoa world without America is conceivablerdquo

So is North Korea

Wilson 8 Clay- Specialist in Technology and National Security Foreign Affairs Defense and Trade Division ldquoHigh Altitude Electromagnetic Pulse (HEMP) and High Power Microwave (HPM) Devices Threat Assessmentsrdquo Congressional Research Service March 26 2008

Reportedly several potential US adversaries such as Russia or China are now capable of launching a crippling HEMP strike against the United States with a nuclear-tipped ballistic missile and other nations such as North Korea could possibly have the capability by 201532 Other nations that could possibly develop a capability for HEMP operations over the next few years include United Kingdom France India Israel and Pakistan

11

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Rogue EMP Adv

US First strike capabilities prevent China from curbing Iranian and North Korean nuclear ambitions

Wu 8 Anne- Managing the Atom Project at the Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs at Harvard University ldquoEngage China in Nuclear-Proliferation Issuerdquo Providence Journal October 27

Chinas crucial role has not been diminished since the North Korean denuclearization process started in 2003 even if the United States later started direct dialogue with Pyongyang Indeed it was just reported that Washington expects Pyongyang to submit to China a list of verification steps it would allow in return for being removed from the US terrorism-sponsor list Yet the North Korean issue only represents one piece of international non-proliferation efforts At a time when the global non-proliferation regime is weakened in the absence of consensus on priority and process China and the US share a common interest and responsibility to strengthen measures that prevent the proliferation of nuclear weapons The two countries both agree and disagree on nuclear non-proliferation Internationally the two countries are committed to promoting non-proliferation within frameworks such as the United Nations the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG) Regionally they maintain consultations on the nuclear issue on the Korean Peninsula and in Iran Bilaterally they have intensified dialogues and cooperation on export control and intelligence sharing as well as in other areas Yet differences ranging from strategic to practical issues remain The next president together with the Chinese leadership must lead by example through more effective cooperation The United States and China should be the strongest advocates for reducing the currency of nuclear weapons One thing in the way of their partnership is their differing views on their own nuclear weapons Since going nuclear in 1964 China has been committed to a policy of no-first-use of nuclear weapons and no use of nuclear weapons against non-nuclear states or in nuclear-free zones The United States on the other hand reserves its right as part of its nuclear doctrine to strike others in a pre-emptive manner Many Chinese believe that it is unfair for the US to ask other countries to not develop nuclear weapons while it maintains a huge nuclear stockpile And its policies are counterproductive because they continue to provide legitimacy to nuclear weapons in international affairs The United States and China must bridge their respective perceptions of potential nuclear threat and approaches to non-proliferation in order to work together to tackle the most urgent nuclear problems The United States could engage China more effectively on concerns such as the North Korean and Iranian nuclear issues by recognizing Chinas own interests Denuclearization efforts will not succeed without Chinas support and the perception that the United States is only using Chinas influence to reduce a nuclear threat to itself is detrimental to bilateral relations Regarding North Korea and Iran China envisions nuclear non-proliferation as a broad security concept that encompasses all-around solutions China believes that the fundamental purpose of non-proliferation is to safeguard and promote regional and international peace and security To achieve these goals non-proliferation should be pursued in a diplomatic manner that eschews coercion and other hostile measures China also advocates equilibrium between non-proliferation peaceful uses of nuclear energy and disarmament Because of its perceived balanced stance on North Korea and Iran China occupies the formidable middle ground and could play a constructive role in facilitating a solution that avoids full-scale crisis The United States should encourage China to continue its constructive intervention no nuclear-weapons program no escalating confrontations but continued flexible dialogue Otherwise should any of the parties up the ante the international community will lose a valuable avenue to mitigate the crisis

12

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Rogue EMP Adv

Plan prevents rogue acquisition of EMP weapons by garnering Russian and Chinese support

Lewallen 2 John- Political Science at Whitman University organizer of the Nuclear Peace Action Group Fulbright Scholarship recipient Public Ocean Access Network ldquoHigh-Altitude Nuclear Warrdquo Nuclear Press p26-27

That is not to say that there is no danger of missile attack against the US from ldquorogue statesrdquo which may be defined as ldquopoor nations who do not accept the military dominations of the United Statesrdquo More than thirty nations have Scud missiles capable of flinging a nuclear weapon into orbit over Earth and several nations are known to have nuclear weapons 25 In addition arms in general and nuclear weapons in particular are commodities on the world market Despite many treaties and restrictions deigned to staunch the proliferation of nuclear weapons and missiles among nations there is abundant evidence that nuclear missiles are spreading around 26 The pace and scope of nuclear missile proliferation is largely determined by China Russia and the United States If relations are peaceful in the Nuclear Triangle the three nations are inclined to serve their mutual interests in keeping nuclear missiles out of the hands of other powers If the atmosphere of nuclear confrontation heats up in the Nuclear Triangle nuclear missile proliferation accelerates as the three adversaries are driven to arm allies Russia President Vladimir Putin an adroit player of US fears that ldquorogue nationsrdquo might obtain long-range nuclear missiles has positioned himself so that he can threaten to instantly supply long-range nuclear missiles to Americarsquos worst nightmare du jour be it North Korea Ira Iran Libya Cuba or Syria27

EMP strikes are the most likely scenario for rogue lashout

Schneider 7 Mark- National Institute for Public Policy The Emerging EMP Threat to the United States United States Nuclear Strategy Forum No 6 November 2007

Weapons of mass destruction are potentially attractive to rogue states because these weapons can provide an asymmetric response to US conventional superiority International arms control treaties have made chemical and biological weapons the nearly exclusive prerogative of rogue states However the ability of rogue states to inflict effective attacks even with WMD payloads requires certain technical capabilities in the delivery systems Good accuracy is minimally necessary for WMD attacks on major urban industrial centers and for EMP attacks43 According to Dr Lowell Wood ldquoBecause a very small number ndash potentially one ndash nuclear weapon exploded at high altitude over an American expeditionary force attempting forced entry against a major regional power could potentially tip the balance against our efforts all such powers who contemplate confronting us will be incentivized to develop acquire or retain nuclear weaponryrdquo44 A key conclusion of the EMP commission report was that ldquoA determined adversary can achieve an EMP attack capability without having a high level of [technical] sophisticationrdquo45 From a political standpoint including alliance cohesion the most damaging form of attack by a rogue state would be WMD attacks or EMP attacks launched against the capitals or the major cities of the United States its friends or allies The US National Strategy for Combating the Proliferation of Weapons of Mass Destruction recognized that we must respond to any WMD attack rapidly and that ldquothe primary objective of a response is to disrupt an imminent attack or an attack in progress and eliminate the threat of future attacksrdquo46 The objective of rogue state WMD attacks could possibly be to shock the attacked populations into demanding that the war be ended promptly It would be the intent of such adversaries that such attacks would be so destructive that they would break up coalitions and cause our allies to deny the US critical basing rights Attacks might even be directed against nations that were not active participants in the conflict much as in the way Saddam Hussein attacked Israeli cities during Operation Desert Storm Catastrophic attacks using modern weapons of mass destruction can inflict casualties at levels that have not been experienced since World War II Nuclear EMP attack could be attractive to the less technically sophisticated rogue states because of the extensive damage that could be inflicted on a technologically superior adversary with a relatively crude ballistic missile In order to be able to employ high altitude EMP strikes the rogue state would not have to develop reentry vehicles or ballistic missiles with precision accuracy

13

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Rogue EMP Adv

A rogue EMP strike would collapse the economy

Timmerman 8 Kenneth R- director of the Foundation for Democracy in Iran 2006 Nobel Peace Prize Nominee ldquoUS Intel Iran Plans Nuclear Strike on USrdquo News Max 29 Jul 2008

The commission warned in a report issued in April that the United States was at risk of a sneak nuclear attack by a rogue nation or a terrorist group designed to take out our nationrsquos critical infrastructure If even a crude nuclear weapon were detonated anywhere between 40 kilometers to 400 kilometers above the earth in a split-second it would generate an electro-magnetic pulse [EMP] that would cripple military and civilian communications power transportation water food and other infrastructure the report warned While not causing immediate civilian casualties the near-term impact on US society would dwarf the damage of a direct nuclear strike on a US city ldquoThe first indication [of such an attack] would be that the power would go out and some but not all the telecommunications would go out We would not physically feel anything in our bodiesrdquo Graham said As electric power water and gas delivery systems failed there would be ldquotruly massive traffic jamsrdquo Graham added since modern automobiles and signaling systems all depend on sophisticated electronics that would be disabled by the EMP wave ldquoSo you would be walking You wouldnrsquot be driving at that pointrdquo Graham said ldquoAnd it wouldnrsquot do any good to call the maintenance or repair people because they wouldnrsquot be able to get there even if you could get through to themrdquo The food distribution system also would grind to a halt as cold-storage warehouses stockpiling perishables went offline Even warehouses equipped with backup diesel generators would fail because ldquowe wouldnrsquot be able to pump the fuel into the trucks and get the trucks to the warehousesrdquo Graham said The United States ldquowould quickly revert to an early 19th century type of countryrdquo except that we would have 10 times as many people with ten times fewer resources he said ldquoMost of the things we depend upon would be gone and we would literally be depending on our own assets and those we could reach by walking to themrdquo Graham said America would begin to resemble the 2002 TV series ldquoJeremiahrdquo which depicts a world bereft of law infrastructure and memory In the TV series an unspecified virus wipes out the entire adult population of the planet In an EMP attack the casualties would be caused by our almost total dependence on technology for everything from food and water to hospital care Within a week or two of the attack people would start dying Graham says ldquoPeople in hospitals would be dying faster than that because they depend on power to stay alive But then it would go to water food civil authority emergency services And we would end up with a country with many many people not surviving the eventrdquo Asked just how many Americans would die if Iran were to launch the EMP attack it appears to be preparing Graham gave a chilling reply ldquoYou have to go back into the 1800s to look at the size of populationrdquo that could survive in a nation deprived of mechanized agriculture transportation power water and communication ldquoIrsquod have to say that 70 to 90 percent of the population would not be sustainable after this kind of attackrdquo he said America would be reduced to a core of around 30 million people mdash about the number that existed in the decades after Americarsquos independence from Great Britain The modern electronic economy would shut down and America would most likely revert to ldquoan earlier economy based on barterrdquo the EMP commissionrsquos report on Critical National Infrastructure concluded earlier this year

14

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Rogue EMP Adv

This means Global War

Mead 9 [Walter Russell Senior Fellow in US Foreign Policy at the Council on Foreign Relations New Republic February 4 2009]

So far such half-hearted experiments not only have failed to work they have left the societies that have tried them in a progressively worse position farther behind the front-runners as time goes by Argentina has lost ground to Chile Russian development has fallen farther behind that of the Baltic states and Central Europe Frequently the crisis has weakened the power of the merchants industrialists financiers and professionals who want to develop a liberal capitalist society integrated into the world Crisis can also strengthen the hand of religious extremists populist radicals or authoritarian traditionalists who are determined to resist liberal capitalist society for a variety of reasons Meanwhile the companies and banks based in these societies are often less established and more vulnerable to the consequences of a financial crisis than more established firms in wealthier societies As a result developing countries and countries where capitalism has relatively recent and shallow roots tend to suffer greater economic and political damage when crisis strikes--as inevitably it does And consequently financial crises often reinforce rather than challenge the global distribution of power and wealth This may be happening yet again None of which means that we can just sit back and enjoy the recession History may suggest that financial crises actually help capitalist great powers maintain their leads--but it has other less reassuring messages as well If financial crises have been a normal part of life during the 300-year rise of the liberal capitalist system under the Anglophone powers so has war The wars of the League of Augsburg and the Spanish Succession the Seven Years War the American Revolution the Napoleonic Wars the two World Wars the cold war The list of wars is almost as long as the list of financial crises Bad economic times can breed wars Europe was a pretty peaceful place in 1928 but the Depression poisoned German public opinion and helped bring Adolf Hitler to power If the current crisis turns into a depression what rough beasts might start slouching toward Moscow Karachi Beijing or New Delhi to be born The United States may not yet decline but if we cant get the world economy back on track we may still have to fight

15

Cornell HKHANE Aff

China Advantage

China believes the US will use nuclear EMP attacks in future wars

Pry 5 Dr Peter Vincent- EMP Commission Staff ldquoForeign Views Of Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP) Attackrdquo Before The United States Senate Subcommittee On Terrorism Technology And Homeland Security March 8 2005 httpwwwendtimesreportcomEMP_attackhtml

Many foreign analysts perceive nuclear EMP attack as falling within the category of electronic warfare or information warfare not nuclear warfare Indeed the military doctrines of at least China and Russia appear to define information warfare as embracing a spectrum ranging from computer viruses to nuclear EMP attack For example consider the following quote from one of Chinarsquos most senior military theoristsndashwho is credited by the PRC with inventing information warfarendash appearing in his book World War the Third World WarndashTotal Information Warfare ldquoWith their massive destructiveness longrange nuclear weapons have combined with highly sophisticated information technology and computer technology today and warfare of the looming 21st century information war under nuclearInformation war and traditional war have one thing in common namely that the country which possesses the critical weapons such as atomic bombs will have lsquofirst strikersquo and lsquosecond strike retaliationrsquo capabilities As soon as its computer networks come under attack and are destroyed the country will slip into a state of paralysis and the lives of its people will ground to a halt Therefore China should focus on measures to counter computer viruses nuclear electromagnetic pulse and quickly achieve breakthroughs in those technologies in order to equip China without delay with equivalent deterrence that will enable it to stand up to the military powers in the information age and neutralize and check the deterrence of Western powers including the United Statesrdquo (2001)

This forces China to pursue EMP warfare and space militarization

Kueter 7 Jeff- president of the George C Marshall Institute ldquoChinarsquos Space Ambitions ndash And Oursrdquo The New Atlantis Number 16 Spring 2007 pp 7-22

A more important motivation for Chinarsquos investment in civil and military space is of course the countryrsquos perception of its security environment and its understanding of the evolution of modern warfare The Chinese have concluded from observing recent warsmdashincluding Operation Desert Storm NATO operations in the Balkans and the present wars in Afghanistan and Iraqmdashthat ldquothe PLArsquos past approach to wars which relied heavily on mass mobilization and preparation for all-out warfare are frankly no longer appropriaterdquo according to China scholar Dean Cheng of the Center for Naval Analyses Chinese analysts have reached several conclusions about the characteristics of future wars They will extend from operations on the land at sea and in the air to the electromagnetic spectrum and into outer space They will demand widely spread forces operating over large geographic areas demonstrating precise operational coordination and timing and requiring multiple military services working together Future wars will be characterized by long-range operations involve the decisive use of precision-strike weapons and require much higher rates of expenditure of munitions Operations will occur more rapidly and conflicts will conclude more quickly American strategists have reached similar conclusions as is reflected in the doctrines of the US military services embodied in the annual US defense budgets and written into recent Quadrennial Defense Reviews These conclusions have shaped Chinarsquos overall military modernization efforts as well as its outer-space ambitions

16

Cornell HKHANE Aff

China Advantage

Chinarsquos fears are reflected in their acquisition of space warfare and EMP capabilities

Wilson 8 Clay- Specialist in Technology and National Security Foreign Affairs Defense and Trade Division ldquoHigh Altitude Electromagnetic Pulse (HEMP) and High Power Microwave (HPM) Devices Threat Assessmentsrdquo Congressional Research Service March 26 2008

According to a 1999 DOD report China has been actively pursuing the development of electromagnetic pulse weapons and has devoted significant resources to development of other electronic warfare systems and laser weapons The report also noted that Chinarsquos leaders view offensive counter space weapons and other space-based defense systems as part of inevitable scenarios for future warfare The report noted that China could have as many as 60 ICBMs capable of striking the United States by 2010 Also China may replace 20 of its current ICBMs with a longer-range missile by the end of this decade or sooner36

Space weaponization leads to extinction

Mitchell 1 Gordon R- member of CSIS Working Group on Theater Missile Defenses in the Asia-Pacific Region Fletcher Forum On World Affairs Winter 2001

Deployment of space weapons with pre-delegated authority to fire death rays or unleash killer projectiles would likely make war itself inevitable given the susceptibility of such systems to ldquonormal accidentsrdquo It is chilling to contemplate the possible effects of a space war According to Bowman ldquoeven a tiny projectile reentering from space strikes the earth with such high velocity that it can do enormous damagemdasheven more than would be done by a nuclear weapon of the same size In the same laser technology touted by President Reagan as the quintessential tool of peace David Langford sees one of the most wicked offensive weapons ever conceived ldquoOne imagines dead cities of microwave-grilled peoplerdquo Given this unique potential for destruction it is not hard to imagine that any nation subjected to a space weapon attack would escalate by retaliating with maximum force including use of nuclear biological andor chemical weapons An accidental war sparked by a computer glitch in space could plunge the world into the most destructive military conflict ever seen

Plan solves space weaponization by breaking the feedback loop

Lewallen 2 John- Political Science at Whitman University organizer of the Nuclear Peace Action Group Fulbright Scholarship recipient Public Ocean Access Network ldquoHigh-Altitude Nuclear Warrdquo Nuclear Press Pg34

A strategic feedback loop would seem to make it at least ldquostrongly possiblerdquo that the United States China and Russia have high-powered EMP bombs in Earth orbit today The ability to wipe out an adversaryrsquos electronics continent-wide pretty much any time with a maneuverable EMP satellite bomb would confer major if not overwhelming advantage to the aggressor So if the other guy probably has EMP satellite bombs we need them too

17

Cornell HKHANE Aff

General Topicality 12

We reduce missions

Kristensen 98 Hans M- Director of the Nuclear Information Project at the Federation of American Scientists ldquoNuclear Futures Proliferation of Weapons of Mass Destruction and US Nuclear Strategy British American Security Information Council Basic Research Report 982

Other exotic design concepts stem from the emphasis on underground and deeply buried targets and the concern to limit the collateral damage from the use of nuclear weapons These are all prime features of the counterproliferation effort Research contracts for 1997 outlined by the Defense Special Weapons Agency (DSWA) formerly the Defense Nuclear Agency include adjusting Electromagnetic Pulse ( EMP) data for nuclear weapons to allow war planners to assess wide-area distributed target damages ldquoinflicted by nuclear weaponsrsquo EMP effectsrdquo The project aims to lower the burst height of nuclear weapons EMP by two-thirds from the existing boundary of 100 km altitude to 30 km and to revamp the capability to compute air and ground bursts EMP fields as well as shallow buried bursts The project will also investigate alternatives to potential design modification and weapon delivery with the aim to ldquolimit or minimize collateral damagerdquo from the use of nuclear weapons Models for using EMP to knock out blast and shock-hardened buried targets will be developed in order to ldquodevise a new tool for PC-based weapon lethality prediction and target damage assessment [hellipfor use by] USSTRATCOM and other regional commandshellip for their specific missions applications rdquo112

And the mission is current- strike plans prove

Kristensen 9 Hans M Reply to Response to ldquoPentagon Misses Warhead Retirement Deadlinerdquo October 13 2009 httpwwwfasorgblogssp200910w62php

In theory yes and EMP or High-Altitude EMP (HEMP) has been part of US and Russian nuclear strike planning for decades Some also believe China might also use it in a war But in recent years some people have warned about scenarios ranging from DPRK Iran or terrorist organizations using EMP against the United States or its allies to disrupt critical electronic infrastructure An EMP Commission has even been established by Congress in 2001

We reduce size

Lewallen 2k John- Public Ocean Access Network ldquoThe Blackout Bombrdquo North Coast Express Spring 2000 httpsonicnet~doretkIssues00-03-SPRtheblackhtml

Any future global war is likely to begin with a few Blackout Bombs China Russia the U nited S tates and other nuclear powers have several nuclear missiles and perhaps weaponized satellites designed to lay down EMP over continent-size areas instantaneously While every nation on Earth is vulnerable to attack from the United States the United States is vulnerable indeed defenseless to a secret class of nuclear weapons which has captured the attention of the major nuclear powers--China Russia Britain France and the United States itself--for the past thirty-eight years

18

Cornell HKHANE Aff

General Topicality 22

Plan reduces roles

Buchan et al 3 Glenn C David Matonick Calvin Shipbaugh Richard Mesic ldquoFuture Roles Of US Nuclear Forces Implications For US Strategyrdquo RAND sponsored by the United States Air Force

In addressing the role nuclear weapons might play in contemporary US national security policy the first step is a ldquoback to basicsrdquo review of nuclear weapons mdashwhat they do what makes them unique and how they have served US security interests in the past WHAT NUCLEAR WEAPONS DO The most fundamental characteristic of nuclear weapons is their almost unlimited destructive power That destructiveness manifests itself in two ways First is the potentially apocalyptic effects of a large-scale war fought with nuclear weapons That obviously has been the driving force behind movements to reduce or eliminate nuclear weapons since the dawn of the nuclear age Second is the enormous destructive power that can be put into a small package which can then be delivered by any one of a number of means A single nuclear detonation can destroy virtually any individual target or lay waste to large areas (eg destroy a city) That characteristic changed the nature of war dramatically It appeared to make defense in the traditional sense virtually impossible because of the damage that even a single nuclear weapon that leaked through defenses could cause Also when coupled with long-range delivery systems (particularly long-range bombers and ballistic missiles) nuclear weapons allowed those possessing them to destroy an enemyrsquos homeland without necessarily having to defeat its military forces first Thus nuclear weapons if used effectively could prevent an enemyrsquos military from achieving the most fundamental objective of any military establishment protecting its homeland That changed the traditional concepts of warEven in strictly military terms nuclear weapons are simply more effective than other weapons in destroying targets Table 21 shows some classes of targets against which nuclear weapons are particularly effective As experience with the weapons grew so did the range of potential applications Some took advantage of special effects of nuclear weapons other than just heat and blast Electromagnetic pulse (EMP) and radar and communications blackout are examples These characteristics of nuclear weapons offered attractive strategic advantages to those who owned them bull Coercion of enemies by threat or use of nuclear weapons (eg the US nuclear attacks on Japan to coerce Japan to surrender unconditionally and end World War II)bull Deterrence of a range of actions by threat of nuclear use bull A means of offsetting an imbalance of conventional forces (eg the US rationale for its nuclear posture in Europe the original motivation for the Swedish nuclear weapons program which never came to fruition)

19

Cornell HKHANE Aff

General Topicality 1AR 12

Extend that we reduce the missions of the nuclear weapons arsenal Kristensen indicates STRATCOM has specific missions employing EMPs Additionally Dunn indicates that high-altitude nuclear explosions have been in our strike plans since the early stages of the Cold War

Additionally war games prove we have EMP missions in early stages of nuclear warfare

Berry 8 Ken Research Coordinator ICNND ldquoNew Weapons Technologyrdquo International Commission on Nuclear Non-proliferation and Disarmament

An aggressor state deploying such weapons could destroy the vast majority of a target countryrsquos electronics including computers cars phones and the power grid All nuclear armed states have the capacity to achieve this and it has been estimated that as little as three high altitude nuclear explosions could blanket an area the size of continental US40 Western Europe Australia or Brazil Open source material has indicated that the US China France and Russia have all used the tactic of an EMP as a surprise first strike in war games 41 Chinese military writings have described scenarios where EMPmdashpresumably non-nuclearmdashis used against US aircraft carriers in a conflict over Taiwan42 A survey of worldwide military and scientific literature found widespread knowledge about EMP and its potential military utility in countries including Taiwan Israel Egypt India Pakistan Iran and North Korea Moreover some terrorist organizations have apparently sought information relating to EMP produced by nuclear weapons as well as on the technology of directed energy weapons These are small non-nuclear weapons that produce an EMP-like effect but over a very much more restricted area43

Extend that we reduce size- Lewallen says we have nuclear missiles designed for HANEs

And missiles are part of the nuclear weapons arsenal

Los Alamos National Laboratory 9 httpwwwlanlgovnatlsecuritynuclearstockpile Accessed 08-05-09The stockpile also called the nuclear arsenal refers to a countrys supply of readily available nuclear weapons The term nuclear weapons refers to the explosive warheads and the bombs and missiles that can deliver them to enemy targets

Extend that we reduce roles Buchan says that EMP attacks perform vital roles of the nuclear arsenal because of their unique effect including coercion deterrence and asymmetric warfare

Here is evidence that high altitude EMP strikes are key tools in asymmetric warfare

Weston 9 Maj Scott A USAF ldquoExamining Space Warfare Scenarios Risks and US Policy Implicationsrdquo Air amp Space Power Journal - Spring 2009

The United States has just one counterspace weaponmdashan electronic counter communication system specifically designed and fielded with the intent of disrupting enemy satellite communications23 Recently however we successfully utilized the Standard Missile 3 in a dual-use role as a kinetic ASAT weapon24 Although the political repercussions from creating additional space debris will likely prohibit further tests the missile and supporting systems are already fielded in an antiballistic missile (ABM) role therefore we consider it an ASAT system that we could field in the near term The U nited S tates can also conduct asymmetric space attacks (eg an EMP produced by exploding a US nuclear-tipped ballistic missile in space ) Since the United States possesses nearly half of all orbiting satellites such an indiscriminate attack would do more harm to US interests than to those of the enemy But what about our opponentsrsquo capability Does a space weapon ldquogaprdquo exist

20

Cornell HKHANE Aff

General Topicality 1AR 22

Lean aff on topicality the information is highly classified making it impossible for us to definitively prove US nuclear EMP posture

Ruppe 4 David ldquoPlausibility of EMP Threat Classified Expert Saysrdquo Global Security Newswire September 24 2004

When asked following his presentation whether US scientists have developed and tested a kilotons-scale weapon to demonstrate its EMP capability Wood said he could not comment The commission conducted assessments of what the United States and others know about such weapons and questions about such matters were addressed in a classified session with members of Congress following a public presentation of the commissionrsquos report he said ldquoWe presented in open session then we went up and spent another few more hours and presented in closed session where they asked and were given answersrdquo to such questions he said ldquoBut they are members and it was a tightly closed environment a doom roomrdquo he said ldquoIrsquod be willing to take the chance to inform the American people about what the situation is but Irsquom forbidden by law to do sordquo

EMP strikes play a prominent mission in the 2001 NPRrsquos tailored deterrence

Stearns-Boles 7 Sherry L- Air Force Space Command (AFSPC) Chair to Air University (AU) ldquoThe Future Role And Need For Nuclear Weapons In The 21st Centuryrdquo US Air Force 2007

The first official reference to tailored deterrence occurred in the 2001 NPR Spring and Gudgel assessed the tailored deterrence doctrine for nuclear weapons in accordance with the latest NPR [a prescription for] a flexible nuclear weapons policy This is necessary in todaylsquos environment of multiple players with different strengths which has replaced the two-player model of the Cold War [N]ew military requirements should be developed to address this changed environment and to ensure a modern strategic force that is capable of dealing with different missions- Leadership and command and control targets which operate from heavily fortified underground locations- Hostile nuclear coalitions which may include rogue states failed or failing states and powerful terrorist groups based in sanctuary states- New nuclear-armed allies which may or may not have confidence in the United Stateslsquo deterrent ability and- Electromagnetic pulse (EMP) weapons an effective deterrent that adversaries may not be able to wield 129

The New Triad includes EMP strikes

Guthe 2 Kurt- Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments ldquoThe Nuclear Posture Review How Is the ldquoNew Triadrdquo Newrdquo 2002

Differences in the damage mechanisms of New Triad strike capabilities should promote effects based targeting Effects-based targeting is intended not simply to destroy targets but to do so in a way that produces broader military political economic and social effects that further operational and strategic objectives106 The damage mechanisms for nuclear weapons include blast thermal radiation nuclear radiation and electromagnetic phenomena (electromagnetic pulse for example ) Those for nonnuclear munitions are blast fragmentation penetration and fire Damage mechanisms for offensive information operations include software tools (such as malicious code) that manipulate or destroy computer networks within military economic or telecommunications infrastructures and directed energy from high-power microwave weapons that can knock out military or commercial electronic systems Because their damage mechanisms have disparate direct (or first-order) physical effects on targets nuclear weapons nonnuclear munitions and information operations must be compared and traded off in terms of their capabilities for achieving indirect (or higher-order) effects that impair the ability or weaken the will of the enemy to fight The problem is not one of calculating how many more high-explosive weapons are needed in lieu of a single nuclear weapon to produce sufficient blast to destroy a given target Instead the problems will lie in acquiring more detailed intelligence and better understanding of critical vulnerabilities in targets and target systems predicting the effects when different strike capabilities are applied against these vulnerabilities assessing actual effects under wartime conditions (the consequences of offensive information operations may be especially hard to ascertain)

determining the linkages among effects outcomes and objectives and deciding how best to employ the various means of attack

21

Cornell HKHANE Aff

More Topicality

Kristensen 97 Hans M- Director of the Nuclear Information Project at the Federation of American Scientists ldquoTargets of Opportunityrdquo Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists SeptemberOctober 1997

The Defense Special Weapons Agencys 1997 projects include adjusting electromagnetic pulse (EMP) data for nuclear weapons to allow war planners to assess the damage that would be inflicted by nuclear weapons EMP effects The project will also investigate possible design modification and delivery methods that could ldquolimit or minimize collateral damagerdquo Models for using EMP to knock out hardened targets will be developed to devise a new tool for PC-based weapon lethality prediction and target damage assessmentsrdquo28

Dunn 6 JR- editor of the International Military Encyclopedia ldquoThe EMP Threat ElectroMagnetic Pulse Warfarerdquo American Thinker April 21 2006

EMP was discovered as a byproduct of the Starfish Prime nuclear test on July 9 1962 A 15 megaton bomb set off 240 miles over the Central Pacific blew up street lights and TV sets in Hawaii 1000 miles away created a mock aurora visible even further and destroyed a number of orbiting satellites including the Telstar I the pioneering telecommunications satellite In short order nuclear attack plans were modified to commence with an EMP strike over enemy territory Military electronics underwent a hardening process with the development of chips and other components resistant to EMP Today even military jets and missiles are constructed to withstand the effect (The same processes would work for civilian application as well but in most cases would be prohibitively expensive)

The US is continuing to develop nuclear EMP weapons

Merkle 97 Major Scott W- Air Command and General Staff College Maxwell Air Force Base ldquoNon-Nuclear EMP Automating the Military May Prove a Real Threatrdquo Military Intelligence Professional Bulletin

So to this extent the plot of Goldeneye is plausible Any of several nations with nuclear weapons and the capacity to launch them into space including the United States Russia China and even Israel could conceivably pulse us back to shall we say a simpler time when operations orders were done orally with a sandtable instead of with the high-speed graphics and charts that turn into an encyclopedia that few people care to read Even more unsettling however is the fact that the US Defense Technology Plan confirms that development of advanced EMP weapons continues to this day and not just by the Americans According to a report drafted by conservative members of the French National Assembly in 1992 EMP weapons testing was a recommended goal during Frances 1995 underground nuclear tests6

22

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Future Wars Conflicts Likely

There probability of great power nuclear war in the next 50 years is 40 percent (1 - 9950)

Hellman 8 Dr Martin- Stanford Professor of Engineering 2008 ldquoRisk Analysis of Nuclear Deterrencerdquo httpwwwnuclearriskorgpaperpdf

Since conditional probabilities were used they can be multiplied yielding an estimated range of (2E-4 5E-3) for lCMTC the failure rate of deterrence based on just this one failure mechanism The upper limit 5E-3 is within a factor of two of my estimate that the failure rate of deterrence from all sources is on the order of one percent per year and even the lower limit is well above the level that any engineering design review would find acceptable Because this estimate is based on a simplified time invariant model it does not apply to the current point in time when relations between the US and Russia are significantly better than they were on average during the last 50 years However that does not invalidate its conclusions Russian-American relations are deteriorating and new trigger mechanisms are coming into playmdashnotably nuclear proliferation terrorism and the expansion of NATO right up to the Russian bordermdashmaking it possible that the next 50 years could be even more dangerous than the last Furthermore atypical times have a disproportionate effect on risk A significant fraction of the total risk during the last 50 years occurred during the 13 days of the Cuban missile crisismdasha period that constituted just 007 of that time period Because crises produce so much of the overall risk it is important to look beyond todayrsquos relatively benign world and also consider the rare disruptive times when events

The past conflicts our Hellman analysis investigates arose for a variety of reasons They cannot access solvency for all possible scenarios of conflict

Hellman 8 Dr Martin- Stanford Professor of Engineering 2008 ldquoRisk Analysis of Nuclear Deterrencerdquo httpwwwnuclearriskorgpaperpdf

As noted above there have been at least three possible initiating events in the first 50 years of nuclear deterrence the Cuban missiles in 1962 President Reaganrsquos threat to reimpose a naval blockade of Cuba in the 1980s and the current deployment of an American missile defense system in Eastern Europe Taking the average rate of occurrence of these possible initiating events three in 50 years results in an estimate lIE = 006 A higher estimate would result if other crises were included as possible initiating events Examples include the Berlin crisis of 1961 the Six-Day War of 1967 and the Yom Kippur War of 1973 all of which involved at least implied nuclear threats To temper the possibility of this article being seen as alarmist it only considers the first three possible initiating events and therefore uses lIE = 006

23

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Future Wars Ext

Unfortunately future great power wars will be initiated with EMP strikes

Lewallen 2k John- Public Ocean Access Network ldquoThe Blackout Bombrdquo North Coast Express Spring 2000 httpsonicnet~doretkIssues00-03-SPRtheblackhtml

Any future global war is likely to begin with a few Blackout Bombs China Russia the United States and other nuclear powers have several nuclear missiles and perhaps weaponized satellites designed to lay down EMP over continent-size areas instantaneously While every nation on Earth is vulnerable to attack from the United States the United States is vulnerable indeed defenseless to a secret class of nuclear weapons which has captured the attention of the major nuclear powers--China Russia Britain France and the United States itself--for the past thirty-eight years

EMP-gtwar

Lewallen 2 John- Political Science at Whitman University organizer of the Nuclear Peace Action Group Fulbright Scholarship recipient Public Ocean Access Network ldquoHigh-Altitude Nuclear Warrdquo Nuclear Press Pg43

If it comes the next global war almost certainly will begin with high-altitude nuclear EMP Anything done or refrained from to reduce international conflict and promote international cooperation will help humanity avoid the awesome setback of global war The nation-state system itself is perhaps the most dangerous factor auguring high-altitude nuclear war It is perhaps amazing that we humans have gone the past fifty-five years without anyone blowing up a nuclear bomb How much longer can we tickle the dragonrsquos tail before the fundamental flaw of competing armies with nuclear weapons finishes us off The United States fond of calling itself the worldrsquos only superpower has the same tendency as past military empires (although not a self-acknowledged empire) a strong and perhaps inevitable drive to move from world preeminence to world domination The US military-industrial complex is set up to endlessly conceive design produce and deploy new strategic weaponry

24

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT Limited War Winter

a) Quinlin indicates that nuclear war would deescalate after the first detonation War wouldnrsquot escalate to even 100 nukes

b) Nuclear testing disproves their theory

Sublette 1 Carey ldquoGallery of US Nuclear Testsrdquo 6 August 2001 httpnuclearweaponarchiveorgUsaTestsBetween 16 July 1945 and 23 September 1992 the United States of America conducted (by official count) 1054 nuclear tests and two nuclear attacks The number of actual nuclear devices (aka bombs) tested and nuclear explosions is larger than this but harder to establish precisely Some devices that were tested failed to produce any noticeable explosion (some by design some not) other tests (by official definition) were actually multiple device detonations It is not clear whether all multiple device tests have yet been identified and enumerated

c) Their study assumes countervalue targeting which is important because only cities are ignited into firestorms Great powers use counterforce targeting which targets silos in the middle of the desert or Siberia

Madrigal 9 Alexis ldquolsquoRegionalrsquo Nuclear War Would Cause Worldwide Destructionrdquo WIRED Science April 7Millsrsquo work which appears online today in the Proceedings of the National Academies of Science used a model from National Center for Atmospheric Research to look at the impact of throwing 5 million metric tons of black carbon or soot into the atmosphere He found that when a cluster of cities are burning together they end up creating their own weather pumping soot 20000 feet into the atmosphere Once there sunlight would heat the smoke and drive it up 260000 feet above the earthrsquos surface

d) Robock admits limited nuclear war would not cause winter Our Helfand evidence indicates 1000 nukes are needed to cause winter

Harrell 9 Eben ldquoRegional Nuclear War and the Environmentrdquo TIME Jan 22 2009Alan Robock a Professor in the Department of Environmental Sciences at Rutgers University who participated in the original nuclear winter research recently completed a study on the results of a nuclear war between India and Pakistan He spoke with TIME from his office in New Brunswick New Jersey CONTINUED Your study predicts mass cooling With all the heat and radioactivity of the explosions why wouldnt nuclear war warm the planet It has nothing to do with the radioactivity of the explosions mdash although that would be devastating to nearby populations The explosions would set off massive fires which would produce plumes of black smoke The sun would heat the smoke and lift it into the stratosphere mdash thats the layer above the troposphere where we live mdash where there is no rain to clear it out It would be blown across the globe and block the sun The effect would not be a nuclear winter but it would be colder than the little ice age [in the 17th and 18th centuries] and the change would happen very rapidly mdash over the course of a few weeks

25

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Accidents- LoW Bad

Hair trigger alert creates a high risk of extinction

Blair 8 Bruce G- president of the Center for Defense Information and World Security Institute former senior fellow in foreign policy for the Brookings Institution and former Minuteman officer ldquoDe-alerting Strategic Forcesrdquo Reykjavik Revisited Steps Toward a World Free of Nuclear Weapons published by the Hoover Institute httpmediahooverorgdocuments9780817949211_ch2pdf

There are a host of reasons why removing forces from launch ready alert and abandoning archaic nuclear war-fighting strategies are urgent priorities Beyond the familiar arguments about the danger of accidental nuclear attack triggered by false alarms and unauthorized launches by unreliable personnel lurk shadowy new threats stemming from terrorist scenarios and growing cybernetic threats to the nuclear command and warning systems In an era of terrorism and information warfare staking the survival of humanity on the assumption that imperfect human and technical systems of nuclear command and control will forever prevent a disastrous breakdown of safeguards against mistaken or unauthorized use of nuclear weapons is simply imprudent in the extreme An in-depth discussion of the potential exploitable weaknesses in nuclear command systems is beyond the scope of this analysis but a few general observations are pertinent First many of the deficiencies are unknown some will never be found and others will not be discovered until it is too late The complexity of command systems prevents a full reckoning of the risks run by hair-trigger postures Periodic investigations routinely discover glaring weaknesses however For instance a Pentagon investigation conducted by an independent commission in the 1990s at the behest of then Sen Sam Nunn to evaluate the effectiveness of US nuclear safeguards against unauthorized launch found dozens of major deficiencies14 This commission recommended a multitude of remedies including installing a special new safeguard on Trident subsmdashthe inner safe described earliermdashto create a technical barrier to unauthorized launch Second many of the deficiencies that are identified and addressed turn out not to have been corrected The introduction of ldquoenable coderdquo devices into Minuteman launch centers in the 1960s is a case in point In theory the devices required launch crews to receive an eight-digit code from higher authority in order to arm their missilesrsquo warheads prior to launch In practice the Strategic Air Command unbeknownst to higher authority (such as former Defense Secretary Robert McNamara who initiated and pressed for this safeguard) configured the devices so that they were always set to all zerosmdashthat was the secret password known to all launch crews This circumvention persisted until 1976 when actual codes were finally introduced In the interim the posture ran a higher risk of unauthorized launch by crew members or others who might have gained access to the launch centers including terrorists15 Third the nuclear command systems today operate in an intense information battleground on which more than 20 nations including Russia China and North Korea have developed dedicated computer attack programs16 These programs deploy viruses to disable confuse and delay nuclear command and warning processes in other nations The US Strategic Command is no exception Information warfare is now one of its core missions At the brink of conflict nuclear command and warning networks around the world may be besieged by electronic intruders whose onslaught degrades the coherence and rationality of nuclear decision making The potential for perverse consequences with computer-launched weapons on hair-trigger is clear Other information warfare programs are designed to infiltrate and collect information on for example the schedule of the movement of nuclear warheads during peacetime Hacking operations of these sorts are increasing exponentially as the militaries of the world increasingly depend on computer and communications networks The number of attempts by outside hostile actors to break into Defense Department networks has surged by tenfold in the past couple of years Hostile intrusion attempts against Pentagon computer systems now run in the neighborhood of 1000 per day (China is especially active) What is worse some of this expanding illicit penetration involves insiders creating a whole new dimension to the ldquoinsiderrdquo threat to nuclear systems If insiders with knowledge of special passwords or other sensitive information related to nuclear weapons activities collude with outsiders the integrity of nuclear command and control systems and safeguards against the unauthorized launch of nuclear weapons on launch-trigger alert may well be compromised The guiding principle of nuclear safeguards during the past 50 yearsmdashthe twoman rulemdashmay be obsolete in the age of information warfare The notion that having a second person present during any sensitive nuclear operation would prevent an accidental or intentional nuclear incident may have been sound during the labor-intensive and analog dominated era of nuclear command and control but in the modern age of information warfare new safeguards may be needed to prevent the electronic compromise of missiles on hair-trigger alert Adding terrorists to this equation gives further reason to believe that the Cold War nuclear postures are counterproductivemdashthey exacerbate rather than alleviate nuclear problems and they are an accident waiting to happen There is a possibility that terrorists could spoof early warning sensors and thereby engender false alarms that precipitate nuclear overreactions The possibility also exists that terrorists possibly with insider help may get inside the command and communications networks controlling nuclear forces They might gain information useful to interdicting and capturing weapons or unauthorized actors might discover ways to inject messages into the circuits 17 Again the wisdom of keeping nuclear forces ready to fly instantaneously upon receipt of a short stream of computer signals is dubious

26

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT FS Remains - Russia

Without EMP hundreds of strategic weapons would have to be armed- Russia would notice and disperse

Yarynich amp Starr 7 Valery- Professor of the Academy for Military Sciences and Steven- Engineers and Scientists Against Proliferation ldquoNuclear Primacy is a Fallacyrdquo Global Research March 4 2007

Third in order to conduct a first strike it is necessary to implement a number of organizational and technical procedures within the strategic nuclear forces This is because in peacetime there are numerous procedural and technological blocks in place which are designed to protect nuclear weapons against human error accidents and sabotage In order to remove such barriers as a preliminary step towards launching a nuclear first strike it would require the participation of a significant number of crews on duty working at different operational levels The implementation of all the above mentioned circumstances as preparations for a ldquosurpriserdquo first strike would be technically impossible to hide Therefore the opposite side would have a certain amount of time to raise the combat readiness of its strategic nuclear forces If Russia did that then as Lieber and Press recognize themselves nuclear retaliation is inevitable

Mobile missiles make first strike impossible without EMPs

Podvig 6 Pavel- Research Associate at the Center for International Security and Cooperation at Stanford University ldquoNuclear Exchange Does Washington Really Have (or Want) Nuclear Primacyrdquo Foreign Affairs SeptemberOctober 2006

Lieber and Press are right to state that Russia may end up having as few as 150 land-based missiles by the end of the decade But about half of those ICBMs would probably be road-mobile Topols and Topol-Ms which if operated properly would have a good chance of surviving a first strike Lieber and Press dismiss Russias mobile missiles by saying that they rarely patrol In reality very little is known about Russias mobile-missile patrol rates and although it is quite plausible that they are low it is a stretch to assume that they are zero

EMP first strike capability is uniquely dangerous because it requires only a few warheads making the threshold for responding to false warnings much lower

Non EMP first strike requires thousands of warheads which will show up on EWS

Yarynich amp Starr 7 Valery- Professor of the Academy for Military Sciences and Steven- Engineers and Scientists Against Proliferation ldquoNuclear Primacy is a Fallacyrdquo Global Research March 4 2007

Lieber and Press also assume that the Russian Early Warning System will be completely unable to reveal a massed American attack capable of destroying all Russian nuclear forces ldquoA critical issue for the outcome of a US attack [they say] is the ability of Russia to launch on warning (ie quickly launch a retaliatory strike before its forces are destroyed) It is unlikely that Russia could do thisrdquo We believe this important conclusion demands more serious calculations than the mere statement that ldquoit is unlikelyrdquo Its necessary to prove that the Russian EWS will be completely incapable of revealing such massed American attack which is capable of destroying all Russian nuclear forces

27

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT FS Remains - China

Lack of perfect Intel makes a first strike on China impossible post plan

Aby 7 The Liberal 7142007 non-profit internationalist site committed to the dissipiation of information pertaining toworld politics social issues cultures travel tips local customs et el ldquoChinarsquos MAD Nuclear Deterrence Against USArdquo lthttpwwwabytheliberalcomworld-politicschinas-mad-nuclear-deterrance-usagt

Chinarsquos nuclear force is based on a lsquoNo First Uselsquo policy formulated by its erstwhile President Mao Zedong This makes sense as China could not launch a first strike against US without facing obliteration in a strike-back by US The small quantity of nuclear warheads and strategic missiles that China possesses would make a Chinese attack on US nuclear facilities futile as China has neither the accuracy of missiles nor the number of warheads required to destroy the all the US facilities On the other hand United States with its improvised and highly accurate strategic missiles (Trident and Minuteman) could strike and destroy over 75 of Chinarsquos nuclear facilities with just about 2-4 of its nuclear and missile arsenal spent But even in the event of a war a successful destruction of 75-80 of Chinarsquos nuclear facilities leaves at least 20-25 surviving which can be used as a retaliatory attack against the United States A 100 destruction of Chinarsquos nuclear facilities would be highly unlikely considering the logistical impossibility of targeting and destroying all of Chinarsquos mobile and SILO launched nuclear ICBMs Since China canrsquot destroy US nuclear facilities as a retaliatory resort it would strike what hurts USA most - its people This is primarily the reason why US cities have been targets of Chinese ICBMs for the last few decades A DF 5A (Dong Feng) missile launched from hardened or mobile SILOs in Chinarsquos Hunan province will have most of West and Central US in its reach A 12000 km DF 5 Mod 2 goes even further including east coast cities like New York and Atlanta in its range if a polar trajectory is followed A DF 5A ICBM can carry a 35 MT (Megaton) thermonuclear warhead The 35 MT warhead detonated at a height of 2500 meters would have a blast radius of 7 km exposing 154 km2 of the ground surface to a blast overpressure of 10 psi or higher In addition to the immediate energy shockwaves of the blast such a high yield H-Bomb would also cause widespread radiation fallouts and heated firestorms due to the rapid changes in the atmospheric pressure which follow such an explosion If a single such warhead is detonated over a busy megapolis like New York Chicago or Los Angeles at least 15 million people would be eliminated immediately during the explosion and a further million within another 72 hours due to radiation burns sickness and firestorms If only 5 of the DF 5As are launched against 5 US cities and 4 of them successfully strike the US mainland more than 10 million people would face extermination According to US DoD Reports to the Congress in 2006 a DF5A Mod2 can be MIRVed with 6 warheads of 250 KT each In such a case if each warhead detonates 1500 metres above the ground the total blast radius (10 psi) of all the six warheads would exceed 21 kms bringing over 1386 km2 under coverage The fatalities from a single such strike on a city like New York or Chicago would exceed 5 million at the bare minimum In such a scenario if 4 of these missiles with 24 warheads strike 4-10 US cities with an accuracy of 83 at least 14 million people would be annihilated in these cities This still leaves out the DF 31A ICBMs and JL-1 SLBMs which could strike US targets and further the damage From both the cases it can be understood than even a retaliatory second strike by China can inflict severe devastation on the continental US These are just bare conservative estimates reality could be much more deadly and devastating with 40-100 million casualties Chinese military strategists can easily do this calculation themselves and as such it becomes apparent why China is so sure that its relatively small number of ICBMs act as an adequate deterrent against the United States or even India and Russia for that matter The threat of even a few surviving nuclear missiles hitting the United States serves as a robust deterrent for the United States China would not consider a first strike either as it would face total annihilation due to the massive US nuclear and missile stockpile Thus the MAD balance is maintained between these two countries one wary of the other despite their significant disparity in nuclear weapons stockpile and delivery systems

28

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT FS Remains - Subs

China has subs

Stephen Herzog British American Security Information Council August 2008 ldquoThe Dilemma between Deterrence and Disarmament Moving beyond the Perception of China as a Nuclear Threatrdquo Basic Papers lthttpwwwbasicintorgpubsPapersBP57pdfgt

The Jin-class is Beijingrsquos replacement for the defunct Type 092-class (NATO designation Xiaclass) SSBN The Xia-class was Chinarsquos first nuclear-powered ballistic missile-capable submarine and was a resounding failure The PRC only produced two of these SSBNs and they did not conduct patrols outside of Chinese territorial waters27 The Jin-class is silentmdashdue to its nuclear power sourcemdashand is virtually invulnerable to a potential first-strike it ensures that the PRC has a sea-based deterrent to complement its land-based strategic nuclear forces Since China finds itself in a position of significant numerical warhead inferiority to the United Statesmdash possibly facing a first-strike in the event of a confrontationmdashthe Jin-class SSBN could give the Sino leadership confidence in their second-strike capability If this is the case rather than being viewed as a threat Chinese deployment of SSBNs could be seen as a confidence-building stabilizing factor in Chinarsquos relationship with the West While the PRC is known to have three commissioned Jin-class SSBNs the United States United Kingdom and France have a total of 22 SSBNs many of which are armed with MIRV-equipped SLBMs28

Russia has them too

NTI 9ldquoRussia Restores Nuclear-Armed Submarine Patrolsrdquo Global Security Wednesday Feb 18 2009Russia might be maintaining continuous nuclear-armed submarine patrols for the first time in 10 years the Federation of American Scientists announced yesterday (see GSN Feb 13) The number of patrols by ballistic missile submarines declined steadily after reaching a high of more than 100 in 1984 and dropped more steeply after the collapse of the Soviet Union In 2002 there were zero Russian missile submarine patrols Russia last year however conducted 10 patrols the most since 1998 That raises the possibility that Russia is always keeping at least one boat at sea for nuclear deterrence said FAS nuclear expert Hans Kristensen

EMPs threaten sub survivability

Graham 4 Dr William R- Deputy Administrator of NASA The report of the Commission to Assess the Threat to the United States From Electromagnetic Pulse Attackrdquo July 22 2004

Mr Langevin Have you assessed the threat of EMP to our surface fleet and submarines Do submarines have a greater likelihood of retaining operational capabilities if they are underwater during an EMP strike Dr Graham The EMP Commission did consider the threat of EMP to surface vessels and submarines Ballistic Missile Submarines are designed and built to survive an EMP attack Care is taken when the ship is modified or equipment added or upgraded to insure that survivability is maintained Particular attention is paid to the potential vulnerability introduced when the ship is at periscope depth or trailing a wire antenna Submarines do have a greater likelihood of retaining operational capabilities if they are underwater during an EMP attack and not trailing an antenna which can couple energy into the submerged vessel However if land-based communications are impacted the ship may survive but not be capable of receiving orders and therefore accomplishing its mission because the sender cant send The survivability of the surface fleet is uncertain without testing and a submarine in port is a surface ship

29

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Rogue- Seeking

Rogue states are seeking EMP capability

McNeill amp Weitz 8 Jena Baker- homeland security policy analyst at The Heritage Foundation and Richard- Senior Fellow and Director of the Center for Political-Military Analysis at Hudson Institute ldquoElectromagnetic Pulse (EMP) Attack A Preventable Homeland Security Catastropherdquo Heritage Foundation Backgrounder 2199 httpwwwheritageorgresearchhomelandsecuritybg2199cfm_ftn19

The range of actors that might attempt an EMP attack against the United States is obviouslymdashand distressinglymdashlarge and includes conventional military regimes rogue states with limited conventional military capabilities and terrorist groups that seek to inflict catastrophic damage on America Both Russia and China have dabbled in EMP technology for decades There is evidence that suggests that certain Russian nuclear weapons have already been optimized to generate enhanced EMP effects[16] Just this year Russian scientists claimed to have developed a compact apparatus that can fit on a dining table The electromagnetic pulse associated with this device could amount to billions of watts of power in a single platform[17] Analysts have also identified Chinese military writings that discuss using EMP weapons in international conflicts[18] For countries less dependent on modern technologies and electronics including both rogue states like Iran and North Korea as well as stateless terrorist groups EMP provides a potential way to attack the United States through asymmetric means EMPs could be used to circumvent Americas superior conventional military power while reducing vulnerability to retaliation in kind It would certainly not be impossible for a terrorist organization especially if state-sponsored to acquire or construct an unsophisticated ballistic missile (non-working Scuds are reportedly available on the open market for $100000) and use it in an EMP attack against America[19] Such a missile could be launched from a freighter in international waters and detonated in the atmosphere over the United States without warning

30

Cornell HKHANE Aff

China Solves NoKo

China can solve North Korea ndash the alternative is US Strikes which escalate to War ndash US action to influence China is key

Doug Bandow 2009 is a senior fellow at the Cato Institute A former special assistant to President Reagan he is the author of Tripwire Korea and US Foreign Policy in a Changed World (Cato Institute) and co-author of The Korean Conundrum Americas Troubled Relations with North and South Korea (PalgraveMacmillan) July 2 2009 (Real Clear World Time to Play China Card on North Korea)

North Korea appears to have moved from intermittent to constant provocation The only nation with real influence in Pyongyang is China South Koreas President Lee Myung-bak visited Washington two weeks ago but a solution is no closer American diplomacy should focus on encouraging Beijing to do its utmost to solve the problem of the Norths criminal regime The challenge posed by the so-called Democratic Peoples Republic of Korea (DPRK) is obvious to all Probably the most murderous government on earth Kim Jong-ils regime has presided over the death by famine of at least a half million people His regimes brutality is both tragic and legendary While impoverishing his people he has maintained an oversize military including an active nuclear-weapons program And he has created a unique marriage of communism and monarchy apparently designating his youngest son now called the brilliant comrade to be his successor just as he succeeded his father Kim Il-sung Although evil he is not suicidal Kim Jong-il enjoys his virgins in this life rather than desiring them in the next one Nevertheless eliminating his regime would be an obvious humanitarian and security plus Bottom of Form Unfortunately no easy solution presents itself Kims latest confrontational tactics do not prevent a negotiated settlement-US special envoy Stephen Bosworth has emphasized the administrations desire to engage Pyongyang-but the likelihood of diplomacy resulting in a demilitarized peninsula grows ever smaller Even if the DPRK proves willing to halt any new nuclear activities it is very unlikely to turn over existing nuclear materials And while Washington should continue to pursue both bilateral and multilateral negotiations the process may yield little other than frustration Tighter sanctions also offer but a forlorn hope Amid reports that the North is planning a new nuclear test the UN Security Council voted to tighten sanctions Americas UN ambassador Susan Rice said the measure provided a strong very credible very appropriate response But it in fact offered little in the way of increased enforcement North Korea already is the worlds most isolated state Moreover the regime has never let the suffering of its people affect its policies A government which allowed a half million people to starve is not likely to be moved by increased hardship for those who remain alive So is a North Korean nuclear arsenal inevitable Maybe not Only Beijing has the clout necessary to influence the DPRK The former provides the bulk of the Norths food fuel and consumer goods trade between the two nations has been rising Severing that lifeline could bring the North Korean economy to a standstill However so far the Peoples Republic of China (PRC) has demurred Indeed before passage of the latest Security Council resolution the PRC called for an appropriate and balanced measure and emphasized calmness and restraint Even now Chinas government appears to fear a North Korean collapse more than a North Korean nuclear weapon The last option is war-either a limited strike on Pyongyangs atomic bases or a more general attack Washington obviously could destroy nuclear facilities above ground and perhaps underground Whether doing so would permanently block the Norths nuclear efforts and eliminate its existing atomic capabilities are less clear Moreover an attack probably would result in war The Kim regime likely would see a strike as the first step in an attempt at coercive regime change Moreover to do nothing would wreck its credibility at home and stature abroad While it is not likely to foolishly start a losing war the DPRK government isnt likely to passively accept a conflict begun by the United States Although the North would lose any conflict it could cause massive damage to the South whose capital Seoul lies close to the Demilitarized Zone and thus within range of both artillery and Scud missiles Other possible consequences include the dispersion of nuclear debris and creation of mass refugee flows So is a North Korean nuclear arsenal inevitable Maybe not The China card has yet to be played Cynicism about Beijings role in the North Korean crisis abounds Some analysts believe that the PRC can do little to move Pyongyang which has steered an independent course for decades Others accuse China of consciously orchestrating the Norths destabilizing course And the mainstream view is that the PRC is unwilling to risk its relationship with Pyongyang or accept the costs of the regimes potential collapse Indeed Beijing has treated North Korean refugees who face prison and even death when repatriated with unconscionable brutality However Washington might be able to change Chinas calculus Its certainly worth attempting to do so The PRC could cut off aid and commerce Beijing also might be able to undertake covert action to transform the North Korean system

31

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Rogue Satelites

Rogue EMP collapses satellite communications

Haimes 9 Yacov Y- Lawrence Quarles Professor of Engineering and Applied Science Director of the Center for Risk Management of Engineering Systems University of Virginia ldquoRisk Modeling Assessment and Managementrdquo Edition 3 - 2009 p780

The vulnerability of satellites to a high-altitude nuclear detonation and the resulting electromagnetic pulse has been widely documented For example a report by the Defense Threat Reduction Agency [DTRA 2001] states LEO [low earth orbit] satellites will be of growing importance to government commercial and military users in coming years Proliferation of nuclear weapons and longer-range ballistic missile capabilities is likely to continue One low-yield (1 th-12 kt) high-altitude (125-300 km) nuclear explosion could disablemdashin weeks to monthsmdashall LEO satellites not specifically hardened to withstand radiation generated by that explosion The report states that a deliberate effort to cause economic damage with a lower likelihood of nuclear radiation fallout can he initiated by a rogue state facing economic strangulation or imminent military threat and pose economic threat to the industrial world without causing human casualties or visible damage to economic infrastructure An article in Scientific American by Dupont [2004] further highlights the risks to the global satellite system from nuclear explosions in orbit Dupont asserts that ldquoThe launch and detonation of a nuclear-tipped missile in low orbit could disrupt the critical system of commercial and civil satellites for years potentially paralyzing the global high-tech economy More nations (and maybe non-state entities) will gain this capability as nuclear-weapon and ballistic-missile technology spread around the world The possibility of an attack is relatively remote but the consequences are too severe to be ignoredrdquo A study conducted for the Commission to Assess the Threat to the United States from High-Altitude Electromagnetic Pulse Attack [Haimes et al 2005] highlights the risks to interdependent infrastructures and to the US economy due to such attacks and reiterates that the benefits of automation have brought an increased vulnerability Finally according to Dupont [2004] ldquoThe Pentagon has been working for decades to safeguard its orbital assets against the effects of nuclear explosionsHardening satellites is costly however Greater protection means more expense and more massive protective materials And heavier satellites cost significantly more to launchDespite the risks to civil orbiters however the Defense Department has failed to persuade US satellite builders to harden their spacecraft voluntarilyrdquo

32

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Rogue- AT No Tech

Tech is attainable

Schnurr 9 Avi- Executive Director of Israels Missile Defense Association reviewed US technology policy for the the Department of Defense the White House Homeland Security Council Congress and the National Academy of Sciences ldquoThe EMP Threat A Strategic Review of Geopolitical Risk Scenariosrdquo 27th July 2009 httpwwwhenryjacksonsocietyorgstoriesaspid=1227

One misunderstanding is the belief that those willing to use an EMP are not going to have the technology to create an EMP weapon However any small nuclear fission bomb would have this effect In fact without going into details there are ways to enhance the effect that would use a very small bomb Certainly a Hiroshima-sized bomb would be adequate a thermonuclear bomb a fusion bomb would not make it any larger That means the capability to do this is in the hands of anyone who can find a boat for example ndash were they to use a short-range missile ndash so it doesnrsquot have to be an ICBM Hezbollah has 300km missiles that carry half-ton warheads which would be more than adequate and al Qaeda is also well-situated in this regard And launching from a ship minimizes the fingerprints

33

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Rogue- AT No Long Range Missiles

Even if they cannot reach the middle of the US the consequences would be enormous

Birdnow 6 Timothy ldquoEMP and the Unfought Victoryrdquo American Thinker July 01 2006Even if an EMP strike should only hit the West Coast the disaster would be catastrophic the United States electric grid is divided into three segments and this strike will more than likely take the entire western power grid completely out Its going to be very hard to maintain order with no running water in the arid western United States Farmers will lose their crops the sick and elderly will die without air conditioning and other electricitymdashdependent services Of course Silicon Valley will be toast as well as such important places as Lawrence Livermore Labs our days as the highmdashtech leader could be numbered What will this do to our economy supposing the country makes it through in decent shape

Even if rogue states cannot build a big EMP they could use a small one on the battlefield

Wilson 8 Clay- Specialist in Technology and National Security Foreign Affairs Defense and Trade Division ldquoHigh Altitude Electromagnetic Pulse (HEMP) and High Power Microwave (HPM) Devices Threat Assessmentsrdquo Congressional Research Service March 26 2008

A HEMP attack directed against the Unites States continent might involve a one-megaton nuclear warhead or a smaller one that is specially-designed using a burst several hundred miles above the mid-western states to affect computers on both coasts20 However creating a HEMP effect over an area 250 miles in diameter an example size for a battlefield might only require a rocket with a modest altitude and payload capability that could loft a relatively small nuclear device If a medium or higher range missile with a nuclear payload were launched from the deck of a freighter at sea the resulting HEMP could reportedly disable computers over a wide area of the coastal United States

34

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Rogue- AT Uncertain Effects

Extend Schneider that rogues prefer EMP strikes to ground bursts because they are easier to produce Ground bursts require too much precision and rogue states will only engage in asymmetric warfare with a lower chance of retaliation

EMPs are well suited for rogue regimesrsquo goals

Timmerman 2 Kenneth R- director of the Foundation for Democracy in Iran 2006 Nobel Peace Prize Nominee ldquoUS Threatened With EMP Attackrdquo Feb 1 2002

The more backward the country the more attractive EMP becomes as a weapon against the United States Bartlett explains ldquoIf North Korea were to launch a missile straight up and explode a nuclear weapon 500 kilometers over their own territory it wouldnrsquot do them a lot of damage because they have very little dependence on electronic systems But it would have a devastating impact on South Korea as well as on our 37000 troops stationed there With North Korearsquos million soldiers they could just walk all over us with impunityrdquo

35

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Rogue- AT Attribution

Easy to get around attribution

Timmerman 8 Kenneth R- director of the Foundation for Democracy in Iran 2006 Nobel Peace Prize Nominee ldquoUS Intel Iran Plans Nuclear Strike on USrdquo News Max 29 Jul 2008

In his recent congressional testimony Graham revealed that Iranian military journals translated by the CIA at his commissionrsquos request ldquoexplicitly discuss a nuclear EMP attack that would gravely harm the United Statesrdquo Furthermore if Iran launched its attack from a cargo ship plying the commercial sea lanes off the East coast mdash a scenario that appears to have been tested during the Caspian Sea tests mdash US investigators might never determine who was behind the attack Because of the limits of nuclear forensic technology it could take months And to disguise their traces the Iranians could simply decide to sink the ship that had been used to launch it Graham said

Rogues do not fear retaliation

Wilson 8 Clay- Specialist in Technology and National Security Foreign Affairs Defense and Trade Division ldquoHigh Altitude Electromagnetic Pulse (HEMP) and High Power Microwave (HPM) Devices Threat Assessmentsrdquo Congressional Research Service March 26 2008

The threat of an EMP attack against the United States is hard to assess but some observers indicate that it is growing along with worldwide access to newer technologies and the proliferation of nuclear weapons In the past the threat of mutually assured destruction provided a lasting deterrent against the exchange of multiple high-yield nuclear warheads However now even a single specially designed low-yield nuclear explosion high above the United States or over a battlefield can produce a large-scale EMP effect that could result in a widespread loss of electronics but no direct fatalities and may not necessarily evoke a large nuclear retaliatory strike by the US military This coupled with the possible vulnerability of US commercial electronics and US military battlefield equipment to the effects of EMP may create a new incentive for other countries to develop or acquire a nuclear capability

Rogues can use terrorists

Schneider 7 [Dr Mark National Institute for Public Policy ldquoThe Emerging EMP Threat to the United Statesrdquo A Publication of the United States Nuclear Strategy Forum November httpwwwnipporgNational20Institute20PressCurrent20PublicationsPDFEMP20Paper20Final20November07pdf]

The possibility of a terrorist group obtaining a nuclear weapon particularly from a rogue state and launching an EMP attack with a crude ballistic missile such as a Scud missile is certainly within the realm of possibility Cooperation with terrorists may be attractive to nuclear-armed rogue states because of the lesser risk of attribution Indeed in March 2001 an Iranian journal stated that ldquoterrorist information warfare [includes] using the technology of directed energy weapons (DEW) or electromagnetic pulse (EMP)rdquo65

36

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Iran Ev

Iran military writings prove reliance on EMP strikes

Pry 5 Dr Peter Vincent- EMP Commission Staff ldquoForeign Views Of Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP) Attackrdquo Before The United States Senate Subcommittee On Terrorism Technology And Homeland Security March 8 2005 httpwwwendtimesreportcomEMP_attackhtml

Iran though not yet a nuclear weapon state has produced some analysis weighing the use of nuclear weapons to destroy cities as ldquoagainst Japan in World War IIrdquo compared to ldquoinformation warfarerdquo that includes ldquoelectromagnetic pulse for the destruction of unprotected circuitsrdquo An Iranian analyst describes ldquoterrorist information warfarerdquo as involving not just computer viruses but attacks using ldquoelectromagnetic pulse (EMP)rdquo (Tehran Siyasat-e Defa-I 1 March 2001) An Iranian political-military journal in an article entitled ldquoElectronics To Determine Fate Of Future Warsrdquo suggests that the key to defeating the United States is EMP attack ldquoAdvanced information technology equipment exists which has a very high degree of efficiency in warfare Among these we can refer to communication and information gathering satellites pilotless planes and the digital system Once you confuse the enemy communication network you can also disrupt the work of the enemy command and decision-making center Even worse today when you disable a countryrsquos military high command through disruption of communications you will in effect disrupt all the affairs of that country If the worldrsquos industrial countries fail to devise effective ways to defend themselves against dangerous electronic assaults then they will disintegrate within a few years American soldiers would not be able to find food to eat nor would they be able to fire a single shotrdquo (Tehran Nashriyeh-e Siasi Nezami December 1998 -January 1999)Iranian flight-tests of their Shahab-3 medium-range missile that can reach Israel and U S forces in the Persian Gulf have in recent years involved several explosions at high altitude reportedly triggered by a self-destruct mechanism on the missile The Western press has described these flight-tests as failures because the missiles did not complete their ballistic trajectories Iran has officially described all of these same tests as successful The flight-tests would be successful if Iran were practicing the execution of an EMP attack Iran as noted earlier has also successfully tested firing a missile from a vessel in the Caspian Sea A nuclear missile concealed in the hold of a freighter would give Iran or terrorists the capability to perform an EMP attack against the United States homeland without developing an ICBM and with some prospect of remaining anonymous Iranrsquos Shahab-3 medium-range missile mentioned earlier is a mobile missile and small enough to be transported in the hold of a freighter We cannot rule out that Iran the worldrsquos leading sponsor of international terrorism might provide terrorists with the means to execute an EMP attack against the United States

Iran is on the brink of gaining EMP capability

Timmerman 8 Kenneth R- director of the Foundation for Democracy in Iran 2006 Nobel Peace Prize Nominee ldquoUS Intel Iran Plans Nuclear Strike on USrdquo News Max 29 Jul 2008

In May 2007 then Undersecretary of State John Rood told Congress that the US intelligence community estimates that Iran could develop an ICBM capable of hitting the continental United States by 2015 But Iran could put a Scud missile on board a cargo ship and launch from the commercial sea lanes off Americarsquos coasts well before then The only thing Iran is lacking for an effective EMP attack is a nuclear warhead and no one knows with any certainty when that will occur The latest US intelligence estimate states that Iran could acquire the fissile material for a nuclear weapon as early as 2009 or as late as 2015 or possibly later Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld first detailed the ldquoScud-in-a-bucketrdquo threat during a briefing in Huntsville Ala on Aug 18 2004 While not explicitly naming Iran Rumsfeld revealed that ldquoone of the nations in the Middle East had launched a ballistic missile from a cargo vessel They had taken a short-range probably Scud missile put it on a transporter-erector launcher lowered it in taken the vessel out into the water peeled back the top erected it fired it lowered it and covered it up And the ship that they used was using a radar and electronic equipment that was no different than 50 60 100 other ships operating in the immediate areardquo Iranrsquos first test of a ship-launched Scud missile occurred in spring 1998 and was mentioned several months later in veiled terms by the Commission to Assess the Ballistic Missile Threat to the United States a blue-ribbon panel also known as the Rumsfeld Commission I was the first reporter to mention the Iran sea-launched missile test in an article appearing in the Washington Times in May 1999 Intelligence reports on the launch were ldquowell known to the White House but have not been disseminated to the appropriate congressional committeesrdquo I wrote Such a missile ldquocould be used in a devastating stealth attack against the United States or Israel for which the United States has no known or planned defenserdquo Few experts believe that Iran can be deterred from launching such an attack by the threat of massive retaliation against Iran They point to a December 2001 statement by former Iranian President Ali Akbar Hashemi-Rafsanjani who mulled the possibility of Israeli retaliation after an Iranian nuclear strike ldquoThe use of an atomic bomb against Israel would destroy Israel completely while [the same] against the Islamic only would cause damages Such a scenario is not inconceivablerdquo Rafsanjani said at the time

37

Cornell HKHANE Aff

NoKo Ev

North Korea is seeking and would use an EMP

Pry 5 Dr Peter Vincent- EMP Commission Staff ldquoForeign Views Of Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP) Attackrdquo Before The United States Senate Subcommittee On Terrorism Technology And Homeland Security March 8 2005 httpwwwendtimesreportcomEMP_attackhtml

In closing a few observations about the potential EMP threat from North Korea North Korean academic writings subscribe to the view voiced in Chinese Russian and Iranian writings that computers and advanced communications have inaugurated an ldquoinformation agerdquo during which the greatest strength and greatest vulnerability of societies will be their electronic infrastructures According to North Korean press Chairman Kim Chong-il is himself supposedly an avid proponent of this view (M A Kim Sang-hak ldquodevelopment of Information Industry and Construction of Powerful Socialist Staterdquo Pyongyang Kyongje Yongu 20 May 2002)The highest ranking official ever to defect from North Korea Hwang Chang-yop claimed in 1998 that North Korea has nuclear weapons and explained his defection as an attempt to prevent nuclear war According to Hwang in the event of war North Korea would use nuclear weapons ldquoto devastate Japan to prevent the United States from participating Would it still participate even after Japan is devastated That is how they thinkrdquo Although Hwang did not mention EMP it is interesting that he described North Korean thinking about nuclear weapons employment as having strategic purposesndash nuclear use against Japanndashand not tactical purposesndashnuclear employment on the battlefield in South Korea It is also interesting that according to Hwang North Korea thinks it can somehow ldquodevastaterdquo Japan with its tiny nuclear inventory although how precisely this is to be accomplished with one or two nuclear weapons is unknownPerhaps most importantly note that the alleged purpose of a North Korean nuclear strike on Japan would be to deter the United States At the time of Hwangrsquos defection in 1998 North Korearsquos longest-range missile then operational the No Dong limited North Korearsquos strategic reach to a strike on Japan Today North Korea is reportedly on the verge of achieving an ICBM capability with its Taepo Dong-2 missile estimated to be capable of delivering a nuclear weapon to the United States In 2004 the EMP Commission met with very senior Russian military officers who are experts on EMP weapons They warned that Russian scientists had been recruited by Pyongyang to work on the North Korean nuclear weapons program They further warned that the knowledge and technology to develop ldquoSuper-EMPrdquo weapons had been transferred to North Korea and that North Korea could probably develop these weapons in the near future within a few years The Russian officers said that the threat to global security that would be posed by a North Korea armed with ldquoSuper-EMPrdquo weapons is unacceptable The senior Russian military officers who claimed to be expressing their personal views to the EMP Commission said that while the Kremlin could not publicly endorse U S preemptive action Moscow would privately understand the strategic necessity of a preemptive strike by the United States against North Korearsquos nuclear complex

38

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Terrorism Adv

Plan is necessary to prevent multiple scenarios of terrorism

Lewallen 2 John- Political Science at Whitman University organizer of the Nuclear Peace Action Group Fulbright Scholarship recipient Public Ocean Access Network ldquoHigh-Altitude Nuclear Warrdquo Nuclear Press p31

Nuclear Weapons in the War of Terror A Modest Prediction on November 8 2001 Terrorist attacks against the United States will not end until the nuclear strategic balance the ldquobalance of terrorrdquo is restored among Russia China and the United StatesToday geopolitics moves at cyberspeed The War of Terror is spreading and deepening throughout the world Clear analysis of the many dimensions of the War of Terror may lead the world toward widespread peace and prosperity rather than toward the global war and depression which is being created today Rational strategic analysis of terrorism begins with the fact that international governmental cooperation is required to defeat terrorists The complete global defeat of terrorism implies international enforcement a world governmentThe nuclear confrontation of terror among Russia China and the United States is a major source of the feeling of terror sweeping the United States and much of the rest of the world With the nuclear strategic balance now disrupted and a United States having declared war on any nation it chooses with any weapons at hand actual nuclear war in the nuclear triangle is an increasingly imminent possibilityThe Russian and Chinese people are intensely and viscerally terrorized by US nuclear aggression as expressed by the US drive to achieve unilateral domination over them with national missile defense and weapons in spaceWithout the complete and wholehearted cooperation of the Chinese and Russian governments the United States will never defeat terrorismIf United States nuclear aggression continues and escalates we must expect terrorist attacks against the American homeland also to continue and escalateSeeking to avoid nuclear war with the United States Russia and China keep leading international efforts to ban weapons in space uphold the arms control treaty structure and move toward nuclear disarmament However the hands of George W Bush have torn up the treaties and loosed a US push for complete nuclear domination over Russia and ChinaThe Chinese and Russians have good reasons to publicly support the US war against international terrorism while secretly encouraging concealing or even sponsoring terrorism against the United States So much the better if the terrorists chased by the United States are also big problems to China and Russia It seems quite within either Russian or Chinese capability to sponsor acts of terrorism against the United States and to set evidence leading gullible US investigators to any terrorist networkAs I write this the Bush administration is pushing full-bore for national missile defense space weapons and intensified nuclear confrontation with Russia and ChinaThis means that terrorist attacks against the United States will continue and probably increase until the United States joins the world community of peace law and order

39

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Terrorism Adv

Future terrorist attacks threaten to collapse world order

Alexander 3 Yonah Director of Inter-University for Terrorism Studies Washington Times August 28Last weeks 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 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 [eg 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 strategy can be developed [eg 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 [eg 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 Israels 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 US military operation in Iraq eliminated Saddam Husseins 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 terror victory however long and hard the road may be For without victory there is no survival

40

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Terrorism Ext

Terrorists arenrsquot interested in non nuclear HPVs

Wilson 8 Clay- Specialist in Technology and National Security Foreign Affairs Defense and Trade Division ldquoHigh Altitude Electromagnetic Pulse (HEMP) and High Power Microwave (HPM) Devices Threat Assessmentsrdquo Congressional Research Service March 26 2008

It is difficult to assess the threat of a terrorist organization possibly using a smaller-scale HPM weapon against the United States critical infrastructure It could be argued that an HPM bomb by itself may not be attractive to terrorists because its smaller explosion would not be violent enough and the visible effect would not be as dramatic as a larger conventional bomb

41

Cornell HKHANE Aff

China- AT Attribution

China can smuggle the EMP nuke

Buff 6 Joe ldquoChina Myth Gets Dangerousrdquo Today in the Military December 04 2006Launching an ICBM and detonating its warhead in outer space as a ldquonon-lethalrdquo EMP generator above the Pacific would be awfully risky because the launch signature could be mistaken for a first strike against the US homeland inviting massive nuclear retaliation More shrewd would be to smuggle a nuclear weapon into space disguised as one of the PRCrsquos frequent launches of satellites (that this violates international treaties doesnrsquot mean Beijing wouldnrsquot do it) The nuke could then be set off at the appropriate place and time as part of the dreaded ldquoPearl Harbor in spacerdquo that could open outright conflict for hegemony It would be problematic for the US to launch any sort of retaliatory nuclear strike against China after such a surprise info-warfare attack -- discussion board fans of the macho ldquoglassing Chinardquo approach left aside With neither Beijing nor Washington being run by madmen or so we hope a conventional war could be fought beneath an unused umbrella of thermonuclear mutually assured destruction And us having to fight a big war is already a form of defeat We got dragged into World War II because our conventional deterrence failed and that victory cost 400000+ American lives

42

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Space Militarization Adv 1

The world in on the brink of massive space weaponization US space weaponization has contributed to states seeking latent space weapons capability

Hitchens 9 Theresa- Director UN Institute for Disarmament Research ldquoSaving Space Threat Proliferation and Mitigationrdquo International Commission on Nuclear Non-proliferation and Disarmament May 19 2009

During the Cold War the United States and the Soviet Union were the only real space powers The situation today is dramatically different Currently some 47 nations own andor operate satellites with nearly 900 working satellites in orbitmdashmostly for civilcommercial purposes The bulk of todayrsquos satellites are in Geostationary orbit (GEO 36000 kilometers in altitude) for civil and military communications purposes telephony internet services and broadcast television However an increasing number of satellites are being built in Low Earth Orbit (LEO up to 2000 kilometers) for Earth imaging with ever greater resolutions that can provide traditional data such as crop and ocean monitoring as well as data for tracking (and perhaps targeting) of military infrastructure There are approximately 389 working satellites in LEO including Earth observation (both civil and militaryintelligence gathering) weather and mobile communications satellites Of that number about 130 are Earth observation sats owned andor operated by 33 countries plus the European Space Agency Vietnam was the most recent nation to orbit an Earth observation satellite launching it in April 2008 In the military arena India most recently (in April 2009) launched a high-resolution (down to 1 meter) all-weather radar imaging satellite with the explicit purpose of monitoring military activities and terrorist movements primarily in rival Pakistan Indeed some ldquoreal estaterdquo in space is getting crowded particularly the GEO belt and the area over the poles where many satellites cross over each otherrsquos path This fact has created emerging concerns about simple ldquohighway safetyrdquo in space and the need to avoid accidental interference or collisions (see below)Further many other nations have recently been putting more emphasis on obtaining military advantages from spacemdashalthough China is the only other nation that has tested an ASAT and just two other nations India and Israel are currently suspected of pursuing such capabilities China France Germany Italy Israel Spain and the United Kingdom all have dedicated military space assets for communications andor imaging A number of other nations have or are building dual-use satellites that can provide both civil and military functions including India and Japan Iran and North Korea are pursuing space launch and satellite capabilities that also would be assumed to have dual-use functions The increasing interest in military uses of space has been fostered by two major factors The first is the easier access to space capabilities over the past 20 years and improvements in capabilities provided by the information revolution of the 1990s The second is the 1990s ldquorevolution in military affairsrdquo led by the United States which has resulted in the shift of national security space applications from strategic missions such as spying and early warning of missile launches to tactical applications which include perhaps most importantly weapons targeting using global navigation and positioning satellites The United States and Russia have long maintained navigation and positioning satellites for multiple purposes (besides targeting these satellites are important for logistics management and own-force tracking) their respective Global Positioning System (GPS) network and the GLONASS constellation Meanwhile the European Union hopes to deploy its Galileo system by 2013 and China intends to deploy a similar world-wide navigation satellite network dubbed COMPASS by 2015mdashalthough both systems are claimed to have primarily civilian functions The new emphasis on tactical applications of space power while greatly increasing military effectiveness on the ground also has spurred military thinking in many nations about how to negate enemy space assetsmdashthus the renewed interest in ASAT capabilities

43

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Space Militarization Adv 2

EMP war plans fuel space militarization

Danchev 6 Dancho- Bulgarian Association for Security ISECA ldquoWho needs nuclear weapons anymorerdquo Security Knowledge February 09 2006

In 2004 the EMP Commission met with very senior Russian officers and we showed that on the sign They warned that the knowledge and technology to develop what they called super EMP weapons had been transferred to North Korea and that North Korea could probably develop these weapons in the near future within a few years The Russian officers said that the threat that would be posed to global security by a North Korean armed with super EMP weapons was in their view and I am sure Mr Speaker in your view and mine unacceptable Foreign views of Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP) Attack reveals further details on other nations ambitions etc Perhaps one of the most famous commitments towards EMP is the The Trestle Electromagnetic Pulse Simulator that can also be seen at Google Maps still in my opinion its a defensive initiative for an offensive purpose Extending the topic even further The Space Warfare arms race has been an active policy of key worlds leaders for decades and thats not good The US Russia and China as the main players are fuelling the growth in one way or other due to believing in perhaps- that the other sides are actively developing such capabilities and they are because they think the opposite =gt arms race- growing trend towards asymmetric warfare

The US is the last obstacle to banning space weapons

Lewallen 2 John- Political Science at Whitman University organizer of the Nuclear Peace Action Group Fulbright Scholarship recipient Public Ocean Access Network ldquoHigh-Altitude Nuclear Warrdquo Nuclear Press p25

Russian and China are urgently asking the worldrsquos nations to begin talks to ban the militarization of space Chinarsquos ambassador to the United Nations Conference on Disarmament in January 2000 called for international talks to ban testing deployment and use of weapons in outer space 23 In March 2000 Russiarsquos ambassador to the UN Conference on Disarmament echoed this urgent plea for UN negotiations for an international treaty to ban testing stationing and use of weapons systems in outer space Of the 66 member nations of the UN negotiations to ban weapons in space the United States24 To avoid the rapidly approaching nuclear conflict with Russia andor China the United States must abandon its efforts to make a national missile defense system and join international talks to ban weapons in space If cornered the Russians and Chinese will fight the United States and both nations are prepared with high-altitude nuclear EMP weapons to attack US electronic civilization

44

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Space Militarization Adv 3

Space militarization leads to extinction

Mitchell Ayotte amp Helwich 1 Associate Professor of Communication and Director of Debate at the University of Pittsburgh Teaching Fellows in the Department of Communication at the University of Pittsburgh Missile Defence Trans-Atlantic Diplomacy at a Crossroads ISIS Briefing on Ballistic Missile Defence No 6 July

A buildup of space weapons might begin with noble intentions of lsquopeace through strength deterrence but this rationale glosses over the tendency that I the presence of space weapons will result in the increased likelihood of their use33 This drift toward usage is strengthened by a strategic fact elucidated by Frank Barnabv when it comes to arming the heavens anti-ballistic missiles and anti-satellite warfare technologies go hand-in- hand134 The interlocking nature of offense and defense in military space technology stems from the inherent dual capability of space borne weapon components As Marc Vidricaire Delegation of Canada to the UN Conference on Disarmament explains If you want to intercept something in space you could use the same capability to target something on land 35 To the extent that ballistic missile interceptors based in space can knock out enemy missiles in mid-flight such interceptors can also be used as orbiting Death Stars capable of sending munitions hurtling through the Earths atmosphere The dizzying speed of space warfare would introduce intense use or losersquo pressure into strategic calculations with the specter of split-second attacks creating incentives to rig orbiting Death Stars with automated hair trigger devices In theory automation would enhance survivability of vulnerable space weapon platforms However by taking the decision to commit violence out of human hands and endowing computers with authority to make war military planners could sow insidious seeds of accidental conflict Yale sociologist Charles Perrow has analyzed complexly interactive tightly coupled industrial systems such as space weapons which have many sophisticated components that all depend on each others flawless performance According to Perrow this interlocking complexity makes it impossible to foresee all the different ways such systems could fail As Perrow explains [the odd term normal accident is meant to signal that given the system characteristics multiple and unexpected interactions of failures are inevitable36 Deployment of space weapons with we-delegated authority to fire death rays or unleash killer projectiles would likely make war itself inevitable given the susceptibility of such systems to normal accidents according to retired Lt Col Robert M Bowman even a tiny projectile reentering from space strikes the earth with such high velocity that it can do enormous damage - even more than would be done by a nuclear weapon of the same size 37 In the same Star Wars technology touted as a quintessential tool of peace defense analyst David Langford sees one of the most - destabilizing offensive weapons ever conceived One imagines dead cities of microwave-grilled people138 Given this unique potential for destruction it is not hard to imagine that any nation subjected to space weapon attack would retaliate with maximum force including use of nuclear biological andor chemical weapons An accidental war sparked by a computer glitch in space could plunge the world into the most destructive military conflict ever seen

45

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Space Ext

Lewallen 2 John- Political Science at Whitman University organizer of the Nuclear Peace Action Group Fulbright Scholarship recipient Public Ocean Access Network ldquoHigh-Altitude Nuclear Warrdquo Nuclear Press Pg37Every nation in the world wants to join Russia and China in their urgent insistence that space weaponry should be legally prohibited every nation except one the United StatesIronically the United States is the most vulnerable nation on Earth to high-altitude nuclear electromagnetic pulse war One or a few nuclear detonations high above the United States could catastrophically devastate information civilization wiping out computer chips nationwide and also destroying satellites without harming people directlyThe most basic military strategic logic dictates that the United States should avoid war in space at all costs Space is simply a disastrously unfavorable field of battle for the United States The Russians and Chinese would prefer to avoid World War Three but should they deem it inevitable they have prepared the greatest ambush in military history a nuclear electromagnetic pulse surprise attack against the United States

Space AdvLewallen 2 John- Political Science at Whitman University organizer of the Nuclear Peace Action Group Fulbright Scholarship recipient Public Ocean Access Network ldquoHigh-Altitude Nuclear Warrdquo Nuclear Press Pg36The United States military is stumbling blindly into the greatest ambush in history Determined to dominate space the United States has tens of billions of dollars of space weaponry with many more space weapons systems in research and development

Space Sat EMPLewallen 2 John- Political Science at Whitman University organizer of the Nuclear Peace Action Group Fulbright Scholarship recipient Public Ocean Access Network ldquoHigh-Altitude Nuclear Warrdquo Nuclear Press Pg34Any rational person must accept the possibility that all three nations in the Nuclear Triangle have EMP bombs in Earth-orbiting satellites today ready to wipe out an adversaryrsquos electronics on very short notice Everyone knows that classified or secret weapons systems exist It is plain crazy to believe that China Russia and the United States are not prepared with high-altitude EMP and low-altitude nuclear weapons in satellites either ready to launch or in orbit alreadyA strategic feedback loop would seem to make it at least ldquostrongly possiblerdquo that the United States China and Russia have high-powered EMP bombs in Earth orbit today The ability to wipe out an adversaryrsquos electronics continent-wide pretty much any time with a maneuverable EMP satellite bomb would confer major if not overwhelming advantage to the aggressor So if the other guy probably has EMP satellite bombs we need them too

Lewallen 2 John- Political Science at Whitman University organizer of the Nuclear Peace Action Group Fulbright Scholarship recipient Public Ocean Access Network ldquoHigh-Altitude Nuclear Warrdquo Nuclear Press Pg25

Russia and China are urgently asking the worldrsquos nations to begin talks to ban the militarization of space Chinarsquos ambassador to the United Nations Converence on Disarmament in January 2000 called for international talks to ban testing deployment and use of weapons in outer space23 In March 2000 Russiarsquos ambassador to the UN Congerence on Disarmament echoid this ugent plea for UN negations for an international treaty to ban testing stationing and use of weapons systems in outer space CONT

46

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Data Sharing Adv

Potential exists for EMP intelligence sharing with Russia which is key to combat rogue or terrorist EMP attacks

Wood 4 Lowell L- member of the Technical Advisory Group US Senate Select Committee on Intelligence a member of the Undersea Warfare Experts Group US House of Representatives Committee on Armed Services a visiting fellow at the Hoover Institution and Stanford University The report of the Commission to Assess the Threat to the United States From Electromagnetic Pulse Attackrdquo July 22 2004

This is particularly strong in the circumstance of the Soviet Union where they detonated most of their high-altitude explosions over their own territory and thus had an opportunity to make extensive measurements That large body of physical data has come forth in a somewhat fragmentary fashion idiosyncratic fashion really over the years But since the end of the Cold War in particular in the context of cooperation against large-scale terrorism Russian workers and indeed the Russian government has indicated a willingness to collaborate with the United States against the common threat that EMP poses to both the Russian Federation and the United States in the hands of both state-substate-scale actors to Russian and American civilizations So there is the prospect for substantially improved understanding in the United States as far as what was actually observed but the large program that the government supported from the early 1960s up into the early 1990s to understand nuclear weaponry effects has run a very consistent thread through the limited body of experimental data that exists to the end of atmospheric testing

However Russia fears US nuclear EMP strikes

Pry 5 Dr Peter Vincent- EMP Commission Staff ldquoForeign Views Of Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP) Attackrdquo Before The United States Senate Subcommittee On Terrorism Technology And Homeland Security March 8 2005 httpwwwendtimesreportcomEMP_attackhtml

Many foreign analystsndashparticularly in Iran North Korea China and Russiandashview the United States as a potential aggressor that would be willing to use its entire panoply of weapons including nuclear weapons in a first strike They perceive the United States as having contingency plans to make a nuclear EMP attack and as being willing to execute those plans under a broad range of circumstances

Russiarsquos scientific community is especially aware of this EMP threat

Zak 6 Anatoly ldquoTHE K PROJECT Soviet Nuclear Tests In Spacerdquo The Nonproliferation Review Volume 13 Issue 1 March 2006

At the same time scientists realized that along with their higher efficiency nuclear-tipped ABMs would generate highly dangerous blast effects and electromagnetic pulse radiation (EMP) in the surrounding atmosphere and on the very territory they were designed to protect Among the affected infrastructure could be radar installations strategic communications networks and other command-and-control assets To further complicate the situation the Soviet military planners envisioned a scenario in which a nuclear attack on the USSR would likely be preceded by a US high-altitude nuclear explosion designed to ldquoblindrdquo the Soviet ABM tracking network1

47

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Data Sharing Adv

Russiarsquos fears prevent them pursuing cooperative programs and intelligence sharing

Robichaud 7 Carl- Program Officer at The Century Foundation and co-editor of Breaking the Nuclear Impasse New Prospects for Security against Weapons Threats ldquoThe Perils of Primacyrdquo The Century Foundation 9-5-2007 httpwwwtcforgprintasptype=NCamppubid=1673

Moreover primacy has costs The first is reduced conflict stability which heightens risks even for the dominant nation If Russia knows that it is at risk of being disarmed by a bolt from the blue it is likely to disperse its weapons shorten launch times and devolve control to sub-commanders Such a posture would exacerbate the risk of accidental or unauthorized launch in the context of a crisis Depending on how Russia responded to American primacy these risks could well outweigh whatever modest bargaining benefits it offered Already Russia is taking some provocative steps to mitigate its vulnerabilitymdashincluding the announcement last month that its nuclear bombers will for the first time since 1992 resume long-range patrols ldquoon a permanent basisrdquo Second the search for primacy directly undermines the Nunn-Lugar Cooperative Threat Reduction Program which remains our best defense against nuclear terrorism One of the reasons that progress on these programs has slowed to a crawl is Russiarsquos suspicion that the initiative is a cover for espionage into its nuclear installations

Russiarsquos important- they have the leading physicists

Wilson 8 Clay- Specialist in Technology and National Security Foreign Affairs Defense and Trade Division ldquoHigh Altitude Electromagnetic Pulse (HEMP) and High Power Microwave (HPM) Devices Threat Assessmentsrdquo Congressional Research Service March 26 2008

Vladimir Lukin the former Soviet Ambassador to the United States and former Chairman of the International Affairs Committee for the Russian Parliament reportedly has stated that Russia currently has a capability to create a HEMP effect over the United States37 During 1962 the then Soviet Union conducted a series of atmospheric nuclear tests and observed HEMP effects that included surge protector burnouts power supply breakdowns and damage to overhead and underground buried cables at distances of 600 kilometers Since then Russia has reportedly made extensive preparations to protect their infrastructure against HEMP by hardening both civilian and military electronic equipment and by providing continuous training for personnel operating these protected systems38 Other sources have reportedly stated that Russia may also have some of the leading physicists in the world currently doing research on electronic warfare weapons and electromagnetic pulse effects39

The US needs Russiarsquos data- we lack the capability

Riddle 4 Lieutenant Colonel Thomas C- United States Army ldquoNuclear High Altitude Electromagnetic Pulse ndash Implications For Homeland Security And Homeland Defenserdquo US Army War College 03 May 2004

Another area of concern is that many of the remaining nuclear physicist personnel specifically those associated with EMP are retiring without a next generation to follow their lead76 Similarly the physical plant to conduct EMP testing and simulation has atrophied almost to the point of non-existence77 Building upon a suggestion originally proposed by Doctor Wood Congress should mandate and oversee the creation of an interagency DoD-DHS led organization to champion the revitalization of both of these resources78

48

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Data Sharing Adv

Increased EMP knowledge is key to effectively hardening our infrastructure

McNeill amp Weitz 8 Jena Baker- homeland security policy analyst at The Heritage Foundation and Richard- Senior Fellow and Director of the Center for Political-Military Analysis at Hudson Institute ldquoElectromagnetic Pulse (EMP) Attack A Preventable Homeland Security Catastropherdquo Heritage Foundation Backgrounder 2199 httpwwwheritageorgresearchhomelandsecuritybg2199cfm_ftn19

The US cannot continue to ignore the EMP threat While some progress has been made in hardening potential US targets against attack including critical military and government systems the vast majority of electrical systems are unshielded and unprotected especially in the civilian sector If properly shielded electrical devices and systems can generally survive even the strongest EMPs[20] Congress and the new Administration must 1 Perform More Research on the Threat Further research is needed in order to ensure that America can respond to the EMP threat appropriately without wasting government resources on flimsy or useless security measures Although there are numerous methods to harness EMPs capable of affecting electronic systems there is still a theoretical limit to what damage they can produce in terms of both geographic size and intensity Some EMP weapons release just enough energy to disable small electrical devices while others can destroy all the electronic devices and systems within a city block Altitude plays a major role in whether an EMP attack will be successful lower heights typically expose a smaller surface area to EMP damage Some systems are simply more vulnerable to EMP attack than others such as devices plugged into power grids and commercial computer equipment The US government must gain knowledge of the attributes and capabilities of EMP and understand the amount of money time and effort that will be required for meaningful prevention EMP research should also include actions by Congress to simulate the effects of an EMP attack on Washington and other high-value targets and re-examine the Graham Report recommendations

Protections drastically reduce the dangers of EMP strikes

Chisholm 5 Patrick ldquoProtect our electronics against EMP attackrdquo Christian Science Monitor December 19 2005

Fortunately protecting electronics and critical infrastructure against an EMP is doable It involves enclosing every electronic component with a metallic cage that blocks out electromagnetic waves Sound impossible Actually electronic components already enjoy some form of shielding against electromagnetic interference Federal Communications Commission standards require it Such shielding is designed to prevent everyday electromagnetic radiation from entering andor exiting the device Your computer contains this shielding from metal housings down to the little metal coverings soldered to your motherboard There even are housings the size of rooms or buildings that protect sensitive equipment inside Without electromagnetic shielding many electronic devices would not work properly However most existing shielding may not be enough to protect against an EMP While US military standards often require electronic components to be protected against an EMP commercial standards do not And while our power grid is shielded against things such as lightning strikes it is not tested for protection against an EMP Upgrading to shield against an EMP would entail using more robust shielding materials especially for the cords cables andor wires that connect devices to external entities such as power supplies or networks Cables and wires act as antennas through which an EMP travels directly into a device

49

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Data Sharing- Uniqueness

Potential exists for collaboration between Russia and the US to reduce EMP dangers

Weldon 4 Curt- vice-chair of the Armed Services Committee and the House Homeland Security Committee The report of the Commission to Assess the Threat to the United States From Electromagnetic Pulse Attack Committee on Armed Services House of Representatives One Hundred Eighth Congress second session hearing held July 22 2004

Let me get into the area of the joint US -Russian initiative that Dr Wood mentioned It just so happens that last year in our defense bill we created the establishment of the Teller-Kurchatov Alliance for Peace Edward Teller and Igor Kurchatov were the two fathers of the nuclear weapons in both the US and Russia Now the head of Kurchatov Institute Dr Evgeny Velikhov is very eager to establish a more proactive relationship for the peaceful purposes of dealing with nuclear energy Is that Dr Wood potentially a forum since Livermore is involved with that effort to begin a formal process of engaging the Russians They just changed their chief of military operations this past week General Baluevskii has now been put in the head position I had a chance to meet with him one month ago in Moscow He has now taken General Kvashnins place as the top military general and I think he has a different outlook on perhaps US American relations and the military So Dr Wood would that be perhaps a vehicle that we could begin to move aggressively into what you alluded to Dr Wood Yes Mr Weldon I believe that that is indeed the case The recent events in the Russian military to which you referred of course appear at least on the surface to be somewhat hopeful in respect to the progress of more collegial relationships between the American and Russian military establishments the potential collaboration with leaders civilian leaders then Soviet now Russian military technologists such as academicians Evgeny Velikhov the head of the Kurchatov Institute personifies I believe at least has prospects So I very much applaud the committees initiatives along these lines both with respect to the Teller-Kurchatov fellowships and the nuclear strategy forum initiative These are directions in which US policy and practice surely should go

50

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Data Sharing- Data Needed

Past US tests failed to record the necessary data

Emanuelson 9 Jerry ldquoNotes about nuclear EMPrdquo Futurescience LLC Jan 26 2009There have only been a few high altitude nuclear explosions There have been none since November 1962 At that time scientists were just beginning to understand the phenomenon well enough to even know what to try to measure This means that there is a very limited amount of data available and only a part of that data is unclassified The largest nuclear EMPs probably occurred with the Hardtack-Teak and Hardtack-Orange tests over Johnston Island in August 1958 however very little information is openly available about the EMP from these tests and it is likely that not much data was obtained due to equipment malfunctions relevant to EMP measurement and a lack of accurate understanding of the EMP phenomenon Although scientists were aware of nuclear EMP in 1958 in many critical respects it was misunderstood Those early errors in the understanding of EMP made good data acquisition very difficult Both of these August 1958 tests used the 38 megaton W39 thermonuclear warhead There have been unconfirmed reports that one or both of these 1958 tests caused power outages in Hawaii

Computer simulations are indecisive

Emanuelson 9 Jerry ldquoNotes about nuclear EMPrdquo Futurescience LLC Jan 26 2009Because of the insufficient amount of hard data scientists have tried to do mathematical calculations about the strength and effects of the different components of the EMP There has never been any clear consensus about whose calculations are correct Since more testing cannot be done there is no way to test the accuracy of the calculations made by various scientists since 1962 The United States National Laboratories have a computer code in which they have a high level of confidence since it closely matches the sparse amount of actual data that does exist

Data is key to protect critical infrastructure

Chisholm 5 Patrick ldquoProtect our electronics against EMP attackrdquo Christian Science Monitor December 19 2005

Radasky one of the worlds few experts on protecting electronics against an EMP thinks that most electronics would undergo only a temporary disruption in the event of an EMP You may just have to restart the computer and everything would be fine said Radasky But a temporary shutdown of a control system for a critical infrastructure system he said would be troublesome And if just 1 percent of all electronics failed havoc could ensue Just think about the power outage in August of 03 when a couple of wires hit a tree observed Radasky That was a single failure propagated over a huge area Now imagine at the speed of light every place in the United States some portion of electronics failing Now you have a very widespread problem The only way to know the extent to which an EMP would knock out electronics is to conduct testing with EMP simulators Unfortunately since the end of the cold war most EMP simulators in the United States have been closed according to Radasky And the few that remain open are for military use not civilian use

51

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Russia Data Sharing (Testing)

Understanding EMP effects is key to prevent testing

Farley 9 Robert is an assistant professor at the University of Kentuckyrsquos Patterson School of Diplomacy and International Commerce ldquoNeocons Salivating Over Their Next Great Exaggerated Threat Electromagnetic Pulse Attackrdquo October 22 2009

Along with their Soviet and Chinese counterparts US military planners and scientists studied the potential dangersmdashand opportunitiesmdashpresented by EMP However since only one nation the United States has ever attacked another country with an atomic bomb the precise extent of EMPrsquos power to damage electronic-dependent infrastructures is not fully understood Testing bans have also prevented the established nuclear powers from fully investigating the EMP effect (prompting some EMP awareness activists to argue for a resumption of nuclear testing)

Nuke War

Johnson 2001(Rebecca Executive Dir Acronym Institute for Disarmament Diplomacy The Guardian 7-17Then the international arms control and non-proliferation regimes collapsed Americans werent bothered at first for hadnt the government promised a super-sophisticated force field round the whole nation that no terrorist or missile would ever penetrate So nuclear testing resumed in Nevada for new warheads to improve the kill prospects of missile interceptors and to penetrate deep into enemies bunkers India had been waiting for just such a go-ahead and Pakistan soon followed both raced to test warheads to fit on to missiles upping the tension in Kashmir and along the borders with China Free now to resume its own testing China boosted its programme to modernise and increase the size of its small nuclear arsenal Somewhat reluctantly Russia followed Moscow suspended all further reductions and cooperative security and safety programmes for its still-large nuclear arsenal and facilities Within a few short years the nuclear non-proliferation treaty was just another discarded agreement Many governments with nuclear power programmes developed nuclear weapons as well while others fitted anthrax or sarin on to weapons just in case Most hadnt wanted to but fearful that their neighbours would all felt compelled Regional rivalries grew quickly into major international problems Alliances collapsed amid suspicion and recriminations The burgeoning arms races even spread into outer space threatening military surveillance as well as public communication entertainment and navigation No one knew who had what Deterrence was empty as defence analysts calculated the advantages of the pre-emptive strike In that terrified atmosphere of insecurity and mistrust someone launched first And then it was too late to speak out The Republicans hadnt yet managed to get missile defence to work Such a doomsday scenario is not so fanciful On July 7 the New York Times announced that President Bush wants to ditch the comprehensive test ban treaty A week before the administration asked nuclear laboratories to work out how quickly the US could resume testing after its nine-year moratorium If Bush were to back out of the test ban treaty or break the moratorium on nuclear testing - undertaken with China Russia Britain and France - he would also explicitly breach agreements made last May when 187 countries negotiated measures to strengthen and implement the non-proliferation treaty The test ban is no outdated cold war instrument but a fundamental tool to prevent new destabilising developments in nuclear weapons Over several decades from the Arctic to the Pacific from the capitals of Europe to the deserts of Nevada people have marched petitioned demonstrated and even sailed or hiked into test sites Many have been imprisoned and some even lost their lives trying to stop the nuclear weapons governments from polluting our oceans and earth with radioactivity from nuclear explosions conducted for one purpose only - to make better nuclear bombs It took three arduous years to complete negotiations on the comprehensive test ban treaty It isnt perfect No product of compromise ever is The verification system is very thorough but it also had to be affordable financially and politically The treaty stopped short of closing and dismantling the known test sites or banning laboratory testing which the weapon states said they needed to assure the safety and reliability of weapons in the stockpiles (pending achievement of their other treaty obligations to eliminate the nuclear arsenals completely) But it does ban all nuclear test explosions in all environments India panicked because the treaty would close off its nuclear options It refused to sign and then let off a string of nuclear explosions in May 1998 Pakistan followed to prove it could Even so the treaty held Neither government has felt able to keep testing which means their options for further developments were curbed Bush has embarked on a very slippery slope that could potentially put at risk the future of the citizens of even the most advanced military nation Mumbling and grumbling wont keep us safe It is time to speak out

52

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Russian ARMS control

Lewallen 2 John- Political Science at Whitman University organizer of the Nuclear Peace Action Group Fulbright Scholarship recipient Public Ocean Access Network ldquoHigh-Altitude Nuclear Warrdquo Nuclear Press p22-23Russia today is a collapsing superpower with an arsenal of thousands of nuclear missiles which it cannot afford to maintain Six thousand Russian strategic missiles are ready to launch today with about 2250 on high alert ldquoWhat counts most now is that Russia and United States start moving jointly or along parallel courses toward radically lowered ceilings on nuclear warheads without any holdupsrdquo Russiarsquos President Putin said on November 14 2000 Russian officials said President Putin would like to cut strategic missile arsenals to 1000 each for the US and Russia Still the Russians clearly want to maintain second-strike nuclear threat credibility against the United States

53

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Modeling Advantage 1

United States failure to reject nuclear EMP warfare has eroded the nuclear taboo surrounding high-altitude explosions and has led several states to incorporate nuclear EMP strikes into warplans

Pry 5 Dr Peter Vincent- EMP Commission Staff ldquoForeign Views Of Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP) Attackrdquo Before The United States Senate Subcommittee On Terrorism Technology And Homeland Security March 8 2005 httpwwwendtimesreportcomEMP_attackhtml

Some foreign analysts judging from open source statements and writings appear to regard EMP attack as a legitimate use of nuclear weapons because EMP would inflict no or few prompt civilian casualties EMP attack appears to be a unique exception to the general stigma attached to nuclear employment by most of the international community in public statements Significantly even some analysts in Japan and Germanyndashnations that historically have been most condemnatory of nuclear and other weapons of mass destruction in official and unofficial forumsndashappear to regard EMP attack as morally defensible For example a June 2000 Japanese article in a scholarly journal citing senior political and military officials appears to regard EMP attack as a legitimate use of nuclear weapons ldquoAlthough there is little chance that the Beijing authorities would launch a nuclear attack which would incur the disapproval of the international community and which would result in such enormous destruction that it would impede postwar cleanup and policies a serious assault starting with the use of nuclear weapons which would not harm humans animals or property would be valid If a nuclear warhead was detonated 40 kilometers above Taiwan an electromagnetic wave would be propagated which would harm unprotected computers radar and IC circuits on the ground within a 100 kilometer radius and the weapons and equipment which depend on the communications and electronics technology whose superiority Taiwan takes pride in would be rendered combat ineffective at one stroke If they were detonated in the sky in the vicinity of Ilan the effects would also extend to the waters near Yonakuni [in Okinawa] so it would be necessary for Japan too to take care Those in Taiwan having lost their advanced technology capabilities would end up fighting with tactics and technology going back to the 19th century They would inevitably be at a disadvantage with the PLA and its overwhelming military force superiorityrdquo (Su Tzu-yun Jadi 1 June 2000) An article by a member of Indiarsquos Institute of Defense Studies Analysis openly advocates that India be prepared to make a preemptive EMP attack both for reasons of military necessity and on humanitarian grounds ldquoA study conducted in the U S during the late 1980s reported that a high-yield device exploded about 500 kilometers above the ground can generate an electromagnetic pulse (EMP) of the order of 50000 volts over a radius of 2500 kilometers around the point of burst which would be collected by any exposed conductor Such an attack will not cause any blast or thermal effects on the ground below but it can produce a massive breakdown in the communications system It is certain that most of the land communication networks and military command control links will be affected and it will undermine our capability to retaliate This in fact is the most powerful incentive for a preemptive attack And a high-altitude exo-atmospheric explosion may not even kill a bird on the groundrdquo Although India Pakistan and Israel are not rogue states they all presently have missiles and nuclear weapons giving them the capability to make EMP attacks against their regional adversaries An EMP attack by any of these statesndasheven if targeted at a regional adversary and not the United Statesndashcould collaterally damage U S forces in the region and would pose an especially grave threat to U S satellites Many foreign analystsndashparticularly in Iran North Korea China and Russiandashview the United States as a potential aggressor that would be willing to use its entire panoply of weapons including nuclear weapons in a first strike They perceive the United States as having contingency plans to make a nuclear EMP attack and as being willing to execute those plans under a broad range of circumstances

54

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Modeling Advantage- Israel

The exclusion of EMP from the nuclear taboo means Israel will EMP strike Iran leading to the closure of the Strait of Hormuz and international terrorist attacks

Nagle 210 Chet- Pentagons International Security Affairs department Intel Research Corporation author of Iran Covenant ldquoItrsquos time to play the war cardrdquo The Daily Caller 021010

The world knows the US military can destroy any target in the world without using nuclear weapons But what about Israel That country with a population less than that of New York City has developed a ldquotriadrdquomdashthe capability to launch a nuclear strike from aircraft missile silos and submarines Besides Israel only the US Russia and China have that deterrent power But would Israel use nuclear weapons in a pre-emptive strike on Iran I suggest that is unlikely because as we will see below it is unnecessary in the usual sense As for a non-nuclear pre-emptive strike Israel cannot successfully attack Iran with conventional weapons or aircraft The distance is great the defenses formidable and the casualties would be very high Instead I believe Israel will use an electromagnetic pulse (EMP) weapon Whatrsquos that In 1962 the US conducted an atmospheric test called Starfish Prime In it a 14 megaton weapon was detonated 400 kilometers above Johnson Island in the Pacific The EMP from that test knocked out street lights in Hawaii 900 miles away The Soviets held similar tests and discovered EMP effects can penetrate far underground If Israel used one of its Jericho III missiles to detonate 400 kilometers above north central Iran there would be no blast or radiation effects on the ground In fact if the strike was at noon on a sunny day the people below would not know it happened except their lights would go out cars stop fridges die power line transformers short out refineries shut down and yes those uranium enrichment centrifuges in caverns stop spinning This bloodless annihilation coupled with a selective cyber attack would freeze Iran for decades What could be Iranrsquos response to such an attack If they can find a working radio they can announce they have mined the Strait of Hormuz Because of depth width and its hydrographic features the Strait cannot be mined but if Iran says it is mined it would have the same effect Lloyds will cancel insurance for any tanker transiting the Strait Then we revisit ldquoTanker Warrdquo tactics of 1985 and the US Navy would escort any ship anxious to cash in on the crisis If shore missile batteries were somehow still operational a battle group in the area together with bombers from Diego Garcia would reduce them to rubble along with associated infrastructure like military harbors A rain of missiles from Hezbollah in Syria would have to be endured by Israel unless another EMP weapon was used Terror attacks would be made on Israelis and Americans but those can be dealt with by law enforcement and military forces especially if they are forewarned Of course the price of oil and gold would spike for a while On the positive side Iranian ldquoGreenrdquo opposition forces would have an opportunity to take to the darkened streets of Tehran and rid themselves of the corrupt clerical regime So it seems the ldquowar cardrdquo is in the hands of Israel and the card has ldquoEMPrdquo on it

55

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Modeling Advantage- Israel

This shuts off the worldrsquos oil supply

Klare 2 Michael- Five Colleges professor of Peace and World Security Studies boards of directors of Human Rights Watch and the Arms Control Association ldquoResource Wars The New Landscape of Global Conflictrdquo p 72-73

Iran does not pose a direct threat to audi Arabia and the southern Gulf kingdomsmdashat least not for the time being However by building up its navy and deploying antiship missiles along its coasts Iran may imperil oil shipping in the Persian Gulf and the all-important Strait of Hormuz the Gulfs narrow opening to the Arabian Sea and the larger world beyond Although lacking major warships Iran has acquired three submarines twenty missile-armed patrol boats numerous shore-based missile batteries and a large inventory of antishipping mines This is enough General Zinni testified in 1999 to jeopardize open access to Gulf shipping lanes Only six miles wide at its narrowest point the Strait of Hormuz is described by the US Department of Energy as the worlds most important oil chokepoint because of the sheer volume of oilmdashover 15 million barrels per daymdashthat passes through it With missile batteries deployed at both entrances to the strait and a large inventory of anti-shipping mines Iran is in an ideal position to impede shipping through this vital channel Pentagon strategists suggest moreover that Iran will seek to do so in the event of a future clash with the United States Iran also seeks to extend its control over Abu Musa and both Greater and Lesser Tunb a small group of islands that guard the western approaches to the strait Iran seized the Tunbs from Ras al-Khaimah (part of the United Arab Emirates) in 1971 and has occupied them since It shared Abu Musa with Sharjah (another UAE component) until 1994 when it took control of the entire island When pressed by the UAE to submit the dispute over the islands to international mediation Tehran declared that they were an inseparable part of Iran46 Since then the Iranians have deployed antiship missiles on Abu Musa and fortified their positions on the Tunbs47

Collapses the global economy

Roberts 4 Paul- regular contributor to Harpers and NYT Magazine ldquoThe End of Oil On the Edge of a Perilous New Worldrdquo p 93-4

The obsessive focus on oil is hardly surprising given the stakes In the fast moving world of energy politics oil is not simply a source of world power but a medium for that power as well a substance whose huge importance encompasses entire nations in a global web that is sensitive to the smallest of variations A single oil event -- a pipeline explosion in Iraq political unrest in Venezuela a bellicose exchange between Russia and Saudi Arabia -- sends shockwaves through the world energy order pushes prices up or down and sets off tectonic shifts in global wealth and power In the volatile would of oil the tide could turn quickly As anxieties over the uncertainties in Iraq drove oil prices up to $40 the oil tide abruptly changed direction transferring tens of billions of dollars from the G-8 countries to the oil exporting countries and threatening the global economic recovery So embedded has oil became in todays political and economic spheres that the major Western governments now watch the oil markets as closely as they once watched the spread of communism This is because six of the last seven global recessions have been preceded by an oil price rise and fear is growing among economists and policy makers that in todays growth-dependent and energy-intensive global economy oil price volatility itself may eventually pose more risks to prosperity and stability and mere survival than terrorism or even war

56

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Modeling Advantage- China

China would love to drop a HEMP on Taiwan- lack of norm

Schneider 9 Mark- National Institute for Public Policy The Nuclear Doctrine and Forces of the Peoples Republic of China Comparative Strategy Volume 28 Issue 3 July 2009

There is also concern about Chinese preparations for a nuclear electromagnetic pulse attack on Taiwan the United States and Japan as part of its strategy to facilitate the conquest of Taiwan The Congressional Commission on the Threat to the United States from Electromagnetic Pulse reported that ldquoChina and Russia have considered limited nuclear attack options that unlike Cold War plans employ EMP as the primary or sole means of attackrdquo121 The 2005 Pentagon report on Chinese military power observed that ldquoSome PLA theorists are aware of the electromagnetic effect of using a high-altitude electromagnetic pulse (HEMP) and might consider using HEMP in an unconventional attack believing that the United States and other nations would not consider it as a use of force and a crossing of the nuclear thresholdrdquo122 A Congressional Research Service report by Ronald ORourke concluded that a US naval force coming to the aid of Taiwan against a Chinese attack would have to be prepared for use of nuclear weapons and EMP because ldquoChina could also use a nuclear-armed ballistic missile to detonate a nuclear warhead in the atmosphere to create a high-altitude electromagnetic pulse (EMP) intended to temporarily or permanently disable the electronic circuits of US or other civilian and military electronic systemsrdquo123 China expert Dr Michael Pillsbury has linked nuclear EMP attack to the Chinese ldquoassassins macerdquo concept of defeating the superior with the inferior Pillsbury has elsewhere noted that the March 2000 issue of Chinas Military Digest featured an article by Xian Fengli Lu Young and Ming Xiang which argued that ldquoEMP warheads will make it much easier to cross the nuclear thresholdrdquo124 The designers of the Chinese DF-11 SRBM ldquohave demonstrated the most interest in HEMP [high altitude nuclear EMP] weaponsrdquo125 According to the Wall Street Journal ldquoChina and Russia have the capability to launch EMP weaponsmdashand have let us know it China recently published an article on EMP in a Chinese-language technical journal To make sure the US got the message the article appeared in Englishrdquo126

This would collapse civilization

Straits Times 2k (Singapore) ldquoNo one gains in war over Taiwanrdquo June 25 lexisThe high-intensity scenario postulates a cross-strait war escalating into a full-scale war between the US and China If Washington were to conclude that splitting China would better serve its national interests then a full-scale war becomes unavoidable Conflict on such a scale would embroil other countries far and near and -horror of horrors -raise the possibility of a nuclear war Beijing has already told the US and Japan privately that it considers any country providing bases and logistics support to any US forces attacking China as belligerent parties open to its retaliation In the region this means South Korea Japan the Philippines and to a lesser extent Singapore If China were to retaliate east Asia will be set on fire And the conflagration may not end there as opportunistic powers elsewhere may try to overturn the existing world order With the US distracted Russia may seek to redefine Europes political landscape The balance of power in the Middle East may be similarly upset by the likes of Iraq In south Asia hostilities between India and Pakistan each armed with its own nuclear arsenal could enter a new and dangerous phase Will a full-scale Sino-US war lead to a nuclear war According to General Matthew Ridgeway commander of the US Eighth Army which fought against the Chinese in the Korean War the US had at the time thought of using nuclear weapons against China to save the US from military defeat In his book The Korean War a personal account of the military and political aspects of the conflict and its implications on future US foreign policy Gen Ridgeway said that US was confronted with two choices in Korea -truce or a broadened war which could have led to the use of nuclear weapons If the US had to resort to nuclear weaponry to defeat China long before the latter acquired a similar capability there is little hope of winning a war against China 50 years later short of using nuclear weapons The US estimates that China possesses about 20 nuclear warheads that can destroy major American cities Beijing also seems prepared to go for the nuclear option A Chinese military officer disclosed recently that Beijing was considering a review of its non first use principle regarding nuclear weapons Major-General Pan Zhangqiang president of the military-funded Institute for Strategic Studies told a gathering at the Woodrow Wilson International Centre for Scholars in Washington that although the government still abided by that principle there were strong pressures from the military to drop it He said military leaders considered the use of nuclear weapons mandatory if the country risked dismemberment as a result of foreign intervention Gen Ridgeway said that should that come to pass we would see the destruction of civilisation There would be no victors in such a war While the prospect of a nuclear Armaggedon over Taiwan might seem inconceivable it cannot be ruled out entirely for China puts sovereignty above everything else

57

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Modeling Advantage- Solvency

Establishing an environment that discourages EMP attacks is critical to prevent them from occurring

EMP Commission 4 Report of the Commission to Assess the Threat to the United States from Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP) Attack Volume 1 Executive Report 2004 Dr John S Foster Jr Mr Earl Gjelde Dr William R Graham (Chairman) Dr Robert J Hermann Mr Henry (Hank) M Kluepfel GEN Richard L Lawson USAF (Ret) Dr Gordon K Soper Dr Lowell L Wood Jr Dr Joan B Woodard

An EMP attack is one way for a terrorist activity to use a small amount of nuclear weaponrymdashpotentially just one weaponmdashin an effort to produce a catastrophic impact on our society but it is not the only way In addition there are potential applications of surface-burst nuclear weaponry biological and chemical warfare agents and cyber attacks that might cause damage that could reach large-scale long-term levels The first order of business is to prevent any of these attacks from occurring The US must establish a global environment that will profoundly discourage such attacks We must persuade nations to forgo obtaining nuclear weapons or to provide acceptable assurance that these weapons will neither threaten the vital interests of the United States nor fall into threatening hands

Plan resurrects the taboo

Bin amp Hongyi 9 Li- director of Arms Control Program at the Institute of International Studies and Nie- officer in the Peoplersquos Liberation Army ldquoAn Investigation of China ndash US Strategic Stabilityrdquo translation of an article published in Chinese in World Economics amp Politics 5-22-09

Damage to the nuclear taboo also comes from some pseudoscientific discussions These discussions completely ignore the effect of the nuclear taboo making casual suppositions about the use of nuclear weapons for example supposing nuclear nations after defeat in a conventional conflict must use nuclear weapons to reverse the war situation During every form of nuclear dialog between China and the United States American academics frequently engage in this type of ldquoacademicrdquo persuasion with the Chinese side The starting point is defending the US refusal to make a no first use pledge but this so-called academic propagandizing objectively weakens the confidence of Chinese scholars in the nuclear taboo During the Cold War the international anti-nuclear movement strengthened the nuclear taboo After the end of the Cold War because the large scale nuclear confrontation between the US and the Soviet Union fundamentally ended the influence of the grass roots of the international anti-nuclear movement has weakened This is not beneficial to the maintenance and strengthening of the nuclear taboo China from the perspective of protecting its own national interest should invest resources in propagandizing the danger of nuclear war oppose the first use of nuclear weapons and the threat to use nuclear weapons strengthening the nuclear taboo

58

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Israeli Strikes Bad

Israeli preemption causes conflagration

Eiland 10 Maj Gen Giora- senior researcher at the Institute for National Security Studies (INSS) in Tel Aviv former head of the Israeli National Security Council ldquoIsraels Military Optionrdquo The Washington Quarterly Volume 33 Issue 1 January 2010 pages 115 - 130

With these risks in mind Israel has made it clear that a military attack is an option The risks however are immense First an attack could fail tactically which would seriously harm Israels deterrent and provide Iran with a good excuse to attack Israel Second Iran could fight back conventionally which is more likely or even with chemical and biological weapons which would be more devastating Third an attack would mobilize Hezbollah increasing the chances of a conflict between Israel and Syria Fourth Israel will certainly lose its already minor international support More importantly Iran will no longer be seen as the bad guy Fifth Iran may choose to retaliate using Persian Gulf oil markets Closing the Strait of Hormuz or attacking the oil fields of the Persian Gulf states will create a serious worldwide crisis Sixth an attack will change the perspective of the Iranian public which currently does not have very strong negative feelings toward Israel And seventh it will increase the anti-Israel sentiment throughout the region An Israeli attack will involve other countries (Israel might need to use their air space with or without permission) This indirect and passive assistance to Israel will push Persian Gulf countries to take anti-Israel or anti-US steps The attack in fact could serve as the straw that breaks the camels back and may even provoke strong reactions from governments throughout the region

59

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Testing Advantage

Mohan 87 C Raja- Henry Alfred Kissinger Scholar in the John W Kluge Center at the Library of Congress ldquoNuclear Test Ban Receding Hopesrdquo Economic and Political Weekly Vol 22 No 7 (Feb 14 1987)The most lucrative among the nuclear weapons on the design board are the so- called third generation nuclear weapons The first generation weapons are those based on nuclear fission-the atomic bombs The second generation weapons are those designed around nuclear fusion-the hydrogen bombs The transition from the first generation to the second saw enormous increases in explosive power and tremendous design efficiency-in terms of yield-to-weight ratio that is larger explosive power for lesser overall weight of the weapons facilitating the development of a variety of nuclear weapons for different delivery systems The third generation weapons involve the development of a number of sophisticated designs which would channel a part of the nuclear explosive energy to a form more precisely tailored to the need than just blast and heat the most well known effects of nuclear weapons in the past4 The neutron bomb built in the 1970s was a precursor to the third generation nuclear weapons Among the major third generation concepts under investigation are the X-ray laser the gamma-ray laser the microwave bomb and the electomagnetic pulse (EMP) bomb The first two designs seek to convert nuclear explosive power into high energy radiation either in the X- or gamma-region of the electromagnetic spectrum It is hoped that such powerful laser weapons driven by nuclear weapons could play a central role in the proposed defence against a missile attack (star wars) Although the SDI has been advertised as a non-nuclear defence against nuclear weapons nuclear-driven exotic weapons have emerged as serious components of the programme In a microwave weapon the nuclear explosive energy is converted into microwaves Having lesser energy than the gamma- or X-ray laser the microwave beam weapons are not designed to destroy Soviet missiles in flight but would be used to debilitate the electronics of the missile and its warhead The EMP bomb is based on the observation that a nuclear explosion in the upper atmosphere would generate an intense pulse of high voltage electric charge which could put out all electric installations over a large area on the ground5 The EMP bomb would maximise the generation of this electromagnetic pulse The American nuclear weapons laboratories thus see the continuation of nuclear testing as essential for the investigation of these new concepts in the design of nuclear weapons Not only would they need to test but do a lot of it Because of the complexity of the third generation nuclear weapon design much more testing than before is required to develop these weapons According to American weapons designers the perfection of any one of the third generation designs could require 100 to 200 test explosions6 In the past only about six underground number tests on the average were required to develop a new nuclear weapon The requirements of the US nuclear strategy in coming years thus clearly demands more intensive testing of nuclear weapons A Comprehensive Test Ban which would block the new round of qualitative improvement in the design of nuclear weapons is clearly not on the American agenda

Acronym Institute 4 ldquoBallistic Missile Defence and the Weaponisation of Spacerdquo httpwwwacronymorgukspacerejintrohtmAt present any high altitude nuclear detonation would violate the provisions of the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT) Pending this treatys entry into force the ban on nuclear explosions is bolstered by moratoria undertaken by all the nuclear weapon states and by India and Pakistan Few would have the technological capacity to undertake such an explosion and it would be extremely difficult if not impossible for a perpetrator to evade detection As with a hostile missile launch the origin of a nuclear detonation can be quickly identified and would invite unified international diplomatic action or failing that overwhelming retaliation Though the technology to prevent a high altitude nuclear explosion is not available the perpetrator would incur high political costs for crossing the nuclear threshold and damaging space assets beneficial to millions around the world For a number of technological and political reasons therefore a high altitude nuclear detonation is unlikely although it cannot be ruled out altogether

60

Cornell HKHANE Aff

EMPacts Econ

Kills global econ

Riddle 4 Lieutenant Colonel Thomas C- United States Army ldquoNuclear High Altitude Electromagnetic Pulse ndash Implications For Homeland Security And Homeland Defenserdquo US Army War College 03 May 2004

Additionally the worldwide economy has grown increasingly interdependent The economic disruptions that occurred in the wake of the 2001 attacks provided a clear demonstration of this interdependence The disruption of the interdependent critical infrastructure of the United States would likely produce worldwide economic disruption The extended loss of the American consumer markets disruption of domestic manufacturing capability and chaotic financial institutions would contribute to an extended period of worldwide economic disruption

US economic collapse will destroy the global economy

Mead 4 Walter Russell- Senior Fellow at Council on Foreign Relations ldquoAmericas Sticky Powerrdquo Foreign Policy MarApr 2004

Similarly in the last 60 years as foreigners have acquired a greater value in the United States-government and private bonds direct and portfolio private investments-more and more of them have acquired an interest in maintaining the strength of the US-led system A collapse of the US economy and the ruin of the dollar would do more than dent the prosperity of the United States Without their best customer countries including China and Japan would fall into depressions The financial strength of every country would be severely shaken should the United States collapse Under those circumstances debt becomes a strength not a weakness and other countries fear to break with the United States because they need its market and own its securities Of course pressed too far a large national debt can turn from a source of strength to a crippling liability and the United States must continue to justify other countries faith by maintaining its long-term record of meeting its financial obligations But like Samson in the temple of the Philistines a collapsing US economy would inflict enormous unacceptable damage on the rest of the world That is sticky power with a vengeance

Electricity would be out for years

Emanuelson 9 Jerry ldquoNuclear Electromagnetic Pulserdquo Futurescience LLC Jan 26 2009A nuclear EMP attack would knock out most if not all of the electric power grid The extent of the electrical grid damage would depend upon the size of the bomb Full repair of the power grid would take anywhere from two months to three years or more Many components such as large transformers which are normally resistant to large voltage transients would be destroyed by the DC-like current induced by the E3 component of the pulse when they are connected to very long copper wires The design life of the transformers in the United States power grid is 40 years but the average age of these transformers is already more than 42 years If power companies were to keep adequate spare parts on hand the repair time could be kept closer to the two-month time frame Adequate parts are not currently being kept on hand and in most cases there are very long lead times for replacement parts for the electrical grid if the parts are not kept on hand by the electrical utility There is currently no United States manufacturing capability for the large power transformers in its power grid All of these extremely heavy transformers have to be manufactured and imported from other countries The current delivery time for these transformers is 3 years from the time that the order is placed but widespread destruction of these transformers would completely overwhelm the very limited worldwide production capacity

61

Cornell HKHANE Aff

EMPacts Heg

EMP attack kills heg

Riddle 4 Lieutenant Colonel Thomas C- United States Army ldquoNuclear High Altitude Electromagnetic Pulse ndash Implications For Homeland Security And Homeland Defenserdquo US Army War College 03 May 2004

To jump start national recovery efforts would likely require significant portions of the remaining overseas military resources of the United States to focus their efforts on domestic recovery The resulting lack of a viable forward presence coupled with an American government intently focused on internal recovery could result in numerous regional conflicts as nations attempted to gain advantage or to redress old grievances Several of these regional conflicts (India-Pakistan Israel-Syria China-Russia China-India) certainly have the potential to involve further use of WMD

Heg collapse results in wars around the globe

Ferguson 4 Niall Senior Fellow the Hoover Institution Stanford JulyAugust 2004 ldquoA World without Powerrdquo httpwwwforeignpolicycomstorycmsphpstory_id=2579amppage=3 ACC 91604 p online

The worst effects of the new Dark Age would be felt on the edges of the waning great powers The wealthiest ports of the global economymdashfrom New York to Rotterdam to Shanghaimdashwould become the targets of plunderers and pirates With ease terrorists could disrupt the freedom of the seas targeting oil tankers aircraft carriers and cruise liners while Western nations frantically concentrated on making their airports secure Meanwhile limited nuclear wars could devastate numerous regions beginning in the Korean peninsula and Kashmir perhaps ending catastrophically in the Middle East In Latin America wretchedly poor citizens would seek solace in Evangelical Christianity imported by US religious orders In Africa the great plagues of AIDS and malaria would continue their deadly work The few remaining solvent airlines would simply suspend services to many cities in these continents who would wish to leave their privately guarded safe havens to go there For all these reasons the prospect of an apolar world should frighten us today a great deal more than it frightened the heirs of Charlemagne If the United States retreats from global hegemonymdashits fragile self-image dented by minor setbacks on the imperial frontiermdashits critics at home and abroad must not pretend that they are ushering in a new era of multipolar harmony or even a return to the good old balance of power Be careful what you wish for The alternative to unipolarity would not be multipolarity at all It would be apolaritymdasha global vacuum of power And far more dangerous forces than rival great powers would benefit from such a not-so-new world disorder

62

Cornell HKHANE Aff

EMPacts Earthquake

Nuclear EMPs cause earthquakes

Mahler 10 William K- M2 Technologies ldquoHugo Chavez Cites Russian Sourcesrdquo Cape Cod Today January 22 2010

As for the ability to make an Earthquake Electro Magnetic Pulse has been around since the first atomic bomb tests way back during World War II It can be separated from a blast meaning it functions on its own as a tool no nuke explosions necessary (remember Hiroshima and Nagasaki) Over in Europe some years back it was around the Netherlands or a neighboring country where citizens protested a USA weapon involving EMP Why They feared (and rightfully so) that weapon would be used to hurt Russia for example How bad could it hurt Give the weapon a target such as a large building like our Empire State Building in New York once fired there would be hole clean through I suppose as clean as a light saber blade could cut in sci-fi such as Star Wars The EMP can penetrate anything to my knowledge so yes a shock jolt from an EMP could absolutely trigger an Earthquake no doubt about it and probably sans the radiation fallout guaranteed by an atomic (nuclear) blast

63

Cornell HKHANE Aff

EMPacts GPS

The EMP would disable GPS technologies

Scott 9 William B- Rocky Mountain Bureau Chief for Aviation Week amp Space Technology Michael J Coumatos- US Space Command director of wargaming William J Birnes- PhD from New York University ldquoCounterspace The Next Hours of World War IIIrdquo p 18

The high-level cram course on nuclear weapons effects Aster had received when he took over as STRATCOM chief had provided a basic understanding of electromagnetic pulse effects But that was thin knowledge at best The general needed more to assess the full spectrum of impacts nowMajor why would GPS be affected by that nuke All the Navstars are in much higher mid-Earth orbits something like twelve-thousand-plus miles right Thats too high for EMP effects cause theres no air to ionize that far outCorrect sir But that detonation created an extremely high radiation flux and its basically charging up the Van Allen Belt even though its way out there too In turn that causes what we call secondary radiation effects in electronic circuits on GPS birdsmdashthings like electronic gate latch-ups data losses and other effects It also created an ion-charged layer in the upper atmosphere which acts like a shield that blocks the weak signals from GPS and other satellites Most GPS navigation and timing signals are now prevented from reaching Earth especially out in the Pacific Probably going to affect the downlinks from some GEO birds too the major added referring to platforms in geostationary orbit 22500 miles from Earth

64

Cornell HKHANE Aff

EMPacts Satelites

A HANE would wipe out satelites

Kueter 7 Jeff- president of the George C Marshall Institute ldquoChinarsquos Space Ambitions ndash And Oursrdquo The New Atlantis Number 16 Spring 2007 pp 7-22

Another type of threat to space assets is high-altitude nuclear detonation An enemy could arm a missile with a nuclear warhead launch it and explode the warhead in space All satellites within the line of sight of the explosion would be destroyed or rendered ineffective immediately with the effects dissipating with distance from the explosion Whatrsquos more the radiation released by a single low-yield high-altitude nuclear explosion ldquocould disablemdashin weeks to monthsmdashall low-Earth orbit satellites not specifically hardened to withstand the radiation generated by that explosionrdquo according to the Defense Threat Reduction Agency Most US satellitesmdashincluding those commercial satellites that are used extensively for defense communicationsmdashare not hardened to withstand such an attack and they lack the maneuvering capabilities needed to ldquoget out of the wayrdquo of the attacking missile the explosion or the radioactive effects China certainly has the missile and nuclear capabilities required to conduct such an attack (So too do the United States Russia the United Kingdom France and possibly Israel India and Pakistan North Korea apparently lacks the missile competence and Iran probably does not have either the missile or nuclear know-howmdashas of this writing) Needless to say this most extreme measure would likely be attempted only in times of acute international crisis

Bright 2 Melanie ldquoHigh-Altitude Nuclear Explosions Blind Deaf And Dumbrdquo Janes Defence Weekly October 23 2002 httpwwwglobalsecurityorgorgnews2002nuke_explosionhtm

However blowing up targets on the Earths surface is only part of the story According to Dr Dennis Papadopoulos from the Department of Physics University of Maryland If someone were to explode a 10kT nuclear weapon at a high enough altitude over their own territory 90 of the worlds low earth orbit [LEO] satellites would be lost within a month In addition to the electromagnetic pulse (EMP) phenomenon generally understood satellites are vulnerable to the Christofilos Effect When a high-altitude nuclear explosion (HANE) is detonated at about 100km altitude the Earths magnetic field accelerates the large cloud of electrons and protons released by the blast The radiation particles speed up spread out all the while accelerating circling the globe until racing around it at speeds approaching the speed of light This effect is named after Dr Nicholas Christofilos who predicted this phenomenon The detonation produces an artificial radiation belt that within weeks to at most months delivers a lethal dose of radiation to [LEO] satellites said Dr Papadopoulos who worked with Dr Christofilos at what is now the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory The superpowers conducted six scheduled nuclear explosions in space during the Cuban Missile Crisis These HANEs damaged or destroyed all seven satellites then in orbit These tests conducted before the 1963 Atmospheric Test Ban Treaty provided the only experimental data on the vulnerability of satellites to nuclear detonation Today the implications of a HANE are far greater as millions use the 250-plus satellites in LEO

65

Cornell HKHANE Aff

EMPacts Healthcare

Ross 8 LH Jr Mihelic FM ldquoHealthcare vulnerabilities to electromagnetic pulserdquo Am J Disaster Med 2008 Nov-Dec3(6)321-5 Center for Homeland Security Studies Graduate School of Medicine University of Tennessee Knoxville Tennessee USA

The US healthcare system is particularly vulnerable to the effects of electromagnetic pulse (EMP) attack because of the systems technological sophistication but while national defense planners prepare for the considerable threat that EMP poses there has been little or no recognition of this threat within the US healthcare community and neither has there been any significant healthcare planning to deal with such an eventuality Recognition of the risk presented by EMP and advance institution of appropriate strategies to mitigate its effects on the healthcare system could enable the preservation of much of that systems function in the face of EMP-related disruptions and will greatly further all-hazards disaster preparations

66

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Morality Advantage

Wilson 8 Clay- Specialist in Technology and National Security Foreign Affairs Defense and Trade Division ldquoHigh Altitude Electromagnetic Pulse (HEMP) and High Power Microwave (HPM) Devices Threat Assessmentsrdquo Congressional Research Service March 26 2008

HEMP and HPM energy weapons primarily damage electronic systems with little or no direct effect on humans however these effects may be difficult to limit or control As HEMP or HPM energy fields instantly spread outward they may also affect nearby hospital equipment or personal medical devices such as pace-makers or other parts of the surrounding civilian infrastructure For this reason some international human rights organizations may object to the development or testing of HEMP or HPM weapons

67

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT Verifiability

Plan results in verifiable operational change and posture changes still have positive effects

Feiveson 99 Harold- Senior Research Policy Scientist at Princeton co-principal investigator of Princetons research Program on Science and Global Security ldquoChapter 4 Nuclear Strategy and Targeting Doctrinerdquo in ldquoThe Nuclear Turning Pointrdquo The Brookings Institution 1999

It will not be easy to break out of cold war thought patterns regarding the use of nuclear weapons War plans are carefully guarded secrets and changes in them can at best be verified only indirectly and over time through corresponding changes in force posture Nuclear doctrine is important however because it is the basis for force structure and operations and could largely determine how the entire nuclear command system would react in a crisis An evolving dialogue between US and Russian military leaders on this subject would be useful and could help pave the way toward very deep reductions in nuclear forces

Plan leads to removal of specific warheads although we cannot predict the exact change because the information is classified

Bernardin 99 Michael- Provost for Theoretical Institute of Thermonuclear Studies Los Alamos National Laboratory ldquoElectromagnetic Pulse Threats to US Military And Civilian Infrastructurerdquo Hearing Before The Military Research And Development Subcommittee October 7 1999

The Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) and the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) identify current and projected nuclear weapon threats and provide inputs to the Department of Energy nuclear design labs Los Alamos and Livermore National Laboratories who model foreign nuclear weapons The labs each have over 25 years of experience in performing this type of modeling The weapon models serve as a basis for associated EMP threat assessmentsFor the purpose of EMP assessment it is convenient to group the threat weapons into the following five categories One single-stage fission weapons two single-stage boosted weapons three nominal two-stage thermonuclear weapons with yields up to a few megatons four two-stage thermonuclear weapons with yields over a few megatons and five special technology thermonuclear weaponsThe reason for this grouping and the threat weapons themselves will be discussed in closed session The EMP produced by these weapons is also a topic delegated largely to closed session

Specific warhead removal is verifiable

Davis et al 10 ldquoTechnical Steps to Support Nuclear Arsenal Downsizingrdquo American Physical Society Report Commitee Jay Davis Chair John Browne Patricia Lewis Carolyn Pura Allen Sessoms Tom Shea Francis Slakey Benn Tannenbaum Jim Tape John Taylor Peter D Zimmerman Feb 18 2010

As bilateral US-Russian nuclear stockpile reductions result in arsenals that no longer dwarf those of other nuclear-armed states further reductions will require working with scientists and negotiators from a broader range of countries At some point it may be useful to monitor warhead dismantlement in such a way that the specific model (eg W88) can be determined Template methods (matching a particular radiation signature) may be useful in addition to attribute measurements (ensuring that certain measured levels exceed defined limits in order to increase confidence in the contents) and may prove to be very attractive for some applications A distinctive template would be created for each model and individual samples would then be compared to the templates on file to confirm (or reject) a declared item The templates could include for example a combination of passive radiation signatures andor radiation signatures caused by subjecting an item to a stream of neutrons andor gamma rays

68

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT Verifiability

The US has specific missiles designed to lay down an EMP attack

Lewallen 2k John- Public Ocean Access Network ldquoThe Blackout Bombrdquo North Coast Express Spring 2000 httpsonicnet~doretkIssues00-03-SPRtheblackhtml

Any future global war is likely to begin with a few Blackout Bombs China Russia the U nited S tates and other nuclear powers have several nuclear missiles and perhaps weaponized satellites designed to lay down EMP over continent-size areas instantaneously While every nation on Earth is vulnerable to attack from the United States the United States is vulnerable indeed defenseless to a secret class of nuclear weapons which has captured the attention of the major nuclear powers--China Russia Britain France and the United States itself--for the past thirty-eight years

Missile removal is verifiable

Davis et al 10 ldquoTechnical Steps to Support Nuclear Arsenal Downsizingrdquo American Physical Society Report Commitee Jay Davis Chair John Browne Patricia Lewis Carolyn Pura Allen Sessoms Tom Shea Francis Slakey Benn Tannenbaum Jim Tape John Taylor Peter D Zimmerman Feb 18 2010

Recent monitoring and inspection practices affecting the United States and Russia focused on verifying the numbers and locations of launchers and delivery platforms (and hence deducing the maximum number of warheads that could be deployed on strategic delivery systems) Modest reductions in US and Russian stockpile numbers (eg 1500) may rely primarily on these existing practices while more significant reductions in total stockpiles (1000 or fewer) will likely require the use of more intrusive techniques to verify numbers of warheads If and when reductions in all nuclear arsenals are verified by multilateral agreements the techniques employed and the inspectors must guarantee international assurance of compliance

Unilateral willingness to verify is best- formal agreements fail

Bunn 2 Matthew- the Project on Managing the Atom (MTA) Belfer Center Harvard ldquoIntroduction Monitoring Nuclear Stockpiles and Reductionsrdquo NTI October 28 2002 httpwwwntiorge_researchcnwmmonitoringindexasp

Finally it is important to understand that while most formal US-Russian transparency initiatives have been stymied by continuing secrecy concerns and the lack of strong incentives for both governments to agree to them informal measures have created an absolutely unprecedented degree of openness transparency and cooperation between the two nuclear weapons complexes As a result of a broad range of scientific and threat-reduction cooperation US and Russian experts have now visited most of the key facilities in the other nationrsquos nuclear weapons complexes and there has been a huge increase in the level of detailed understanding of what goes on at individual facilities and buildings within these complexes Some threat reduction programs have formalized this transparency with specific agreements regulating access to sensitive sites Both sides (particularly the United States ) have also unilaterally revealed a wealth of information about their nuclear stockpiles and complexes in both published reports and other sources The level of openness that now exists would have been completely unthinkable as recently as early 1994 (when it was still true that Russia was refusing to allow US experts direct access for implementing security upgrades at any facility in Russia where actual HEU or plutonium existed)

69

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Verifiability Extensions

Specific weapons are designed for EMP strikes

Schneider 7 Mark- National Institute for Public Policy The Emerging EMP Threat to the United States United States Nuclear Strategy Forum No 6 November 2007

All nuclear weapons detonated at high altitude produce EMP but some types of nuclear weapons are designed specifically to be efficient at producing EMP In 2004 Clay Wilson of the Congressional Research Service reported that ldquoA HEMP [high altitude electromagnetic pulse] attack directed against the United States might involve a one-megaton nuclear warhead or a smaller warhead that is specially-designed [to produce EMP] using a burst several hundred miles above the mid-western states to affect computers on both coastsrdquo 3

Extension- Missile removal is verifiable

WSLF 2 ldquoBanning Ballistic Missilesrdquo Western States Legal Foundation Feb 1 2002 httpwwwwslfweborgspaceMCRbriefhtm

A ban on missile flight tests would be relatively easy to verify It should include a system of inspections to assure that civilian rocket launches do not conceal efforts to develop weapons delivery systems These inspections could make it more difficult to develop and deploy weapons systems that operate through or from space If the type of inspections appropriate for controlling ballistic missiles worked well it could provide the technical and political basis for more comprehensive agreements aimed at preventing the further militarization of space

Specific warheads and their composition can be verified

Davis et al 10 ldquoTechnical Steps to Support Nuclear Arsenal Downsizingrdquo American Physical Society Report Commitee Jay Davis Chair John Browne Patricia Lewis Carolyn Pura Allen Sessoms Tom Shea Francis Slakey Benn Tannenbaum Jim Tape John Taylor Peter D Zimmerman Feb 18 2010

The techniques that have received the most attention for the purposes of warhead or material verification involve passive gamma and neutron measurements Medium resolution gamma measurements (eg by sodium iodide (NaI) detectors) could be used to indicate the presence or absence of plutonium and to match weapon template signatures High-resolution gamma measurements (eg high-purity Germanium detectors) provide in addition the ability to determine isotopic ratios indicative of weapons grade plutonium and americium content thus revealing whether the plutonium is weapons grade and the time since the last americium separation In general neutron measurement methods ranging from simple neutron counting to more complex coincidence and multiplicity techniques have been used to determine plutonium massesMeasurements of some highly-enriched uranium (HEU) characteristics and material mass using specially-developed gamma measurement techniques have been shown to be possible under some carefully-controlled conditions It is likely that high confidence measurements of HEU characteristics will require the use of active interrogation techniques Experiments and demonstrations using a range of measurement systems ndash sodium iodide highpurity germanium and helium-3 detectors as well as neutron multiplicity counters ndash have been performed to determine the feasibility and applicability of these techniques for potential verification measures

70

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT CMR

The pentagon is no longer cares about EMPs

Timmerman 2 Kenneth R- director of the Foundation for Democracy in Iran 2006 Nobel Peace Prize Nominee ldquoUS Threatened With EMP Attackrdquo Feb 1 2002

Twenty years ago only the Soviet Union had the capability to launch an EMP attack on the United States by exploding a nuclear warhead 500 kilometers (310 miles) in space Pentagon planners spent billions of dollars protecting US military equipment against EMP during the Cold War But during the last decade the military has canceled many of those protection programs alleging an end to the threat of a Soviet nuclear strike And none of our civilian infrastructure is protected because of the high cost

71

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Politics Link Answers

Congress doesnrsquot care about minor operational changes like the plan

Woolf 7 Amy F Specialist in National Defense Congressional Research Service ldquoCongress And US Nuclear Weapons Review and Oversight of Policies and Programsrdquo The Nonproliferation Review (peer-reviewed) Volume 14 Issue 3 November 2007

The US Congress charged with overseeing US nuclear weapons policy and programs usually addresses such policies and programs through the annual authorization and appropriations process focusing mostly on questions of how many and what types of weapons the United States should deploy with little attention paid to questions about nuclear weapons strategy doctrine and policy The oversight process has brought about some significant changes in the plans for US nuclear weapons including the elimination of funding for the Robust Nuclear Earth Penetrator study and the shift of that funding into a study of the Reliable Replacement Warhead But with the focus on authorizations and appropriations along with the divided jurisdiction over nuclear weapons policy and programs in congressional committees Congress has not either recently or during the Cold War and post-Cold War eras conducted a more comprehensive review of US nuclear weapons strategy policy or force structure Changes in committee jurisdictions could affect the oversight process but as long as nuclear weapons policy and programs remain a relatively low priority for most members of Congress and the country at large it is unlikely that Congress will pursue such a comprehensive debate

No link- EMP weapons donrsquot have a constituency

Forstchen 8 William R PhD Author of ldquoOne Second Afterrdquo httpwwwonesecondaftercompbwp_d10e87d9wp_d10e87d9html

EMP has managed to ldquostealthrdquo its way on to the highly dangerous list and few except for a small number of personnel in the Pentagon various research labs and men like Congressman Bartlett (R MD) who heads the Congressional Investigative Committee on EMP are aware of it For one it has a certain ldquosci-firdquo sound to it which makes many dismiss the potential before the discussion has even started Second the only way to truly evaluate the threat and demonstrate it is to detonate a nuclear weapon something we have not done since the full test ban went into effect decades ago It is therefore not ldquovisiblerdquo to us the way another airliner smashing into a skyscraper is now forever imprinted on our national psyche feared and prepared for Next with all the competing issues and threats in the world EMP simply does not have a ldquoconstituencyrdquo of influence Only a few members of Congress our military and scientific community are issuing the warnings There are no Hollywood stars placing themselves in front of cameras with this as their cause the few times it has been used in popular movies it has been portrayed inaccurately often absurdly

72

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Politics Link Answers

Congress doesnrsquot care

Matthews 8 William ldquoLittle Congressional Interest in EMP Threatrdquo Defense News Jul 10 2008Once again a congressional commission is warning that an electromagnetic pulse attack against the United States could wipe out the nations electronics-dependent civilization And again hardly anyone is listening Only a handful of the 60 members of the House Armed Services Committee showed up for a hearing on the EMP threat July 10 and most didnt stick around for the whole two-hour sessionIts obvious that theres not very much interest in it said Rep Roscoe Bartlett R-Md who asked for the hearing There are lots of seats vacant he lamented

Failure to reduce the threat of EMP strikes on the US will kill Obamarsquos capital

Kessler 9 Ronald- chief Washington correspondent of Newsmaxcom ldquoObama Democrats Expose US to EMP Attackrdquo Newsmax 17 Aug 2009

Despite polls showing that Americans overwhelmingly support missile defense President Obamarsquos administration already has cut the Pentagonrsquos missile defense budget by $14 billion or 15 percent If an EMP attack occurs we will have the Democrats to blame But without voting machines or any form of communication Americans who survive will not be able to vote them out of office

Plan prevents capital draining disputes for Obama

Hitchens 9 Theresa- Director UN Institute for Disarmament Research ldquoSaving Space Threat Proliferation and Mitigationrdquo International Commission on Nuclear Non-proliferation and Disarmament May 19 2009

While it remains to be seen what direction the new administration of President Barak Obamamdashwho spoke out against space weapons during the presidential campaign mdashwill take regarding national security in space (as well as regarding overall relations with China) it cannot be denied that the issue of how best to approach protection of space assets remains in mid-2009 a major issue in the domestic US debate over national security

73

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Politics Link Turn

Plan is a win for Obama- bolsters his agenda

New York Times 9 Christopher Drew October 28 2009 lthttpwwwnytimescom20091029business29defensehtml_r=1gt

When the Obama administration proposed canceling a host of expensive weapons systems last spring some of the military industryrsquos allies in Congress assumed as they had in the past that they would have the final say But as the president signed a $680 billion military policy bill on Wednesday it was clear that he had succeeded in paring back nearly all of the programs and setting a tone of greater restraint than the Pentagon had seen in many years Now the question is whether Mr Obama can sustain that push next year when the midterm elections are likely to make Congress more resistant to further cuts and job losses White House officials say Mr Obama took advantage of a rare political moment to break through one of Washingtonrsquos most powerful lobbies and trim more weapons systems than any president had in decades Rahm Emanuel the White House chief of staff said Wednesday that the plan was to threaten a veto over a prominent program mdash in this case the F-22 fighter jet mdash ldquoto show we were willing to expend political capital and could win on something that people thought we could notrdquo Once the Senate voted in July to stop buying F-22s Mr Emanuel said in an interview that success ldquoreverberated downrdquo to help sustain billions of dollars of cuts in Army modernization missile defense and other programs Mr Emanuel said the strategy emerged when the defense secretary Robert M Gates told Mr Obama they needed to ldquoshake up sacred cows and be seen as taking on fightsrdquo Military analysts said Mr Gates a holdover from the Bush administration also aimed at the most bloated programs And Senator John McCain of Arizona the former Republican presidential candidate who has criticized the Pentagonrsquos cost overruns provided Mr Obama with political cover to make the cuts without being seen as soft on the military ldquoThey probably get an lsquoArsquo from the standpoint of their success on their major initiativesrdquo said Fred Downey a former Senate aide who is now vice president for national security at the Aerospace Industries Association ldquoThey probably got all of them but one or maybe two and thatrsquos an extraordinarily high scorerdquo

Winners win

Pascal 9 Marc staff writer for The Moderate Voice 1052009 lthttpthemoderatevoicecom48571obamaE28099s-only-priority-get-re-electedgt

Many political leaders incorrectly confuse political capital with financial capital The first is a perpetually renewable commodity if used correctly and the latter is always finite no matter how much is amassed One cannot hoard political capital for some future battle that may or may not come It grows and shrinks directly as one uses it and it directly mirrors political fights taken and avoided Actually winning on certain core issues and major legislative battles helps increase political capital for future use But not using political capital causes it to dissolve rapidly Talking too much and never getting anything accomplished is a good recipe to dissipate valuable political capital

74

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT Geomagnetic Storms

Geomagnetic storms are predictable- prevention measures exist

PSEPC 2 Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness Canada ldquoGeomagnetic Storms - Reducing the Threat to Critical Infrastructure in Canadardquo 25 April 2002 httpwwwsolarstormsorgCanadaPipelineshtml

Preventative measures have been implemented to avoid events such as the 1989 Quebec blackout System operators in Canada have developed and implemented procedures to respond to these emergencies thereby reducing potential damage due to GICs Since 1989 Hydro-Quebec has spent more than $12 billion installing transmission line series capacitors These capacitors block GIC flow in order to prevent them from causing damage to the system Hydro-Quebec has also installed monitoring equipment that spots voltage fluctuations and immediately notifies operators so that they may redistribute the load to other parts of the network Additional protective measures include disconnecting the links between power grids desensitizing automatic control systems delaying power station maintenance and delaying the replacement of equipment Utilities are also relying on space weather forecasting to help remain operational during geomagnetic storms Operators can implement conservative operating procedures once they have received an advance warning of a storm threat

EMPs are too spontaneous- the protections fail

Survival 9 ldquoElectromagnetic Pulse (EMP) Review of One Second Afterrdquo Survival 2013 September 20 2009EMP is the energy surge that comes off a nuclear explosion If that explosion takes place in space say 300 miles above the surface we will feel only the tingling sensation thatrsquos similar to what we feel when lightning strikes nearby But all the electronics in the country will feel it and will be blown out The pulse travels down anything that serves as an antenna anything that is metal and fries all the equipment thatrsquos running Because the pulse is ldquofront-loadedrdquo therersquos no build-up or warning to allow surge protectors or circuit breakers to function It will stop cars dead in their tracks (unless yoursquore driving one of the 1965 or so models that the government wants to get off the road) and will do even more damage to airplanes (As many as a quarter million people who are flying at any given time would be killed immediately)

Geomagnetic storms pale in comparison to EMP strikes

Foster et al 8 ldquoReport of the Commission to Assess the Threat to the United States from Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP) Attackrdquo April 2008 Dr John S Foster Jr Mr Earl Gjelde Dr William R Graham (Chairman) Dr Robert J Hermann Mr Henry (Hank) M Kluepfel Gen Richard L Lawson USAF (Ret) Dr Gordon K Soper Dr Lowell L Wood Jr Dr Joan B Woodard

Geomagnetic storms represent an approximation to an E3-induced voltage effect The experience to date is of events that may be orders of magnitude smaller in scope and less severe than that expected from an EMP mdash although the Commission has also investigated the impact of a 100-year superstorm The induced geomagnetic superstorm currents in the transmission lines will cause hundreds of high voltage transformers to saturate creating a severe reactive load in the power system leading to voltage collapse in the affected area and damage to elements of the transmission system The nature of this threat did not allow for experimental testing of the E3 effect so this historical record is the best information on the effect

75

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT Geomagnetic Storms

Three times the damage

Foster et al 8 ldquoReport of the Commission to Assess the Threat to the United States from Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP) Attackrdquo April 2008 Dr John S Foster Jr Mr Earl Gjelde Dr William R Graham (Chairman) Dr Robert J Hermann Mr Henry (Hank) M Kluepfel Gen Richard L Lawson USAF (Ret) Dr Gordon K Soper Dr Lowell L Wood Jr Dr Joan B Woodard

The late time EMP or E3 follows E1 and E2 and may last for a minute or more The E3 pulse is similar in a great many respects to geomagnetic effects induced by solar storms Solar storms and their impacts on electrical systems with long lines have been thoroughly evaluated and are known to cause serious damage to major electrical system components at much lower levels than the reasonably possible E3 impact This damage has been incurred in spite of functioning in-place protective systems Given the preceding E1 and E2 pulse damage to the protective systems and other system components damage from E3 to unprotected major system components is virtually assured

EMPs worse- no ozone protection and cascading effects

Forstchen 8 William R PhD Author of ldquoOne Second Afterrdquo httpwwwonesecondaftercompbwp_d10e87d9wp_d10e87d9html

EMP is shorthand for Electro Magnetic Pulse It is a rather unusual and frightening by-product when a nuclear bomb is detonated above the earthrsquos atmosphere We all know that our atmosphere and the magnetic field which surrounds our planet is a thin layer which not only keeps us alive but also protects us from dangerous radiation from the sun On a fairly regular basis there are huge solar storms on the sunrsquos surface which emit powerful jets of deadly radiation If not for the protective layer of our atmosphere and magnetic field those storms would fry us At times though the storm is so power that enough disruptive energy reaches the earthrsquos surface that it drowns out radio waves and even shorts electrical power grids this happened several years back in CanadaView the detonation of a nuclear bomb two hundred miles straight up as the same thing but infinitely more powerful since it is so close by As the bomb explodes it emits a powerful wave of gamma rays As this energy release hits the upper atmosphere it creates a electrical disturbance know as the Compton Effect The intensity is magnified View it as a small pebble rolling down a slope hitting a larger one setting that in motion until finally you have an avalanche

EMP strikes are frontloaded- no protection

Forstchen 8 William R PhD Author of ldquoOne Second Afterrdquo httpwwwonesecondaftercompbwp_d10e87d9wp_d10e87d9html

Wouldnrsquot circuit breakers and surge protectors stop it This is where the effect of EMP starts to get complex All electricity travels of course at the speed of light The circuit breakers that are built into our electrical system or the ones you buy to plug your own computer in to are designed to ldquoreadrsquo the flow of current If it suddenly exceeds a certain level the breaker snaps and takes you off line thus protecting everything beyond it More than a few of us have found out that when you buy a cheap surge protector for ten or twenty bucks sure it will snap off but the surge has already passed through and fried your expensive pla sma television or new computer Unlike a lightning strike or other power surge an EMP surge is ldquofront loadedrdquo Meaning it doesnrsquot do a build up for a couple of mirco-seconds allowing enough time for the circuit breaker to ldquoreadrdquo that trouble is on the way and shut down It comes instead like a wall of energy without any advance wave building up as a warning It therefore slams through nearly all commercial and even military surge protectors already in place and is past the ldquosafety barrierrdquo and into the delicate electronics before the system has time to react

76

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT Blackout Alt Causes

Alt causes to blackout are not as severe

Foster et al 8 Chairman of the Board of GKN Aerospace Transparency Systems ldquoReport of the Commission to Assess the Threat to the United States from Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP) Attackrdquo April 2008 Dr John S Foster Jr Mr Earl Gjelde Dr William R Graham (Chairman) Dr Robert J Hermann Mr Henry (Hank) M Kluepfel Gen Richard L Lawson USAF (Ret) Dr Gordon K Soper Dr Lowell L Wood Jr Dr Joan B Woodard

Distinctions Past electric power blackouts provide a baseline for assessing the impact of an EMP attack on the power grid as discussed previously However there are several important factors that distinguish the EMP collapse scenario from these historical experiences 1048715 In the historical power system outages only one or a few critical elements within an entire system have been debilitated For example a power generation facility may trip because a surge of current is unexpectedly presented through a fault from a particular load Yet a substantial portion of the system may well be rendered out of service as the disruption triggers a series of cascading failures each instigating the next failure (eg first a generator trips then the frequency sags and a load trips off or a transmission line trips out with its associated loads which in turn causes the frequency to overrun and another generator trips out and it continues to oscillate until the interconnected system comes down) In the case of an EMP attack elements within many critical facility components are likely to be damaged or disrupted simultaneously over a relatively broad geographic area thus creating an almost certain cascading collapse of the remaining elements Similarly while lightning might strike a single plant transmission line or large load causing it to trip out lightning has not hit multiple locations spread over a very wide area of the system with sufficient intensity and hitting all simultaneously to the extent that would be representative of an EMP attack 1048715 During historical outages the telecommunications system and associated control systems have continued to function This provides the system operators with eyes and ears to know what was damaged where damage occurred and in some cases the range of damage While the power system may still come down it is more possible to take protective measures to minimize damage and impact in order to effectuate rapid restoration The communications and control systemsrsquo functionality are at high risk of disruption and damage themselves during an EMP attack A minimum communications capability is needed to support immediate responses to isolate parts for continued operation and to implement necessary measures to restore the electrical system 1048715 In the early stages of the EMP attack even before the disruptions could be sensed and trips could occur that would lead to collapse some or many of the protective devices will be damaged that have ensured critical system components are safe to allow fast recovery As a result some and perhaps much of the electrical system would not be able to protect itself from the effects of multiple simultaneous and cascading failures Widespread damage to the generation transmission and distribution infrastructures and equipment are probable Rather than simply restoring power to an intact infrastructure with only a very few damaged components the recovery task would be to replace an extensively damaged system under very difficult and decaying circumstances and then proceeding to restoration 1048715 The control systems would be damaged to some extent as opposed to remaining fully operational as in historical outages The operations and dispatch centers where the vast interconnected system is controlled and managed would probably have damaged and disrupted components the readings from the system would be fragmented and in many cases false or nonexistent and communication by whatever means would be difficult to impractical to impossible Control and knowledge would range from unreliable at best to simply nonexistent Finding what and where damage has occurred and getting it repaired would be very problematic in any reasonable time frame even within the control centers themselves let alone out over the vast network with millions of devices 1048715 Skilled labor for a massive and diverse repair effort is not currently available if allocated over a large geographic area with great numbers of components and devices to check and repair where necessary This scope of damage could cover perhaps 70 percent or possibly more of the continental United States as well as a significant part of Canadarsquos population This is far too large to bring in the limited skilled labor from very distant points outside the affected area in any reasonable time even if one could coordinate them and knew where to send them and they had the means to get there Thus the extensive support from nearby fringe areas used so effectively in historical outages is likely to be unavailable as a practical matter as they themselves would be affected The blackout resulting from Hurricane Katrina an event comparable to a small EMP attack overtaxed the ability of the Nation to quickly restore electric power a failure that contributed to the slow recovery of the afflicted region 1048715 Other infrastructures would be similarly impacted simultaneously with the electrical system such as transportation communication and even water and food to sustain crews The ability to find and get spare parts and components or purchase services would be severely hampered by lack of normal financial systems in addition to communication transportation and other factors The Hurricane Katrina blackout caused precisely such problems 1048715 Fuel supplies for the power generation would be interrupted First the SCADA and DCS systems used in delivery of the fuel would be adversely impacted In addition much of the fuel supply infrastructure is dependent upon the electrical system For example natural gas-fired plants (which make up such a large share of the domestic generation) would be rendered inoperable since their fuel is delivered just in time for use Coal plants have stockpiles that variously might be adequate for a week to a month The few remaining oil-fired plants similarly have a limited storage of fuel Nuclear plants would reasonably be expected to still have fuel but they would have to forego protective regulations to continue to operate Many renewable fueled resources would still have their fuel supply but EMP effects on controls may still render them inoperable

77

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT Alternative EMP forms

Nuclear EMPs affect the whole continental US Other HPMs only travel a mile

Wilson 8 Clay- Specialist in Technology and National Security Foreign Affairs Defense and Trade Division ldquoHigh Altitude Electromagnetic Pulse (HEMP) and High Power Microwave (HPM) Devices Threat Assessmentsrdquo Congressional Research Service March 26 2008

HEMP is produced when a nuclear weapon is detonated high above the Earthrsquos surface creating gamma-radiation that interacts with the atmosphere to create an intense electromagnetic energy field that is harmless to people as it radiates outward but which can overload computer circuitry with effects similar to but causing damage much more swiftly than a lightning strike6 The effects of HEMP became fully known to the United States in 1962 during a high-altitude nuclear test (code named ldquoStarfish Primerdquo) over the Pacific Ocean when radio stations and electronic equipment were disrupted 800 miles away throughout Hawaii The HEMP effect can span thousands of miles depending on the altitude and the design and power of the nuclear burst (a single device detonated at an appropriate altitude over Kansas reportedly could affect all of the continental United States)7 and can be picked up by metallic conductors such as wires or power cables acting as antennas to conduct the energy shockwave into the electronic systems of cars airplanes and communications equipment Description of High-Power Microwave HPM is a non-nuclear radio frequency energy field It can be produced as a weapon when a powerful chemical detonation is instantly transformed by a special coil device called a flux compression generator into a strong electromagnetic field of microwave energy8 Other methods such as powerful batteries can also be used to create a reusable HPM weapon HPM energy can be focused using a speciallyshaped antenna or emitter to produce effects similar to HEMP but only within a very limited range Unlike HEMP however HPM radiation is comprised of shorter wave forms at higher-frequencies which make it highly effective against electronic equipment and more difficult to harden against A mechanically simple suitcasesized device using a chemical explosive and special focusing antenna might theoretically produce a one-time instantaneous HPM shockwave that could disrupt many computers within a 1-mile range9 Also HPM energy at higher power levels (megawatts) and powered for a longer time interval reportedly could cause physical harm to persons near the source emitter or possibly in the path of a narrowly focused energy beam10

HPMs donrsquot effect a large area

Wilson 8 Clay- Specialist in Technology and National Security Foreign Affairs Defense and Trade Division ldquoHigh Altitude Electromagnetic Pulse (HEMP) and High Power Microwave (HPM) Devices Threat Assessmentsrdquo Congressional Research Service March 26 2008

Electromagnetic energy characterized as weapon potentially threatening to national security can be created as a pulse traditionally by two methods overhead nuclear burst and microwave emission High-Altitude Electromagnetic Pulse (HEMP) is an instantaneous electromagnetic energy field produced in the atmosphere by the power and radiation of a nuclear explosion and that is damaging to electronic equipment over a very wide area depending on the design of the nuclear device and altitude of the burst High-Power Microwave (HPM) electromagnetic energy can be produced as an instantaneous pulse created through special electrical equipment that transforms battery power or powerful chemical reaction or explosion into intense microwaves that are very damaging to electronics within a much smaller area

78

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT Protective Measures

The blast zaps through hardened electronics

Wilson 8 Clay- Specialist in Technology and National Security Foreign Affairs Defense and Trade Division ldquoHigh Altitude Electromagnetic Pulse (HEMP) and High Power Microwave (HPM) Devices Threat Assessmentsrdquo Congressional Research Service March 26 2008

Electronic equipment may be hardened by surrounding it with protective metallic shielding which routes damaging electromagnetic fields away from highly sensitive electrical components This method known as Faraday cage protection is traditionally used to protect electronic equipment from a lightning strike However power surges HEMP or HPM weapons could possibly involve peak currents of tens of millions of amps which can pass through a protective Faraday cage Additionally equipment placed within a Faraday cage may also be made vulnerable by any wires running into to the cage which can conduct the electromagnetic shockwave into the equipment Depending on the power level involved points of entry into the shielded cages can sometimes be protected from electromagnetic pulse by using specially designed surge protectors special wire termination procedures screened isolated transformers spark gaps or other types of specially-designed electrical filters Critical systems may also be protected by increasing the number of backup units and by keeping these units dispersed and out of range of the electromagnetic pulse source emitter26

The second stage of the EMP blast eats through protective barriers

Wilson 8 Clay- Specialist in Technology and National Security Foreign Affairs Defense and Trade Division ldquoHigh Altitude Electromagnetic Pulse (HEMP) and High Power Microwave (HPM) Devices Threat Assessmentsrdquo Congressional Research Service March 26 2008

A high altitude nuclear explosion (that creates HEMP) produces three major energy components that arrive in sequence and which have measurably different effects that can be cumulatively damaging to electronic equipment The first energy component is the initial energy shockwave which lasts about one microsecond and is similar to extremely intense static electricity that can overload circuitry for every electronic device that is within line of sight of the burst A secondary energy component then arrives which has characteristics that are similar to a lightning strike By itself this second energy component might not be an issue for some critical infrastructure equipment if anti-lightning protective measures are already in place However the rise time of the first component is so rapid and intense that it can destroy many protective measures allowing the second component to further disrupt the electronic equipment The third energy component is a longer-lasting magnetic signal from about one microsecond to one full second in duration This geomagnetic signal causes an effect that is damaging primarily to long-lines electronic equipment A localized magnetic effect builds up throughout the length of the transmission lines and then quickly collapses producing a magnetohydrodynamic (MHD) ldquoheaverdquo or ldquolate-timerdquo power surge that overloads equipment connected to the power and telecommunications infrastructure This latetime effect adds to the initial HEMP effect and systems connected to long-lines power and communications systems may be further disrupted by the combined effects Smaller isolated systems do not collect so much of this third energy component and are usually disrupted only by the first energy component of HEMP

79

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT Protective Measures

Commercial surge protectors will fail

Wilson 8 Clay- Specialist in Technology and National Security Foreign Affairs Defense and Trade Division ldquoHigh Altitude Electromagnetic Pulse (HEMP) and High Power Microwave (HPM) Devices Threat Assessmentsrdquo Congressional Research Service March 26 2008

Some assert that little has been done by the private sector to protect against the threat from electromagnetic pulse and that commercial electronic systems in the United States could be severely damaged by either HEMP or smaller-scale HPM8 Commercial electronic surge arresters used for lightning strikes reportedly do not clamp fast enough to protect against the instantaneous effects of electromagnetic pulse9 In March 2007 a survey of state Adjutants General who oversee National Guard units throughout the country found that most state-based emergency responders are not actively preparing against an attack on the United States by electromagnetic pulse The survey entitled Missile Defense and the Role of the States was conducted jointly by the Anchorage-based Institute of the North and the Claremont Institute of Claremont California Survey questions were sent to Adjutants General of all 50 states with more than half responding Although 96 of state Adjutants General indicated significant concern over an EMP attack the majority had done little or no analysis of the effects of an overhead EMP attack and little or no training or preparation to harden electronic equipment None of the Adjutants General surveyed indicated that they were actively involved in a formal planning process for response to an EMP attack10

80

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT Low Altitude Nuclear Explosions

Low altitude nuclear explosions do no cause any of the dangerous EMP effects

Johnston 9 Robert Wm- PhD in physics from UT-Dallas ldquoHigh-altitude nuclear explosionsrdquo 28 January 2009

Several effects are relatively unique to high altitude bursts Electromagnetic pulse (EMP) is important only for high altitude bursts For such detonations ionization

of the upper atmosphere can produce a brief intense pulse of radio frequency radiation which can damage or disrupt electronic devices For explosions above most of the atmosphere EMP can affect large areas

Ionization of the atmosphere from explosions in the atmosphere can interfere with radar and radio communications for short periods

Charged particles produced by explosions above the Earths atmosphere can be captured by the Earths magnetic field temporarily creating artificial radiation belts that can damage spacecraft and injure astronautscosmonauts in orbit

Ground attacks do not destroy satellites in LEO

Kueter 7 Jeff- president of the George C Marshall Institute ldquoChinarsquos Space Ambitions ndash And Oursrdquo The New Atlantis Number 16 Spring 2007 pp 7-22

There are numerous ways our space assets could be disabled or destroyed One likely threat to US space assets resides in a very terrestrial environment strikes against ground stations and launch systems Such attacks could constrain the usefulness of our existing satellites or reduce our ability to put new satellites into orbit But such ground attacks would probably at worst only diminish our ability to use our space assets since the data transmitted from orbiting satellites could in most cases be rerouted to other receiving stations on the ground and since our launch systems are (somewhat) redundant Of more concern is the possibility of attacks that directly destroy or damage satellites since they cannot at present be replaced quickly easily or cheaply Without a reorientation of the way it acquires space hardware the United States faces substantial barriers to repairing or replacing damaged satellites

81

Cornell HKHANE Aff

CP Theories

Conditionality is a voter and justifies the aff capturing the perma) Time skew ndash the aff has to invest time in multiple worlds that the neg can just kickb) Strat skew ndash the neg can run multiple contradictory worldviews that prevent us from making our best

argumentsc) in-depth education is impossible when the neg can just kick any position that we really press them on

PICs are a voting issuea) Strat skew- by mooting the 1AC they deprive the aff of a third of speech timeb) Vague plan writing- trading off with more educational negative groundc) Aff contradiction ndash PICs force us to argue against ourselves Our strike plans not verifiable card could

be used against usd) Inifintely regressive- justifying any single pic opens up the floodgates for menial one word pics

International fiat is abusive and a voting issue1 Not Predictable- There are an infinite number of international actors that the aff can never be ready to

debate2 Literature- The negative should have to produce solvency evidence that speaks to the exact mandates

of the plan in context to their international actor so that they can ensure predictability within the literature

3 Bad Advocacy Model- The judge is supposed to be a US policy maker not have international jurisdiction These types of counterplans make world peace CPs and utopia CPs legitimate

4 Infinitely regressive- they can have as many actors as they want as well as the ability to fiat the object of resolution That allows them to literally fiat out our advantages and win on a small risk of disads meaning debate is never fair or predictable

5 International organizations are uniquely abusive- they compromise multiple countries including the US which makes them plan-plus and not competitive because US action is involved

82

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT Hardening CP

Perm do both

CP alone signals a new race and causes escalation

Lewallen 2 John- Political Science at Whitman University organizer of the Nuclear Peace Action Group Fulbright Scholarship recipient Public Ocean Access Network ldquoHigh-Altitude Nuclear Warrdquo Nuclear Press p48

If a US national effort to defend vital systems against nuclear EMP attack is done in the context of moving away from national missile defense and space weapons in general and toward cooperation for disarmament and non-proliferation of nuclear weapons with Russia China and other nations it will be viewed by US adversaries as a prudent defensive move to protect American civilization However if the United States starts to harden civilian electronics against EMP in the current context of a military domination of space and invulnerability to missile attack it will send an aggressive and offensive signal that the US is preparing to fight World War Three This is a war we well all lose

Guidelines will not be implemented

Sirak 4 Michael- JDW Staff Reporter ldquoUS vulnerable to EMP attackrdquo Janersquos Defence Weekly 26 July 2004While the US military has grown increasingly dependent on computers electronics and information systems it has relaxed requirements for EMP-hardened systems since the end of the Cold War and its overall record of adherence to its guidelines for such robust equipment has been spotty they said This trend continues in the wrong direction the panel noted Similarly the US civilian critical infrastructure is not adequately prepared to deal with the effects of an EMP attack according to the panel which is known formally as the Commission to Assess the Threat to the United States from Electromagnetic Pulse Attack Congress created the panel in 2000 out of concern that this issue was not receiving enough attention

Even CP protects military infrastructure the military will be undermined because they rely on commercial electronics

Wilson 8 Clay- Specialist in Technology and National Security Foreign Affairs Defense and Trade Division ldquoHigh Altitude Electromagnetic Pulse (HEMP) and High Power Microwave (HPM) Devices Threat Assessmentsrdquo Congressional Research Service March 26 2008

The US military has adopted a policy where commercial electronic equipment is now used extensively in support of complex US weapons systems For example a large percentage of US military communications during Operation Iraqi Freedom was reportedly carried by commercial satellites and much military administrative information is currently routed through the civilian Internet43 Many commercial communications satellites particularly those in low earth orbit reportedly may degrade or cease to function shortly after a high altitude nuclear explosion44 However some observers believe that possible HEMP and HPM vulnerabilities of military information systems are outweighed by the benefits gained through access to innovative technology and increased communications flexibility that come from using state-of-the-art electronics and from maintaining connections to the civilian Internet and satellite systems

Bright 2 Melanie ldquoHigh-Altitude Nuclear Explosions Blind Deaf And Dumbrdquo Janes Defence Weekly October 23 2002 httpwwwglobalsecurityorgorgnews2002nuke_explosionhtm

The most obvious solution to HANEs is to harden civilian satellites In fact this is not an option with current technology More shielding means more weight

83

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT Hardening CP

Hardening sends threatening signals

Lewallen 99 John- Public Ocean Access Network ldquoThe Blackout Bomb What It Means To Yourdquo httpnonuclearnettheblackoutbombhtm

However I respectfully disagree with Dr Woods recommendation that any civilian hardening to protect us from EMP be done After a flirtation with civil defense and bomb shelters Americans have realized that nuclear attack against the United States is not something they are willing to prepare for because there is no rational way to prepare for it I believe Russia China and the United States form a Nuclear Triangle with constant low-to high-key nuclear weapons confrontation in the air If we start hardening our civilian infrastructure to withstand EMP it will signal to the Russians and Chinese that we are moving toward the brink of nuclear war

CP links to politics

Chisholm 5 Patrick ldquoProtect our electronics against EMP attackrdquo Christian Science Monitor December 19 2005

It is a thorny question as to whether the FCC should revise its standards to require electronics manufacturers to build in EMP protection This could be prohibitively expensive for the manufacture of individual components But businesses and government agencies should install EMP protection at the system level (This also would provide protection against other electromagnetic disturbances such as lightning)

84

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT NMD CP

Lewallen 2 John- Political Science at Whitman University organizer of the Nuclear Peace Action Group Fulbright Scholarship recipient Public Ocean Access Network ldquoHigh-Altitude Nuclear Warrdquo Nuclear Press p9-10

Dr Graham noted that a nuclear missile could have ldquosympatheticrdquo or ldquosalvagerdquo fusing which means it could be detonated when attacked by a missile defense system In other words US national missile defense if effective could cause a high-altitude nuclear EMP burst

Lewallen 2 John- Political Science at Whitman University organizer of the Nuclear Peace Action Group Fulbright Scholarship recipient Public Ocean Access Network ldquoHigh-Altitude Nuclear Warrdquo Nuclear Press Pg45The Chinese weapon to trump the National Missile Defense is a missile satellite or fractional orbiting nuclear bomb either intended for high-altitude nuclear EMP or fused to detonate when attacked by a hit-to-kill National Missile Defense system As noted by William Graham at the Weldon Hearings ldquoone of the ways an offensive nuclear weapon on a missile can be armed is in what is called a sympathetic or a salvage fusing mode so that even if you intercepted above the atmosphere before it reaches its target once it knows it is being attacked once the offensive nuclear warhead knows it is being attacked its fusing system may choose to detonate itself there to get at least the EMP and space radiation effect of the weaponrdquoIn short Clintonrsquos hit-to-kill National Missile Defense if effective could cause high-altitude nuclear explosions Laser missile defense systems in earlier stages of research and development are coming to be focused on shooting down missiles in their boost phase before they achieve high altitude The Russians and Chinese are very unlikely to allow effective boost-phase missile attack systems to be set up by the United StatesAll attempts by the United States or any other nuclear power to develop homeland missile defense systems suffer from three fatal flaws First counter-measures to any system can be developed much more cheaply than the system itself Secondly missile defense systems will take years to deploy at best while the Russians and Chinese have high-altitude and low-altitude nuclear weapons deployed and ready to strike the United States nowThirdly a credibly effective national missile defense of the United States poses much greater threat of nuclear missile attack against the US than do the incredibly ineffective systems now publicly visible The imminent deployment of a missile defense system that would work (or that an adversary believes would work or even believes that the United States commanders believe would work) poses Russia or China with an ugly choice submit to US military domination or launch a preemptive nuclear strike against the US before its defenses are set up

Doesnrsquot solve spaceLewallen 2 John- Political Science at Whitman University organizer of the Nuclear Peace Action Group Fulbright Scholarship recipient Public Ocean Access Network ldquoHigh-Altitude Nuclear Warrdquo Nuclear Press Pg33On Feb 4 2001 Sergei Ivanov Russian President Putinrsquos closest military advisor got up at a Munich meeting of defense ministers from many nations and said that any US national missile defense system would by definition abolish the 1972 Antiballistic Missile Treaty (ABM)ldquoAndrdquo Mr Ivanov added ldquothe destruction of the ABM treaty we are quite confident will result in the annihilation of the whole structure of strategic stability and create prerequisites for a new arms race ndash including one in spacerdquo

85

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT PAROS CP

Perm do both Curbing Chinese space ambitions is a prerequisite for a successful PAROS

Hitchens 9 Theresa- Director UN Institute for Disarmament Research ldquoSaving Space Threat Proliferation and Mitigationrdquo International Commission on Nuclear Non-proliferation and Disarmament May 19 2009

Finally the test also reverberated in the diplomatic arena calling into question the credibility of Chinarsquos longstanding efforts to push forward a treaty on the Prevention of an Arms Race in Outer Space (PAROS) and threatening to further weaken already shaky chances for negotiations on such a treaty to commence at the Conference on Disarmament (CD) in Geneva Disagreement on starting PAROS negotiations had been at the center of the CDrsquos 12-year standstill blocking the acceptance of a formal program of work and most specifically preventing negotiations on a Fissile Material Cutoff Treaty (FMCT)mdashdue to the standoff between the US and China on whether one set of talks should go forward without the other Although Russia and China dropped the demand for simultaneous negotiations in 2003 (instead calling for ldquodiscussionsrdquo of PAROS) at the time the Bush administration was not interested in a deal on either FMCT or PAROS With the May 29 agreement by the CD on a new program of work that includes both FMCT negotiations and PAROS discussions progress toward nuclear disarmament and nonproliferation looking more achievable than it has in many years Certainly this momentous shift is largely due to the dramatic change in US policy emerging from the Obama administration Nonetheless there remain major obstacles to a PAROS treaty (elaborated below)

86

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT Asteroids PIC

Quantitatively even if we only win 11000 probability for the solvency deficit it outweighs the risk of an asteroid hitting Earth even assuming the nuclear weapon works

Anissimov 9 [Michael Media Director for the Singularity Institute and Fundraising Director North America for the Lifeboat Foundation consultant for a variety of future-oriented non-profit organizations and for-profit companies including the Methuselah Foundation Center for Responsible Nanotechnology and Kurzweil Technologies ldquoEurekalert How to deflect asteroids and save the Earthrdquo Thursday Apr 16 httpwwwacceleratingfuturecommichaelblog200904eurekalert-how-to-deflect-asteroids-and-save-the-earth]

The asteroid risk is a great one to get people acquainted with the concept of catastrophic risk in general because it is statistically pinned down very well However according to some calculations the risk of a civilization-ending asteroid hitting Earth in the next 100 years is only 15000 leading to a 1500000 annual probability Say we give a 1500 annual probability estimate of the end of civilization due to nuclear war (Seems like quite the underestimate) According to standard cost-benefit analysis we should assign roughly 1000 times more importance to the task of minimizing the chance of catastrophic nuclear war than to deflecting asteroids We may see some common miscalculations on this score as asteroids are new and exciting and nuclear war is the same boring old risk that has been around for over half a century

PICs are a voting issuee) Strat skew- by mooting the 1AC they deprive the aff of a third of speech timef) Vague plan writing- trading off with more educational negative groundg) Aff contradiction ndash PICs force us to argue against ourselves Our strike plans not verifiable card could

be used against ush) Inifintely regressive- justifying any single pic opens up the floodgates for menial one word pics

Conditionality is a voter and justifies the aff capturing the permd) Time skew ndash the aff has to invest time in multiple worlds that the neg can just kicke) Strat skew ndash the neg can run multiple contradictory worldviews that prevent us from making our best

argumentsf) in-depth education is impossible when the neg can just kick any position that we really press them on

87

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT Japan Rearm

Japan likes the plan ndash they think US EMP attacks would damage Japan

Birdnow 6 Timothy contributor to American Daily Review writer for The American Thinker ldquoEMP and the Unfought Victoryrdquo July 1 httpwwwamericanthinkercom200607emp_and_the_unfought_victoryhtml

Couple an EMP attack on the West Coast with a terrorist strike and you have a recipe for chaos Here is one simple scenario send men into the CaliforniaArizonaNevada scrubland and light fires Without aircraft or water those fires could engulf the entire west This would be an easy lowmdashtech way to maximize damage while keeping operational costs to a minimum Of course the usual terrorist methods mdash bombs sniper attacks etc would also work well You could light natural gas wells oil wells and other combustible facilities on fire and watch the black smoke pour into the sky You could take steps to poison water sources so that people would die from drinking tainted water The point is nobody will be able to stop sleeper cells from acting after such an attack and the terrorists would know the best ways to strike to maximize their damage The real question is how would the United States respond to such an attack Will we launch a nuclear strike against North Korea killing millions and poisoning the entire region (including our friends in Japan and South Korea) An EMP attack against the DPRK would be the equivalent of embargoing gasoline on Sitting Bull they have so few high tech gadgets it would be pointless

88

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT Consult Japan

Japan says no ndash they fear an EMP attack

a) China

Pry 5 Dr Peter Vincent- EMP Commission Staff ldquoForeign Views Of Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP) Attackrdquo Before The United States Senate Subcommittee On Terrorism Technology And Homeland Security March 8 2005 httpwwwendtimesreportcomEMP_attackhtml

Some foreign analysts judging from open source statements and writings appear to regard EMP attack as a legitimate use of nuclear weapons because EMP would inflict no or few prompt civilian casualties EMP attack appears to be a unique exception to the general stigma attached to nuclear employment by most of the international community in public statements Significantly even some analysts in Japan and Germanyndashnations that historically have been most condemnatory of nuclear and other weapons of mass destruction in official and unofficial forumsndashappear to regard EMP attack as morally defensible For example a June 2000 Japanese article in a scholarly journal citing senior political and military officials appears to regard EMP attack as a legitimate use of nuclear weapons ldquoAlthough there is little chance that the Beijing authorities would launch a nuclear attack which would incur the disapproval of the international community and which would result in such enormous destruction that it would impede postwar cleanup and policies a serious assault starting with the use of nuclear weapons which would not harm humans animals or property would be valid If a nuclear warhead was detonated 40 kilometers above Taiwan an electromagnetic wave would be propagated which would harm unprotected computers radar and IC circuits on the ground within a 100 kilometer radius and the weapons and equipment which depend on the communications and electronics technology whose superiority Taiwan takes pride in would be rendered combat ineffective at one stroke If they were detonated in the sky in the vicinity of Ilan the effects would also extend to the waters near Yonakuni [in Okinawa] so it would be necessary for Japan too to take care Those in Taiwan having lost their advanced technology capabilities would end up fighting with tactics and technology going back to the 19th century They would inevitably be at a disadvantage with the PLA and its overwhelming military force superiorityrdquo (Su Tzu-yun Jadi 1 June 2000)

b) North Korea

Weldon 99 Curt Weldon A Representative From Pennsylvania Chairman Military Research And Development Subcommittee Electromagnetic Pulse Threats To US Military And Civilian Infrastructure House of Representatives Committee on Armed Services Military Research and Development Subcommittee Washington DC Thursday October 7 1999 httpcommdocshousegovcommitteessecurityhas280010000has280010_0HTM

The EMP threat may have acquired new and urgent relevance as the proliferation of nuclear weapons and missile technology accelerates North Korea for example is assessed as already having developed one or two atomic weapons and is on the verge of testing an Inter-Continental Ballistic Missiles (ICBM) capable of delivering a nuclear warhead to the United States North Korea already has missiles capable of delivering a nuclear warhead against US regional allies and US forces based in Japan and South Korea

89

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT Primacy DA

Primacy collapse is inevitable in the status quo- rogue states will achieve EMP capability that can decimate the US Their primacy good cards assume that the US will be the only country capable of a first strike And This is impossible because Primacy leads other nations to seek asymmetric warfighting tactics like EMP

Calleo 3 David P- Currently director of the European Studies Program and Professor of The Johns Hopkins University Taught at Brown Yale and Columbia ldquoEurope and America Different Geopolitical Wavelengthsrdquo Annual Foreign Policy Conference Heinrich Boumlll Stiftung - November 13th 2003

Military superiority is frequently vulnerable to what might be called the ldquoLaw of Asymmetrical Deterrencerdquo In the Cold War for example despite the huge nuclear arsenals of the superpowers anyone else with a ldquosecond-strikerdquo capability could have a reasonable deterrent with only a few hundred missiles Nothing has changed in that realm since the Soviet collapse ndash except that there are a few more nuclear powers Nuclear deterrence still seems a cheap way for the weak to counter the strong This seems true of weapons of mass destruction in general Not only are they relatively cheap equalizers but the presence of a superpower actively exercising its military superiority is a great inducement for others to acquire these equalizing weapons

EMP warfare shatters US primacy since the consequences are so huge and the US is the most vulnerable

Lewallen 2 John- Political Science at Whitman University organizer of the Nuclear Peace Action Group Fulbright Scholarship recipient Public Ocean Access Network ldquoHigh-Altitude Nuclear Warrdquo Nuclear Press Pg38

The United States has overwhelming military superiority and a gargantuan vulnerability to high-altitude nuclear EMP attack Russia and China have had several decades to fill their weapons bag with specialized nuclear EMP weapons and to prepare to sling them over the American homeland by missile by satellite or in a fractional orbiting bomb flung into orbit with a Scud or other short-range missile David knew that Goliath had a soft spot in his forehead just as the Russians and Chinese are perfectly aware that the United States in the words of Representative Weldon is the ldquomost vulnerable nation on Earth to electronic warfarerdquo

Primacy via EMP weapons makes nuclear apocalypse inevitable

Lewallen 2 John- Political Science at Whitman University organizer of the Nuclear Peace Action Group Fulbright Scholarship recipient Public Ocean Access Network ldquoHigh-Altitude Nuclear Warrdquo Nuclear Press Pg43

If it comes the next global war almost certainly will begin with high-altitude nuclear EMP Anything done or refrained from to reduce international conflict and promote international cooperation will help humanity avoid the awesome setback of global war The nation-state system itself is perhaps the most dangerous factor auguring high-altitude nuclear war It is perhaps amazing that we humans have gone the past fifty-five years without anyone blowing up a nuclear bomb How much longer can we tickle the dragonrsquos tail before the fundamental flaw of competing armies with nuclear weapons finishes us off The United States fond of calling itself the worldrsquos only superpower has the same tendency as past military empires (although not a self-acknowledged empire) a strong and perhaps inevitable drive to move from world preeminence to world domination The US military-industrial complex is set up to endlessly conceive design produce and deploy new strategic weaponry

90

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT Primacy DA

Extend our CDI and Schorr evidence that EMP primacy causes dangerous crisis escalation and accidental nuclear war

Nuclear primacy causes uncontrollable crisis dynamics

Schwarz 6 Benjamin- literary editor and the national editor of The Atlantic foreign policy analyst at the RAND Corporation ldquoThe Perils of Primacyrdquo The Atlantic JanuaryFebruary httpwwwtheatlanticcomdoc200601primacy

Lieber and Press emphasize that their analysis doesnt prove that a US first strike would succeed but it highlights a development that is grave if only because its one that prudent planners in Russia and China who conduct similar analyses are no doubt already surmising that their countries can no longer be confident of having a viable deterrent Surely adding to their alarm is the realization that the nuclear imbalance troubling enough already will only grow in the coming years Washingtons withdrawal from the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty and its concomitant pursuit of a national missile-defense system will greatly enhance its offensive nuclear capabilities because although critics of missile defense correctly argue that it could never shield America from a massive full-scale nuclear attack it could quite plausibly deal with the very few missiles an adversary might have left to deploy after a US first strike Whats more the United States is actively pursuing a series of initiativesmdashincluding further advances in anti-submarine and anti-satellite warfare in missile accuracy and potency and in wide-area remote sensing aimed at finding relocatable targets such as mobile ICBMsmdashthat will render Russias and Chinas nuclear forces all the more vulnerable To be sure Americas emerging nuclear hegemony could bring benefits including potential leverage vis-agrave-vis our superpower counterparts in such areas of competition as the Balkans and Taiwan It will also force China to divert defense resources from its power-projection efforts in East Asia (This however would be both a blessing and a curse We should expect a new prolonged and intense nuclear arms race Lieber and Press conclude) But whether or not America has deliberately pursued the ability to win a nuclear conflict that capability will increase the risk of great-power war US-Chinese relations are bound to be edgy or worse for the foreseeable future and although relations between Washington and Moscow are nowhere near their Cold War nadir actual and potential strains remain formidable Each country has nuclear-armed missiles that can be delivered against the other within minutesmdashand in Americas nuclear-war plans the overwhelming number of targets remain inside Russia Most important any shift in the nuclear balance itself will engender a volatility that could cause seemingly small conflicts between countries to quickly spiral Confronted with the growing nuclear imbalance Russia and China will be forced to try to redress it but given Americas advantages that effort as Lieber and Press note could take well over a decade Until a nuclear stalemate is restoredmdashif it ever ismdashMoscow and Beijing will surely buy deterrence by spreading out their nuclear forces decentralizing their command-and-control systems and implementing launch on warning policies If more than half a century of analyzing nuclear dangers and crisis stability has taught us anything it is that all these steps can cause crises to escalate uncontrollably They could trigger the unauthorized or accidental use of nuclear weapons this could lead to inadvertent nuclear war American military preponderance now embraces the entire spectrum of conflict as Pentagon planners put it That is to say were miles ahead of everyone in every type of warfare But if that preponderance is leading to a world in which Russian and Chinese launch commanders are fingering nuclear hair triggers the game may not be worth the candle Without any public scrutiny or debate the United States has emerged as the nuclear hegemon in possession of a destabilizing first-strike capability It does not matter whether this has come about by accident or design or whether Americas motives are worthy or malign the condition itself is the problem The ramifications of this state of affairs are of the gravest significance to Americas securitymdashand the worlds Its time for scrutiny and debate to begin

91

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT Damage Limitation

The ability to engage in various levels of nuclear war is key to damage limitation

Gray amp Payne 80 Colin S and Keith ldquoVictory is Possiblerdquo Foreign Policy Summer 1980 pp 14-27Nuclear war is unlikely to be an essentially meaningless terminal event Instead it is likely to be waged to coerce the Soviet Union to give up some recent gain Thus a president must have the ability not merely to end a war but to end it favorably The United States would need to be able to persuade desperate and determined Soviet leaders that it has the capability and the determination to wage nuclear war at even higher levels of violence until an acceptable outcome is achieved For deterrence to function during a war each side would have to calculate whether an improved outcome is possible through further escalation An adequate US deterrent posture is one that denies the Soviet Union any plausible hope of success at any level of strategic conflict offers a likely prospect of Soviet defeat and offers a reasonable chance of limiting damage to the United States Such a deterrence posture is often criticized as contributing to the arms race and causing strategic instability because it would stimulate new Soviet deployments However during the 1970s the Soviet Union showed that its weapon development and deployment decisions are not dictated by American actions Western understanding of what determines Soviet defense procurement is less than perfect but it is now obvious that Soviet weapon decisions cannot be explained with reference to any simple action-reaction model of arms-race dynamics In addition highly survivable US strategic forces should insure strategic stability by denying the Soviets an attractive first-strike target set

EMP warfare undermines our ability to perform limited nuclear war

Burnham 83 David- co-director of the Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse (TRAC) ldquoUS Fears One Bomb Could Cripple The Nationrdquo The New York Times

Another reason for the recent concern in the Government is the adoption by both the Carter and Reagan Administrations of a nuclear strategy that includes the possibility that this country might have to wage a prolonged limited nuclear war For a nation to conduct such a war military analysts stress much would depend on its ability to organize an effective civil defense that would enable a large part of the population to continue to house and feed itself CONTINUES The potential chaos that may be created by high altitude EMP has national security implications the Energy Department said in a statement explaining why it had started the new research program During a period of national crisis electrical power will be required to operate military installations civil defense facilities and critical industries In addition if EMP caused a disruption of the financial manufacturing retail transportation and communication industries as well as basic utilities serious economic and social consequences would result Disruption of the nations electrical power supply has grave implications In an article in Spectrum the authoritative magazine of the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers Eric J Lemer a contributing editor expressed similar concerns Power Grids Vulnerability The potential impact on the national power grid of a small number of high altitude EMP bursts would be comparable to that produced by large lightning bolts hitting every power line segment in the country he said When it is considered that two ordinary lightning bolts were the proximate cause of the 1977 New York City blackout it is easy to see why many analysts believe that a complete shutdown of the national power grid could be achieved by a handful of EMP detonations

92

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT Damage Limitation

Non Nuclear Pulse devices allow for damage limitation without undermining the escalation ladder

Wilson 8 Clay- Specialist in Technology and National Security Foreign Affairs Defense and Trade Division ldquoHigh Altitude Electromagnetic Pulse (HEMP) and High Power Microwave (HPM) Devices Threat Assessmentsrdquo Congressional Research Service March 26 2008

DOD research on pulsed-power HPM electromagnetic weapons is currently being done at Kirtland Air Force Base in Albuquerque New Mexico Weapons now being developed by the US military for electronic warfare can disrupt the trajectory of missiles while in flight and can overpower or degrade enemy communications telemetry and circuitry Other HPM weapons being tested by the military are portable and re-usable through battery-power and many are effective when fired miles away from a target These weapons can also be focused like a laser beam and tuned to an appropriate frequency in order to penetrate electronics that are heavily shielded against a nuclear attack The deepest bunkers with the thickest concrete walls reportedly are not safe from such a beam if they have even a single unprotected wire reaching the surface29 During Operation Iraqi Freedom many Iraqi command bunkers and suspected chemical-biological weapons bunkers were deeply buried underground and thought to be difficult to disable using conventional explosives New HPM weapons were reportedly considered for possible use in attacks against these targets because the numerous communications and power lines leading into the underground bunkers offered pathways for conducting powerful surges of electromagnetic energy that could destroy the computer equipment inside30 Because instantaneous HPM energy can reflect off the ground and possibly affect piloted aircraft above much testing currently involves HPM devices on Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs) and on the Air Force Conventional Air Launched Cruise Missile system By 2010 DOD reportedly will field several airlaunched UAVs using disposable and reusable HPM weapons designed to disrupt enemy computers31

93

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT Damage Limitation

A HEMP destroys US military capability and damage limitation

Graham 4 Dr William R- Deputy Administrator of NASA The report of the Commission to Assess the Threat to the United States From Electromagnetic Pulse Attackrdquo July 22 2004

Mr Langevin In the event that an EMP event threatened or damaged the GPS system what would happen to battlefield information and communications systems such as FBCB2 (Force XXI Battle Command Brigade-and-Below) Blue Force Tracker (BFT) and Movement Tracking System (MTS) Are there backup systems available if our situational awareness provided by GPS input is taken away Dr Graham Army battlefield information and communication systems such as FBCB2 (Force XXI Battle Command Brigade-and-Below) Blue Force Tracker (BFT) and Movement Tracking System (MTS) provide position location communication capability and force tracking-situational awareness These information and communication systems use the Global Positioning System (GPS) as a component Loss of a GPS signal would negate MTSs and BFTs ability to identify position location and to conduct force tracking While high Altitude EMP (HEMP) is not likely to directly damage the satellites that broadcast GPS signals because of the height of their orbits the ground-based systems that receive and make use of GPS information would be at risk unless protected against HEMP effects MTS and BFT transmit data via a communications satellite that would not be affected by loss of a GPS signal Certain ground platforms which use FBCB2 and BFT such as the Bradley Paladin and Ml have an inertial navigation unit (INU) which is a redundant capability for deternining position lacation Having to resort to using the INU would result in a degradation of performance and possible delay of missions due to reinitializing position data every 20-26 kilometers depending on the platform and the INU system used INUs do not rely on GPS signals The location data from the INU is transmitted via FBCB2 communications which again is not affected by loss of GPS signal The location data can then be used by FBCB2 for force tracking Situational awareness of any system on the battlefield which relies soley on GPS will no longer appear in the FBCB2 situational awareness display HEMP survivability is a requirement for the GPS receivers in MTS BFT and FBCB2 FBCB2 has been tested in many vehicles such as the HMMWV M1A2 SEP Tank STRYKER and LOSAT over the last four years There are no known HEMP survivability issues or concerns resulting from these tests BFT was tested on a HMMWV in April 04 and passed MTS evaluation on the Family of Medium Tactical Vehicles (FMTV) has been delayed due to asset availability However MTS relies on many of the same components as BFT so no major problems are anticipated It should also be noted that nuclear weapon effects other than HEMP could damage GPS or interfere with the transmission of GPS signals through the atmosphere bull In a high-altitude nuclear event loss of a GPS signal will degrade the ability of ground systems such as FBCB2 BFT and MTS to self-locate and track forces

94

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT Deterrence DA

1) Nuclear deterrent in trouble now

Kyl amp Perle 9 Jon Richard June 30 2009 ldquoOur Decaying Nuclear Deterrentrdquo Mr Kyl is a Republican senator from Arizona Mr Perle a fellow at the American Enterprise Institute was assistant secretary of defense in the Reagan administration lthttponlinewsjcomarticleSB124623202363966157htmlgt

Thus in his Prague speech Mr Obama announced that the US would immediately and aggressively pursue ratification of the comprehensive ban on the testing of nuclear weapons The administration believes without evidence that ratification of the test-ban treaty will discourage other countries from developing nuclear weapons Which countries does it have in mind Iran North Korea Syria Countries alarmed by the nuclear ambitions of their enemies Allies who may one day lose confidence in our nuclear umbrella There are good reasons why the test-ban treaty has not been ratified The attempt to do so in 1999 failed in the Senate mostly out of concerns about verification -- it simply is not verifiable It also failed because of an understandable reluctance on the part of the US Senate to forgo forever a test program that could in the future be of critical importance for our defense and the defense of our allies Robert Gates who is now Mr Obamas own secretary of defense warned in a speech last October that in the absence of a nuclear modernization program even the most modest of which

Congress has repeatedly declined to fund [a]t a certain point it will become impossible to keep extending the life of our arsenal especially in light of our testing moratorium Suppose future problems in our nuclear arsenal emerge that cannot be solved without testing Would our predicament

discourage nuclear proliferation -- or stimulate it For the foreseeable future the US and many of our allies rely on our nuclear deterrent And as long as the US possesses nuclear weapons they must be -- as Mr Obama recognized in Prague -- safe secure and effective Yet his proposed 2010 budget fails to take the necessary steps to do that Those steps have been studied extensively by the Perry-Schlesinger Commission (named for co-chairmen William Perry secretary of defense under President Bill Clinton and James R Schlesinger secretary of defense under Presidents Richard Nixon and Gerald Ford) Its consensus report released in May makes numerous recommendations to increase the funding for and improve the effectiveness of the deteriorating nuclear weapons laboratory complex (eg the Los Alamos facility in New Mexico the Pantex plant in Texas and the dangerously neglected Y-12 plant in Tennessee) that has become the soft underbelly of our deterrent force The commission also assessed the nuclear weapons infrastructure that is essential to a safe secure and effective deterrent and declared it in serious need of transformation It looked at our laboratory-based scientific and technical expertise and concluded that the intellectual

infrastructure is in serious trouble A major cause is woefully inadequate funding The commission rightly argued that we must exercise the full range of laboratory skills including nuclear weapon design skills Skills that are not exercised will atrophy The president and the Congress must heed these recommendations There are some who believe that failing to invest

adequately in our nuclear deterrent will move us closer to a nuclear free world In fact blocking crucial modernization means unilateral disarmament by unilateral obsolescence This unilateral disarmament will only encourage nuclear proliferation since our allies will see the danger and our adversaries the opportunity By neglecting -- and in some cases even opposing -- essential modernization programs arms-control proponents are actually undermining the prospect for further reductions of the US nuclear arsenal As our nuclear weapons stockpile ages and concern about its reliability increases we will have to compensate by retaining more nuclear weapons than would otherwise be the case This reality will necessarily influence future arms-control negotiations beginning with the upcoming Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty follow-on For these negotiations the Russians are insisting on a false linkage between nuclear weapons and missile defenses They are

demanding that we abandon defenses against North Korean or Iranian missiles as a condition for mutual reductions in American and Russian strategic forces As the president cuts the budget for missile defense and cedes ground to the Russians on our planned defense sites in Poland and the Czech Republic we may end up abandoning a needed defense of the US and our European allies from the looming Iranian threat There is a fashionable notion that if only we and the Russians reduced our nuclear forces other nations would reduce their existing arsenals or abandon plans to acquire nuclear weapons altogether This idea an article of faith of the soft power approach to halting nuclear proliferation assumes that the nuclear ambitions of Kim Jong Il or Mahmoud Ahmadinejad would be curtailed or abandoned in response to reductions in the American and Russian deterrent forces -- or that India Pakistan or China would respond with reductions of their own

Non Nuclear Pulse devices solve

Wilson 8 Clay- Specialist in Technology and National Security Foreign Affairs Defense and Trade Division ldquoHigh Altitude Electromagnetic Pulse (HEMP) and High Power Microwave (HPM) Devices Threat Assessmentsrdquo Congressional Research Service March 26 2008

DOD research on pulsed-power HPM electromagnetic weapons is currently being done at Kirtland Air Force Base in Albuquerque New Mexico Weapons now being developed by the US military for electronic warfare can disrupt the trajectory of missiles while in flight and can overpower or degrade enemy communications telemetry and circuitry Other HPM weapons being tested by the military are portable and re-usable through battery-power and many are effective when fired miles away from a target These weapons can also be focused like a laser beam and tuned to an appropriate frequency in order to penetrate electronics that are heavily shielded against a nuclear attack The deepest bunkers with the thickest concrete walls reportedly are not safe from such a beam if they have even a single unprotected wire reaching the surface29 During Operation Iraqi Freedom many Iraqi command bunkers and suspected chemical-biological weapons bunkers were deeply buried underground and thought to be difficult to disable using conventional explosives New HPM weapons were reportedly considered for possible use in attacks against these targets because the numerous communications and power lines leading into the underground bunkers offered pathways for conducting powerful surges of electromagnetic energy that could destroy the computer equipment inside30 Because instantaneous HPM energy can reflect off the ground and possibly affect piloted aircraft above much testing currently involves HPM devices on Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs) and on the Air Force Conventional Air Launched Cruise Missile system By 2010 DOD reportedly will field several airlaunched UAVs using disposable and reusable HPM weapons designed to disrupt enemy computers31

95

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT Deterrence DA

US EMP strikes are not used to deter EMPs

Riddle 4 Lieutenant Colonel Thomas C- United States Army ldquoNuclear High Altitude Electromagnetic Pulse ndash Implications For Homeland Security And Homeland Defenserdquo US Army War College 03 May 2004

Similarly the decision to implement an earlier deployment of an initial ground-based interceptor and improved ballistic missile tracking capabilities will support the improved passive and active defenses called for in the NSS 50 Also the convincing demonstration of the continuing efficiency and effectiveness of Americarsquos global precision strike capabilities during Operation IRAQI FREEDOM is a clear indication that multi-dimensional counterforce capabilities remain a viable element of Americarsquos counter-proliferation capabilities that may be used if required to prevent a HEMP attack on the United States Finally the United Statesrsquo demonstrated willingness to conduct preemptive strikes to neutralize WMD under the concept of imminent defense adds an unmistakable dimension to the concept of deterrence for those seeking to acquire weapons of mass destruction51

EMPs have no deterrent effect against the majority of countries because they are less reliant on electronic systems

Timmerman 2 Kenneth R- director of the Foundation for Democracy in Iran 2006 Nobel Peace Prize Nominee ldquoUS Threatened With EMP Attackrdquo Feb 1 2002

The more backward the country the more attractive EMP becomes as a weapon against the United States Bartlett explains ldquoIf North Korea were to launch a missile straight up and explode a nuclear weapon 500 kilometers over their own territory it wouldnrsquot do them a lot of damage because they have very little dependence on electronic systems But it would have a devastating impact on South Korea as well as on our 37000 troops stationed there With North Korearsquos million soldiers they could just walk all over us with impunityrdquo

Deterrence against EMP strikes fails now- lack of clear response

Spencer 4 Jack- Senior Policy Analyst for Defense and National Security in the Kathryn and Shelby Cullom Davis Institute for International Studies at The Heritage Foundation ldquoThe Electromagnetic Pulse Commission Warns of an Old Threat with a New Facerdquo Heritage Foundation Backgrounder 1784 August 3 2004

The difficulty of developing a clear response to EMP is due primarily to the unique nature of the threat It is unclear for example what would constitute a proportional response to an explosion that takes place in space without being seen or heard yet instantaneously devastates society or a military force while resulting in no initial loss of life or physical destruction Furthermore there is a dearth of academic or legal analysis by which to guide such policies because until very recently few took the threat seriously This is especially so in the context of rogue states or transnational groups

96

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT Deterrence DA

EMP attacks cannot be deterred

Wilson 8 Clay- Specialist in Technology and National Security Foreign Affairs Defense and Trade Division ldquoHigh Altitude Electromagnetic Pulse (HEMP) and High Power Microwave (HPM) Devices Threat Assessmentsrdquo Congressional Research Service March 26 2008

The threat of an EMP attack against the United States is hard to assess but some observers indicate that it is growing along with worldwide access to newer technologies and the proliferation of nuclear weapons In the past the threat of mutually assured destruction provided a lasting deterrent against the exchange of multiple high-yield nuclear warheads However now even a single specially designed low-yield nuclear explosion high above the United States or over a battlefield can produce a large-scale EMP effect that could result in a widespread loss of electronics but no direct fatalities and may not necessarily evoke a large nuclear retaliatory strike by the US military This coupled with the possible vulnerability of US commercial electronics and US military battlefield equipment to the effects of EMP may create a new incentive for other countries to develop or acquire a nuclear capability

Canrsquot deter EMP threats

EMP Commission 4 Report of the Commission to Assess the Threat to the United States from Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP) Attack Volume 1 Executive Report 2004 Dr John S Foster Jr Mr Earl Gjelde Dr William R Graham (Chairman) Dr Robert J Hermann Mr Henry (Hank) M Kluepfel GEN Richard L Lawson USAF (Ret) Dr Gordon K Soper Dr Lowell L Wood Jr Dr Joan B Woodard]

EMP effects from nuclear bursts are not new threats to our nation The Soviet Union in the past and Russia and other nations today are potentially capable of creating these effects Historically this application of nuclear weaponry was mixed with a much larger population of nuclear devices that were the primary source of destruction and thus EMP as a weapons effect was not the primary focus Throughout the Cold War the United States did not try to protect its civilian infrastructure against either the physical or EMP impact of nuclear weapons and instead depended on deterrence for its safety What is different now is that some potential sources of EMP threats are difficult to determdashthey can be terrorist groups that have no state identity have only one or a few weapons and are motivated to attack the US without regard for their own safety Rogue states such as North Korea and Iran may also be developing the capability to pose an EMP threat to the United States and may also be unpredictable and difficult to deter Certain types of relatively low-yield nuclear weapons can be employed to generate potentially catastrophic EMP effects over wide geographic areas and designs for variants of such weapons may have been illicitly trafficked for a quarter-century China and Russia have considered limited nuclear attack options that unlike their Cold War plans employ EMP as the primary or sole means of attack Indeed as recently as May 1999 during the NATO bombing of the former Yugoslavia high-ranking members of the Russian Duma meeting with a US congressional delegation to discuss the Balkans conflict raised the specter of a Russian EMP attack that would paralyze the United States

97

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT Deterrence DA

EMP Strikes will be used for catalytic wars

Lewallen 2 John- Political Science at Whitman University organizer of the Nuclear Peace Action Group Fulbright Scholarship recipient Public Ocean Access Network ldquoHigh-Altitude Nuclear Warrdquo Nuclear Press Pg36

The Soviet Union no longer exists Now many nations and even several corporations potentially have nuclear bombs in satellites In 1984 the US President knew right away where the nuclear attack was coming from Today any nuclear attack against the American homeland is almost sure to be anonymous How does one deter an adversary who can strike without attribution perhaps choosing a moment of crisis between its two nuclear adversaries to make it look like the other guy did it

98

Cornell HKHANE Aff

No US Second Strike

An EMP attack would decimate our sub deterrent- they would be unable to receive orders

Graham 4 Dr William R- Deputy Administrator of NASA The report of the Commission to Assess the Threat to the United States From Electromagnetic Pulse Attackrdquo July 22 2004

Mr Langevin Have you assessed the threat of EMP to our surface fleet and submarines Do submarines have a greater likelihood of retaining operational capabilities if they are underwater during an EMP strike Dr Graham The EMP Commission did consider the threat of EMP to surface vessels and submarines Ballistic Missile Submarines are designed and built to survive an EMP attack Care is taken when the ship is modified or equipment added or upgraded to insure that survivability is maintained Particular attention is paid to the potential vulnerability introduced when the ship is at periscope depth or trailing a wire antenna Submarines do have a greater likelihood of retaining operational capabilities if they are underwater during an EMP attack and not trailing an antenna which can couple energy into the submerged vessel However if land-based communications are impacted the ship may survive but not be capable of receiving orders and therefore accomplishing its mission because the sender cant send The survivability of the surface fleet is uncertain without testing and a submarine in port is a surface ship

An EMP strike would destroy communications

Wilson 8 Clay- Specialist in Technology and National Security Foreign Affairs Defense and Trade Division ldquoHigh Altitude Electromagnetic Pulse (HEMP) and High Power Microwave (HPM) Devices Threat Assessmentsrdquo Congressional Research Service March 26 2008

During the Cold War the US Military designed an innovative communications system to relay emergency messages between strategic military areas in the continental United States using signals that travel by means of low frequency ground waves mdash electromagnetic fields that hug the ground mdash rather than by radiating into the atmosphere The Ground Wave Emergency Network or GWEN system was intended to allow continuous communications despite EMP disruptions However the hardware was reportedly transistor based leaving the system with some level of vulnerability to EMP In addition the fixed locations of GWEN sites were known to adversaries and thus vulnerable to direct attack40

Even if military infrastructure is protected critical civilian infrastructure is not

Wilson 8 Clay- Specialist in Technology and National Security Foreign Affairs Defense and Trade Division ldquoHigh Altitude Electromagnetic Pulse (HEMP) and High Power Microwave (HPM) Devices Threat Assessmentsrdquo Congressional Research Service March 26 2008

The US military has adopted a policy where commercial electronic equipment is now used extensively in support of complex US weapons systems For example a large percentage of US military communications during Operation Iraqi Freedom was reportedly carried by commercial satellites and much military administrative information is currently routed through the civilian Internet43 Many commercial communications satellites particularly those in low earth orbit reportedly may degrade or cease to function shortly after a high altitude nuclear explosion44 However some observers believe that possible HEMP and HPM vulnerabilities of military information systems are outweighed by the benefits gained through access to innovative technology and increased communications flexibility that come from using state-of-the-art electronics and from maintaining connections to the civilian Internet and satellite systems

99

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Yes US Second Strike

EMPs cannot endanger our ability to retaliate

Critchlow 6 Robert D- National Defense Fellow Foreign Affairs Defense and Trade Division ldquoNuclear Command and Control Current Programs and Issuesrdquo CRS Report for Congress May 3 2006

Nuclear Command and Control Platforms The lead elements of the NCCS form the National Military Command System (NMCS) The NMCS is ldquothe priority component of the Global Command and Control System designed to support the Secretary of Defense and Joint Chiefs of Staff in the exercise of their responsibilitiesrdquo5 It provides the National Command Authorities (NCA)6 and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff (CJCS) with command and control of the armed forces both nuclear and conventional7 The NMCS includes the following command nodes and supporting components

National Military Command Center (NMCC) The NMCC is the primary location for national command and control on a day to day basis This center is staffed around-the-clock and each ldquowatch teamrdquo is led by a General or Admiral known as the ldquoDeputy Director for Operationsrdquo Located in a shielded room in the Pentagon the NMCC is responsible for monitoring nuclear forces and ongoing conventional military operations and can be augmented by additional response cells in the event of a crisis

National Airborne Operations Center (NAOC) If ground based command centers are destroyed the NAOC can serve as a survivable airborne backup to the NMCCrsquos command and control capabilities A NAOC aircraft is always on alert and the mobility of this airborne platform contributes to its survivability The NAOCs are a fleet of modified Boeing 747-200B aircraft each of which can include a crew of up to 114 people and are based at Offutt AFB in Nebraska Its communications which include both Extremely High Frequency (EHF) and Very Low Frequency-Low Frequency (VLFLF) links are hardened against Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP) Although the Joint Staff tasks the aircraft US Strategic Command (USSTRATCOM)9 provides personnel and day-to-day administration while the Air Forcersquos Air Combat Command serves as the programrsquos resource manager

Site-R Located at Fort Ritchie Maryland Site-R can be activated from a ldquocoldrdquo status to serve as an alternate NMCC location11

USSTRATCOM Global Operations Center (GOC) Located underneath the USSTRATCOM Headquarters at Offutt AFB Nebraska the GOC can serve as a back up element to the NMCS for essential emergency actions This center also serves as the command center for the USSTRATCOM Commander one of the four- star-general Unified Combatant Commanders for the day-to-day management of his forces and for providing situational awareness The facility is protected against EMP and has its own emergency power supply to enable extended operations This facility is staffed 24 hours a day 365 days a year with each team led by a Senior Controller who is always a full Colonel (Air Force Army or Marine Corps) or Captain (Navy)12

USSTRATCOM Airborne Command Post (ABNCP) Should the USSTRATCOM GOC be unable to fulfill its role the E-6B ABNCP can serve as a survivable airborne backup The ABNCPs are a fleet of modified Boeing 707 aircraft each of which carries a crew of 22 which includes aircrew communications operators and battlestaff personnel Historically each battle staff has been led by a General or Admiral known as the Airborne Emergency Action Officer (AEAO) This aircraft fulfills two additional key missions As the Airborne Launch Control System (ALCS) the aircraft has the ability to communicate launch codes directly to ICBM launch facilities to command launch in the event that their launch control centers are unable to perform that function Also the E-6B can serve as the Take Charge And Move Out (TACAMO) relay for Navy ballistic missile submarines The airplane can deploy a 2frac12-mile-long trailing wire antenna and communicate directives to the submarines over its VLFLF system In addition to the VLFLF the ABNCP can communicate using Ultra-High Frequency (UHF) or EHF satellite systems While USSTRATCOM provides the battlestaff personnel the aircraft aircrew and communications operators are from the Navyrsquos Strategic Communications (STRATCOMM) Wing One based at Tinker AFB Oklahoma13 USSTRATCOM Mobile Consolidated Command Center (MCCC) The MCCC is a convoy of trucks that can deploy during a crisis to serve as a survivable road-mobile backup to the USSTRATCOM GOC or ABNCP

100

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Yes US Second Strike

Strat nukes remain operable

Riddle 4 Lieutenant Colonel Thomas C- United States Army ldquoNuclear High Altitude Electromagnetic Pulse ndash Implications For Homeland Security And Homeland Defenserdquo US Army War College 03 May 2004

Additionally the military forces of the United States have been increasingly based in the continental United States (CONUS) and would also be affected Although the strategic nuclear forces (and portions of their supporting infrastructure) were designed to resist the effects of EMP the general purpose forces have not received the same focus After a successful HEMP attack the posts camps bases and stations throughout the country might not be able to provide the services necessary to function as power projection platforms Although some military programs have incorporated EMP resistance as part of the design and acquisition process increasingly the military forces have turned to commercial-off-the-shelf equipment that has little or no EMP protection

Military communication would survive

Wilson 4 Clay- Specialist in Technology and National Security Foreign Affairs Defense and Trade Division ldquoHigh Altitude Electromagnetic Pulse (HEMP) and High Power Microwave (HPM) Devices Threat Assessmentsrdquo Congressional Research Service August 20 2004

As the Cold War ended the US military took steps to reduce its nuclear arsenal and associated infrastructure32 After 1998 the USAF decommissioned GWEN assets and replaced the entire system with the Single Channel Anti-Jam Man-Portable (SCAMP) Terminal SCAMP uses extremely high frequency (EHF) technology is resistant to EMP and offers more flexibility than GWEN because the equipment is lightweight transportable and interoperable with DOD satellite networks33

101

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT Security Kritik

Russia data sharing solves the impact

Farley 9 Robert is an assistant professor at the University of Kentuckyrsquos Patterson School of Diplomacy and International Commerce ldquoNeocons Salivating Over Their Next Great Exaggerated Threat Electromagnetic Pulse Attackrdquo October 22 2009

The fact that EMP is poorly researched and not well understood works in its favor as a scare tactic Since evidence of EMPrsquos allegedly lasting impact is purely theoretical EMP awareness advocates can make outlandish claims regarding the threat that even the smallest nuclear arsenal poses They can also point to allegations made by the official EMP Commission ignoring the fact that many outside experts dispute its findings The Niagara conferencersquos emphasis on strategic and policy considerations shows that alarmist predictions about EMP attacks serve as fodder for promotion of a larger nuclear weapons stockpile for missile defense and for preventive attacks

Ignoring the threat results in disaster

Dunn 6 JR- editor of the International Military Encyclopedia ldquoThe EMP Threat ElectroMagnetic Pulse Warfarerdquo American Thinker April 21 2006

Above all we cant allow the problem to slip past without being addressed always a danger in a confusing and urgent time Threats have a way of sneaking up on democracies Back in the 70s an American president on the promise of the Soviet premier that no aerial attack would be carried out on the US decided to shut down the Aerospace Defense Command and its US Army equivalent responsible for air defense of the country The bases were closed the assets either scrapped or turned over to the National Guard Two decades later on a fine morning in September there were no alert squadrons longmdashrange interceptors or surfacemdashtomdashair missiles to defend New York and Washington The presidents name was Jimmy Carter We can do better

102

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT Kritiks

Informing the public is key to challenging the industrial military complex

Lewallen 2 John- Political Science at Whitman University organizer of the Nuclear Peace Action Group Fulbright Scholarship recipient Public Ocean Access Network ldquoHigh-Altitude Nuclear Warrdquo Nuclear Press p9-10

Certainly we are courting disaster by leaving all thought about high-altitude nuclear war to a tiny group of military-industrial-complex insiders Everyone testifying at the Congressional EMP hearings has an axe to grind weapons systems to promote a reputation to make a job to do a grim reality to deny

Engaging in the debate over high altitude nuclear weapons is crucial to curbing nuclear madness

Lewallen 2 John- Political Science at Whitman University organizer of the Nuclear Peace Action Group Fulbright Scholarship recipient Public Ocean Access Network ldquoHigh-Altitude Nuclear Warrdquo Nuclear Press p9-10

I humbly offer the following commentary as my initial thoughts on the strategic implications of high-altitude nuclear electromagnetic pulse weapons I invite peer review Today we are all peers beneath the sword of looming nuclear catastrophe I believe the global human network of love empathy and respect is ultimately superior to the forces pushing toward global nuclear war But we cannot afford to ignore nuclear weapons In the psychological darkness of reality denial they grow and grow Help cast the light which will dissipate nuclear madness

103

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT Religion K

Lewallen 2 John- Political Science at Whitman University organizer of the Nuclear Peace Action Group Fulbright Scholarship recipient Public Ocean Access Network ldquoHigh-Altitude Nuclear Warrdquo Nuclear Press Pg38

ldquoAnd David proceeded to take his staff in his hand and to choose for himself the five smoothest stones from the torrent valley and to place them in his shepherdsrsquo bag that served him as a receptacle and in his hand was his sling And he began approaching the PhilistineldquoAnd the Philistine began to come coming nearer and nearer to David and the man carrying the large shield was ahead of himhellipldquoThen David thrust his hand into his bag and took a stone from there and slung it so that he struck the Philistine in his forehead and the stone sank into his forehead and he went falling upon his face to the earth So David with a sling and a stone proved stronger than the Philistine and struck the Philistine down and put him to death and there was no sword in Davidrsquos handrdquo

- The Old Testament I Samuel 1740-50As Russia and China face the onslaught of the United States advancing militarily toward them behind a missile shield still in research and development their military position is similar to that of the young shepherd David confronting the giant and mighty Philistine warrior GoliathThe United States has overwhelming military superiority and a gargantuan vulnerability to high-altitude nuclear EMP attack Russia and China have had several decades to fill their weapons bag with specialized nuclear EMP weapons and to prepare to sling them over the American homeland by missile by satellite or in a fractional orbiting bomb flung into orbit with a Scud or other short-range missileDavid knew that Goliath had a soft spot in his forehead just as the Russians and Chinese are perfectly aware that the United States in the words of Representative Weldon is the ldquomost vulnerable nation on Earth to electronic warfarerdquo

104

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT Psychoanalysis

An EMP attack would cause serious psychological trauma

Foster et al 8 ldquoReport of the Commission to Assess the Threat to the United States from Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP) Attackrdquo April 2008 Dr John S Foster Jr Mr Earl Gjelde Dr William R Graham (Chairman) Dr Robert J Hermann Mr Henry (Hank) M Kluepfel Gen Richard L Lawson USAF (Ret) Dr Gordon K Soper Dr Lowell L Wood Jr Dr Joan B Woodard

The human consequences of such a scenario include the social and psychological reactions to a sudden loss of stability in the modern infrastructure over a large area of the country Loss of connectivity between the government and its populace would only exacerbate the consequences of such a scenario This analysis is based largely on selected case studies including major blackouts natural disasters and terrorist incidents in recent US history These incidents served as approximate analogs in order to best predict the sociological and psychological effects of an EMP attack Impact of an EMP AttackWhile no single event serves as a model for an EMP scenario with incidence of long lasting widespread power outage communications failure and other effects the combined analysis of the following case studies provides useful insight in determining human reactions following an EMP attackBlackouts

1048715 Northeast (1965)1048715 New York (1977)1048715 Hydro Quebec (1989)1048715 Western states (1996)1048715 Auckland New Zealand (1998)1048715 Northeast (2003)Natural Disasters1048715 Hurricane Hugo (1989)1048715 Hurricane Andrew (1992)1048715 Midwest floods (1993)Terrorist Incidents1048715 World Trade Center attack (2001)1048715 Anthrax attacks (2001)

BlackoutsIn 1965 a blackout occurred over the northeastern United States and parts of Canada New Hampshire Vermont Massachusetts Connecticut Rhode Island New York including metropolitan New York City and a small part of Pennsylvania were in the dark after operators at Consolidated Edison were forced to shut down its generators to avoid damage Street traffic was chaotic and some people were trapped in elevators but there were few instances of antisocial behavior while the lights were out5 It was a ldquolong night in the darkrdquo but the recovery proceeded without incident and citizens experienced relative civility TIME Magazine described New Yorkrsquos next blackout in 1977 as a ldquoNight of Terrorrdquo 6 Widespread chaos reigned in the city until power was restored mdash entire blocks were looted and set ablaze people flipped over cars and vans on the streets the city was in pandemonium That night 3776 arrests were made and certainly not all looters thieves and arsonists were apprehended or arrested7 While this is a dramatic example of antisocial behavior following a blackout sociologists point to extraordinary demographic and historical issues that contributed to the looting For instance extreme poverty and socioeconomic inequality plagued New York neighborhoods and many of the looters originated from the poorer sections of the city engaging in ldquovigilante redistributionrdquo by looting consumer goods and luxuries Racial tensions were high and a serial killer known as Son of Sam had recently terrorized New Yorkers

105

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Negative

106

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Not Topical

US doesnrsquot do EMP targeting

Citizendium 9 ldquoSingle Integrated Operational Planrdquo httpencitizendiumorgwikiSingle_Integrated_Operational_Plan

It is known that nuclear explosions produce varying intensities of electromagnetic pulse (EMP) which has the potential to damage electronic equipment Effective power coverage and frequencies of the electromagnetic pulse are dependent at a minimum on the yield of the nuclear weapon and the altitude of the burst[7] While general US planning and engineering documents specify means of EMP protection [8] no unclassified references suggest that any weapons targeted under SIOP are intended principally to produce EMP

EMP nukes have already been removed

Berry 8 Ken Research Coordinator ICNND ldquoNew Weapons Technologyrdquo International Commission on Nuclear Non-proliferation and Disarmament

Generally speaking the shorter pulse wave forms such as microwaves are far more effective against electronic equipment and more difficult to devise hardened protection against45 For maximum effect the electromagnetic burst must be in the upper atmosphere Thus such a weapon stationed in space could in theory knock out electrical systems including computers and communications across continent-wide distances With this in mind the Soviet Union developed nuclear weapons designed for detonations in the upper atmosphere The United States and the United Kingdom also carried out similar research It is believed that most of the nuclear EMP weapons were disarmed following the ReaganGorbachev arms talks in the 1980s

Kristensen 98 Hans M- Director of the Nuclear Information Project at the Federation of American Scientists ldquoNuclear Futures Proliferation of Weapons of Mass Destruction and US Nuclear Strategy British American Security Information Council Basic Research Report 982

It is still too early to predict whether these exotic designs will mature into actual nuclear weapons modifications But these and a wide range of other nuclear projects are clear indicators that US nuclear weapons are here to stay113 And the expansion of US nuclear doctrine is an increasingly prominent justification for new weapons

107

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Tix Links

Partisan issue

Weinberger 2-17 Sharon- CarnegieNewhouse School Legal Reporting Fellow International Reporting Project fellow at the Johns Hopkins University School of Advanced International Studies ldquoThe Boogeyman Bomb How afraid should we be of electromagnetic pulse weaponsrdquo Foreign Policy February 17 2010

But unlike some of the other national security threats on the horizon the e-bomb has emerged as a partisan issue with a core group of conservative supporters Gingrich has been among the most outspoken On Capitol Hill Rep Roscoe Bartlett (R-Md) has been one of the most ardent supporters of those pushing for an EMP defense establishing the investigatory commission and warning of a catastrophe on a scale far greater than Hurricane Katrina Despite EMPACTs claims of nonpartisanship liberals have largely dismissed the idea as conservative fear-mongering EMPs were even derisively labeled the Newt Bomb by New Republic senior editor Michael Crowley The real debate is not so much over whether EMP is a real phenomenon -- even critics of the commissions findings agree it exists -- but how much of a threat it poses to the nations infrastructure how likely it is that a group or country might build and use such a weapon and what should be done about it

Weinberger 2-17 Sharon- CarnegieNewhouse School Legal Reporting Fellow International Reporting Project fellow at the Johns Hopkins University School of Advanced International Studies ldquoThe Boogeyman Bomb How afraid should we be of electromagnetic pulse weaponsrdquo Foreign Policy February 17 2010

In the end advocates for EMP preparation could end up being their own worst enemy The unlikely scenarios they peddle lend themselves to caricature And though there are certainly some intellectual heavyweights among those who have warned about the effects of EMP -- like Johnny Foster the former head of Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory -- critics have derided EMP defense supporters for relying on the likes of science fiction writer William R Forstchen to help bolster their case By talking about time machines and turning the EMP bomb into something that goes bump in the night those advocating for better defenses risk pushing the issue further into the margins of science fiction

108

Cornell HKHANE Aff

GOP Link

GOP would support any measure to reduce EMP dangers

Smith 9 George ldquoNot Soiling Yourself Over an EMP Attack You mustrsquove voted for Obamardquo 62909The electromagnetic pulse attack lobby is now exclusively the property of the GOP Itrsquos a dumping ground for a rich a variety of Republican crazies a constituency which DD mapped for many years Like those who believe global warming to be a hoax the Republican right has electromagnetic pulse fear all locked up If one thinks about this paradox it has a neatly confounding internal anti-logic If something is backed up by hard science and poses a real danger for everyone on the planet the Republican party denies its existence If however the threat is something rather abstract to almost all Americans rests almost entirely on theoretical prediction is something not likely to ever occur at all and then only in the context of what would promise to be an all out nuclear war the GOP believes in it very strongly To paraphrase Paul Krugman characterizing GOP attitudes towards global warming You could call this crazy conspiracy theory but doing so would actually be unfair to crazy conspiracy theorists ldquoThe nightmare scenario of [EMP attack] is this A rogue nation like North Korea or a stateless terrorist like Bin Laden gets hold of a nuclear weapon and decides not to drive it into a large city but rather to launch it on a Scud-type missile straight into the atmosphere from a barge off the East Coastrdquo wrote one brilliant theoretician at Slate a couple years ago ldquoIn fact [a congressionally chartered commission] discovered that knowledge about EMP is widespread in such places as China Cuba Egypt India Iran Saddam Husseinrsquos Iraq North Korea Pakistan and Russiardquo wrote defense hawk and EMP crazy Frank Gaffney for the Washington Times also a couple of years ago

109

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT Terrorist EMP

Terrorists using EMPs is impossible

Butt 10 Yousaf M- Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics ldquoThe EMP threat fact fiction and response (part 2)rdquo The Space Review February 1 2010 httpwwwthespacereviewcomarticle15531

Thus it is not at all a simple matter even for countries with considerable resources and focused decades-long effort to build such weapons let alone pair them to reliable delivery systems As carefully argued by John Mueller in his new book Atomic Obsession it is virtually impossible for a terrorist cell to obtain the raw materials needed for a nuclear device and assemble it correctly themselves [Ref 22 p 172ndash198] Even a ldquocruderdquo U-type device is not all that ldquocruderdquo and requires the concerted effort of skilled scientists and engineers Any weapon produced by a terrorist cell would likely be a one of a kind and would have to remain untested For a terrorist group to then mate this weapon to a ballistic missile and successfully carry out an EMP strike beggars belief As John Pike director of GlobalSecurityorg has said ldquoIt is just very difficult to imagine how terrorists are going to be able to lay hands on a nuclear-tipped missile and launch it and reprogram it in such a way that it would be a high-altitude burst like thatrdquo Dr Philip Coyle former Pentagon director of operational test and evaluation has stated that the EMP commissionrsquos report appeared to ldquoextrapolate calculations of extreme weapons effects as if they were a proven fact and further to puff up rogue nations and terrorists with the capabilities of giantsrdquo The 2009 Strategic Posture Commission puts it more delicately by saying that ldquothe Commission is divided over how imminent a threat this ishelliprdquo If a terrorist cell miraculously built such a weapon they are likely to explode their ldquocrown jewelrdquo in a simple spectacular ground-burst that will destroy a large part of a city and not risk the complicationsmdashand likely failuremdashof a lofted EMP strike that will if all goes according to their plan cause casualties via unpredictable secondary effects upon a limited part of some of the nationrsquos infrastructure The risk versus reward calculation for both terrorists cells and so-called ldquoroguerdquo states would almost certainly force their hand to a spectacular and direct ground burst in preference to a unreliable and uncertain EMP strike A weapon of mass destruction is preferable to a weapon of mass disruption

Terrorists will use HPMs instead

Wilson 4 Clay- Specialist in Technology and National Security Foreign Affairs Defense and Trade Division ldquoHigh Altitude Electromagnetic Pulse (HEMP) and High Power Microwave (HPM) Devices Threat Assessmentsrdquo Congressional Research Service August 20 2004

In addition while HEMP weapons are large in scale and require a nuclear capability along with technology to launch high altitude missiles HPM weapons are smaller in scale involve a much lower level of technology and may be within the capability of many non-state organizations HPM can cause damage to computers similar to HEMP although the effects are limited to a much smaller area The technical accessibility lower cost and the apparent vulnerability of US civilian electronic equipment could make small-scale HPM weapons attractive for terrorist groups in the future

110

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT State EMP

States wouldnrsquot use EMPs

Butt 10 Yousaf M- Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics ldquoThe EMP threat fact fiction and response (part 2)rdquo The Space Review February 1 2010 httpwwwthespacereviewcomarticle15531

A state would be highly unlikely to launch an EMP strike from their own territory because the rocket could be traced to the country of origin and would probably result in nuclear or massive conventional retaliation by the US The EMP commission also considers adversarial nations carrying out a shipborne EMP attack that would be less traceable However even so there would some small risk of trace-back that would give the leadership in such nations pause While nuclear forensics are not well enough developed to assuredly ascribe the origin of a nuclear explosion even their current state of development would in some measure dissuade the leaders of a nation from seriously contemplating such an attack Furthermore the US certainly has data via its DSP satellites on the infrared (IR) signatures of the rocket exhausts from the missiles of various countries Though these signatures are probably virtually identical for the ScudShahabNo-dong family of missiles the nations which may entertain such attacks do not necessarily know whether eg the DSP data can discriminate between a NK Nodong versus an Iranian Shahabs perhaps due to differences in fuel andor subtle design idiosyncrasies This is data only the US has and it has an inherent deterrent value to nations thinking about launching an EMP strike via a ship-launched ballistic missile This is almost certainly the case if say Iran were to use its solid rocket motor technology to launch such a strikemdashif and when Iran obtains nuclear weapons of course In such a case the burn time-profile and solid-motor IR signatures could probably be used to tie the missile to a nation Furthermore the leaders of a nation contemplating such an attack would have to carefully consider what would happen in case the warhead was not delivered properly If it fell short andor did not explode it may be possible for US engineers and scientists to ascribe a national origin given the forensic material For the leadership of any nation to chance such an attack they must be almost suicidally optimistic they would have to presume that everything would go perfectly Even so it may still be possible to identify the country of origin which would invite massive US retribution

States wouldnrsquot give terrorists EMPs

Butt 10 Yousaf M- Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics ldquoThe EMP threat fact fiction and response (part 2)rdquo The Space Review February 1 2010 httpwwwthespacereviewcomarticle15531

What about an adversarial nation ldquosub-contractingrdquo its dirty work to a terrorist cell Again there would be substantial doubt in the nationrsquos leadership as to whether or not forensic evidence (whether the device exploded or not) could tie them to the weapon In any case as argued by Mueller [Ref 22 p 163] it is highly unlikely that a nation would give one of its crown jewels to an unpredictable terrorist cell At least in the case of Iran this view is supported by in-depth research done by authors at the National Defense University who conclude ldquo[W]e judge and nearly all experts consulted agree that Iran would not as a matter of state policy give up its control of such weapons to terrorist organizations and risk direct US or Israeli retributionrdquo

111

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT RussiaChina EMP

China and Russia would never EMP attack the US

Butt 10 Yousaf M- Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics ldquoThe EMP threat fact fiction and response (part 2)rdquo The Space Review February 1 2010 httpwwwthespacereviewcomarticle15531

Though they possess the technological know-how to fabricate a powerful EMP device the possibility of China or Russia carrying out such an attack is virtually nil Not only for the regular military deterrent reasons but also post-Cold War our economies are intimately linked which amounts to an inherent economic deterrent The latter is likely the more relevant deterrent [Ref 22 p 65] We owe China tremendous sums of money they need us as a market and both the US and China require Russian oil via intertwined world markets Although the EMP commissioners have offered a Chinese-language PowerPoint presentation outlining the effects of EMP devices as evidence that China has an interest in such weapons this presentation is actually of Taiwanese origin [ldquoElectromagnetic Pulse Attack and Defenserdquo by Dr Chien Chung] and it is not pertinent to any official Chinese military doctrine

112

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT Proliferators EMP

New nuclear states will not carry out EMP attacks

Butt 10 Yousaf M- Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics ldquoThe EMP threat fact fiction and response (part 2)rdquo The Space Review February 1 2010 httpwwwthespacereviewcomarticle15531

More importantly the DoD itself has weighed in on the issue in its ldquoMilitarily Critical Technologies Listrdquo This is a detailed compendium of the technologies the DoD assesses as critical to maintaining superior United States military capabilities Part II ldquoWeapons of Mass Destruction Technologiesrdquo addresses those technologies required for development integration or employment of biological chemical or nuclear weapons and their means of delivery against the US This document states that ldquoHEMP can pose a serious threat to US military systems when even a single high-altitude nuclear explosion occurs In principle even a new nuclear proliferator could execute such a strike In practice however it seems unlikely that such a state would use one of its scarce warheads to inflict damage which must be considered secondary to the primary effects of blast shock and thermal pulse Furthermore a HEMP attack must use a relatively large warhead to be effective (perhaps on the order of one megaton) and new proliferators are unlikely to be able to construct such a device much less make it small enough to be lofted to high altitude by a ballistic missile or space launcherrdquo Lastly General Robert T Marsh former Chairman of the Presidentrsquos Commission on Critical Infrastructure Protection concluded (in 1997) that he did not ldquosee any evidence that suggests capabilities seriously threatening our critical infrastructurehellip There are many easier less costly and more dramatic ways for terrorists to use nuclear weapons than delivery to a high altitude Such an event is so unlikely and difficult to achieve that I do not believe it warrants serious concern at this timerdquo

Attacks will be deterred now

Riddle 4 Lieutenant Colonel Thomas C- United States Army ldquoNuclear High Altitude Electromagnetic Pulse ndash Implications For Homeland Security And Homeland Defenserdquo US Army War College 03 May 2004

Similarly the decision to implement an earlier deployment of an initial ground-based interceptor and improved ballistic missile tracking capabilities will support the improved passive and active defenses called for in the NSS 50 Also the convincing demonstration of the continuing efficiency and effectiveness of Americarsquos global precision strike capabilities during Operation IRAQI FREEDOM is a clear indication that multi-dimensional counterforce capabilities remain a viable element of Americarsquos counter-proliferation capabilities that may be used if required to prevent a HEMP attack on the United States Finally the United Statesrsquo demonstrated willingness to conduct preemptive strikes to neutralize WMD under the concept of imminent defense adds an unmistakable dimension to the concept of deterrence for those seeking to acquire weapons of mass destruction51

113

Cornell HKHANE Aff

EMPacts False

Impacts of high altitude nuclear explosions are overstated

Ruppe 4 David ldquoPlausibility of EMP Threat Classified Expert Saysrdquo Global Security Newswire September 24 2004

Philip Coyle who was the assistant secretary of defense and Pentagon director of operational test and evaluation during the Clinton administration however questioned the certainty of the reportrsquos conclusion that smaller kiloton-scale nuclear weapons could be developed to produce the catastrophic consequences described by the report ldquoThe US military does not know how to do this today and has no way of demonstrating the capability in the future without returning to nuclear testingrdquo he said by e-mail ldquoThe fact is that a rogue nation or terrorists that tried this would be very unsure of the results and would risk massive retaliation from the United States for having achieved nothingrdquo he wrote Coyle who also worked at the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory for more than 30 years also said it is uncertain that even a massive nuclear weapon would cause the scale of destruction the commission predicted

Transportation would survive

Chisholm 5 Patrick ldquoProtect our electronics against EMP attackrdquo Christian Science Monitor December 19 2005

Unlike what was depicted in the 1983 movie The Day After automobiles may keep functioning after an EMP attack The electronics within automobiles enjoy robust shielding because of the harsh electromagnetic environment on existing roadways Aircraft have even stronger electromagnetic shielding so they are unlikely to fall out of the sky Some of the [aircrafts] equipment may not work but the propulsion and control system usually is pretty robust said Dr William A Radasky president of Metatech Corp a consulting firm specializing in electromagnetic environment analysis

114

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT Strait of Hormuz

The US would restore oil within days

Klare 2 Michael- Five Colleges professor of Peace and World Security Studies boards of directors of Human Rights Watch and the Arms Control Association ldquoResource Wars The New Landscape of Global Conflictrdquo p 73

Just as it would resist any new Iraqi assault on Kuwait the United States would greet any Iranian move to impede Persian Gulf shipping with an immediate and crushing military response Tomahawk cruise missiles and radar-guided bombs would most likely be used to demolish Iranian ships missile batteries airfields and communications facilities Ships and aircraft already deployed in the region would carry out most of the attacks backed up by additional units sent in from the United States and Europe And while the Iranians might succeed in damaging a number of tankers their ability to imperil the oil flow would quickly be eliminated by superior American firepower4s

115

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Alt Cause- Geomagnetic Storms

Geomagnetic storms make the impact inevitable

Butt 10 Yousaf M- Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics ldquoThe EMP threat fact fiction and response (part 2)rdquo The Space Review February 1 2010 httpwwwthespacereviewcomarticle15531

For the reasons outlined above it is highly unlikely that any adversary would choose tomdashor in the case of a terrorist cell even be remotely capable ofmdashcarrying out a nuclear EMP strike against the US However it is virtually guaranteed that a powerful geomagnetic storm capable of knocking out a significant section of the US electrical grid will occur within the next few decades In fact this may well happen even within next few years as we approach the next period of elevated solar activity known as ldquosolar maximumrdquo which is forecast to peak in 2013 Geomagnetic storms are E3-like low-intensity but long-lasting and low-frequency coupling to long-lines The first recorded evidence of space weather effects on technology was in 1847 when currents were registered in electric telegraph wires Later in 1859 a major failure of telegraph systems in New England and Europe coincided with a large solar flare called the ldquoCarrington Eventrdquo after astronomer Richard Carrington who witnessed the instigating flare However the real modern-era wakeup call to geomagnetic susceptibility of our infrastructure was the (moderate intensity) geomagnetic storm that shut down the entire Hydro Quebec grid in March 1989 There were also reports of computer failures in August of that year in Toronto Canada (which possibly indicate that the associated geomagnetic activity had considerably faster components than just E3) Geomagnetically induced currents (GICs) in long-line power delivery systems are caused by the rate-of-change of the geomagnetic field just as in an E3 pulse Thus the severity of such geomagnetic field disturbances is measured in nanotesla per minute (nTmin) Experience with modern-day infrastructure indicates failures can result even at relatively low-threat intensities For example the instigating activity associated with the Hydro Quebec collapse mentioned above only reached an intensity of ~480 nTmin Solar storms on other occasions have been known to produce geomagnetic disturbances of ~2000 nTmin and a solar storm on May 14ndash15 in 1921 may have produced a disturbance of 4800 nTmin [23] As Mr Kappenman states [23] ldquoanalysis indicates that storms withexcursions of ~2800 nTmin have been observed at geomagnetic latitudes of concern for modern day infrastructures Further anecdotal evidence suggests that ~5000 nTmin may have occurred during the Great Geomagnetic Storm of May 1921rdquo To understand the effects of such GIC on the electric grid we may examine the August 2003 Northeast Blackout which was not geomagnetically induced (It reportedly originated when high-voltage power lines came in contact with ldquoovergrown treesrdquo) This outage affected the Northeast US and parts of Canada and more than 200 power plants including several nuclear plants were shut down as a result of the electricity cutoff Other effects included loss of water pressure possible sewage contamination gridlock various other transportation problems (because of secondary effects on railways airlines and gas stations) and disruption of oil refineriesrsquo operations Phone service was stressed due to the high call volume and several radio and television stations went off the air It is estimated that the one-day blackout cost $7ndash10 billion in spoiled food lost production overtime wages and other related expenses inflicted on more than one-seventh of the US population [24] A similar vegetation-induced outage in Europe occurred on September 28 2003 when ldquoat 301 am one of the main north-south transit lines ndash the Lukmanier transmission line ndash shut down following a flash-over between a conductor cable and a treerdquo The blackout affected about 56 million people although electricity was restored gradually (about 3ndash6 hours) in most places and in most cities electricity were powered on again during the morning Rolling blackouts reportedly continued to affect about 5 of the population for the next two days as repairs were being made Although the August and September 2003 outage was not geomagnetic in origin solar outbursts during late October and early November 2003 triggered severe geomagnetic storms with wide-ranging effects that were described as follows in a 2008 National Academy of Sciences (NAS) study [25] The Sydkraft utility group in Sweden reported that strong geomagnetically induced currents (GIC) over Northern Europe caused transformer problems and even a system failure and subsequent blackout Radiation storm levels were high enough to prompt NASA officials to issue a flight directive to the [International Space Station] astronauts to take precautionary shelter Airlines took unprecedented actions in their high latitude routes to avoid the high radiation levels and communication blackout areas Rerouted flights cost airlines $10000 to $100000 per flight Numerous anomalies were reported by deep space missions and by satellites at all orbits GSFC Space Science Mission Operations Team indicated that approximately 59 of the Earth and Space science missions were impacted The storms are suspected to have caused the loss of the $640 million ADEOS-2 spacecraft On board the ADEOS-2 was the $150 million NASA SeaWinds instrument Due to the variety and intensity of this solar activity outbreak most industries vulnerable to space weather experienced some degree of impact to their operations Even more serious effects can be expected during future powerful geomagnetic storms To quote the NAS study [25] Because of the interconnectedness of critical infrastructures in modern society the impacts of severe space weather events can go beyond disruption of existing technical systems and lead to short-term as well as to long-term collateral socioeconomic disruptionshellip Collateral effects of a longer-term outage would likely includehellip disruption of the transportation communication banking and finance systems and government services the breakdown of the distribution of potable water owing to pump failure and the loss of perishable foods and medications because of lack of refrigeration The resulting loss of services for a significant period of time in even one region of the country could affect the entire nation and have international impacts as well Our electric power grid has continued to become more vulnerable to disruption from geomagnetic storms For example the power delivery system is now operating closer to margin than in the past As Kappenman states ldquomany of the things that we have done to increase operational efficiency and haul power long distances have inadvertently and unknowingly escalated the risks from geomagnetic stormsrdquo [25] The possible extent of a power system collapse from a 4800 nTmin geomagnetic storm (centered at 50deg geomagnetic latitude) is shown in Figure 2 Similar levelsmdash10 times those experienced during the March 1989 stormmdashwere reached during the great magnetic storm of May 14ndash15 1921 A nuclear weapon would need to be a ~multi-megaton size to cause the equivalent E3 damage [15] The most serious outcome of such power delivery system failures is damage to the transformers although other critical systems on the grid are also at risk As the NAS study points out transformers experience ldquoexcessive levels of internal heating brought on by stray flux when GICs cause a transformerrsquos magnetic core to saturate and to spill flux outside the normal core steel magnetic circuithellip previous well-documented cases have involved heating failures that caused melting and burn-through of large-amperage copper windings and leads in these transformers These multi-ton apparatus generally cannot be repaired in the field and if damaged in this manner they need to be replaced with new units which have manufacture lead times of 12 months or morerdquo Metatech Corp estimates that more than 300 large extra-high voltage (EHV) transformers would be exposed to levels of GIC sufficiently high to place these units at risk of failure or permanent damage requiring replacement [25] Figure 3 shows an estimate of percent loss of EHV transformer capacity by state for a 4800 nTmin threat environment such as might occur during a storm of the magnitude of the May 1921 event As a recent article in the journal Science states ldquoThe surging power-line currents induced by a severe solar storm could push the grid into uncharted territoryrdquo [26] In summary current US grid operational procedures are based largely on limited experience generally do not reduce GIC flows and are unlikely to be adequate for historically large disturbance events Historically large storms have a potential to cause power grid blackouts and transformer damage of unprecedented proportions long-term blackouts and lengthy restoration times and chronic shortages for multiple years are possible [25]

116

Cornell HKHANE Aff

China Turn

High Altitude Nuclear Explosions are key to dissuade China

Castle 6 Colonel Douglas A ldquoShaping Chinarsquos Rise Through Strategic Frictionrdquo USAWC Strategy Research Project March 2006

Continued strengthening of the US military can also decelerate Chinarsquos expanding potency Washington must not allow China to outpace Americarsquos conventional or nuclear capabilities and must maintain its clear technological advantages If the US can stay significantly ahead of China in weapons technology ndash such as advanced missile defense electromagnetic pulse (EMP) weapons and space utilization systems ndash then China would be forced to spend inordinate amounts of money to develop a costly defense infrastructure thereby further delaying its power build-up However this plan depends upon safeguarding technology from espionage corporate transmission and allied governmental transfers to prevent a free ride for China Chinarsquos military growth is disconcerting given that it faces no real regional challenge128 Its development of intercontinental nuclear missiles as well as land- and sea-launched weapons poses a significant threat to the continental US as well as forward-based land and maritime US forces Although China has publicly endorsed a ldquono first-strikerdquo strategic nuclear policy 129 its ldquocult of defenserdquo predilection increases the likelihood of a first-strike scenario130 America is especially vulnerable to the effects of a high-altitude EMP-producing detonation Such an attack would cripple Americarsquos economy and infrastructure yet the US has no publicly-stated policy of response131 An effective operational US anti-missile defense shield and credible EMP deterrence are thus essential to American security

Tellis 7 Ashley J- Senior Associate at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace ldquoChinas Military Space Strategyrdquo Survival Volume 49 Issue 3 September 2007

This has led some observers such as US Senator Jon Kyl to conclude that the solution to redressing emerging American space vulnerabilities in the context of competition with China lies in developing among other things US offensive counterspace capabilities90 These will almost certainly be required if for no other reason than to deter Beijings use of anti-space weaponry and to hold at risk its own emerging assets in space which are likely to become even more important for both economic and military purposes as China evolves into a great power91 Offensive American counterspace instruments serve the limited but critical purpose of raising the costs of Chinas evolving space-denial strategy increasing the probability that Beijing will desist from asymmetric attacks on US space assets

117

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT PGS Prolif

Conventional strike doesnrsquot lead to prolif

Guthe 2 Kurt- Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments ldquoThe Nuclear Posture Review How Is the ldquoNew Triadrdquo Newrdquo 2002

Some argue that greater US reliance on long-range precision-guided conventional weapons will increase the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction They claim that adversaries unable to match US nonnuclear strike capabilities will acquire weapons of mass destruction as an asymmetric counter This reasoning ignores the facts The first major demonstration of the operational effectiveness of US precision-guided weapons was the Gulf War of 1991 Foreign militaries were greatly impressed by the key contribution of precision weapons to the US victory Those hostile to the United States recognized the need for strategies tactics and capabilities to offset the US advantage Weapons of mass destruction have been seen as one response44 But every potential adversary of the United States had or was pursuing nuclear biological or chemical weapons well before 199145 While adversaries may see weapons of mass destruction as counters to US precision-guided weapons US nonnuclear strike capabilities have not been the cause of proliferation which results from political military and technological factors that vary with each country Abandoning this advantage would not reverse proliferation but would seriously impair the ability of the United States to defend itself and others Were certain allies and friends to lose confidence in US defense commitments those countries might seek security in nuclear weapons of their own increasing nuclear proliferation The long-range precision guided weapons of the New Triad offer options for deterring or otherwise preventing WMD use thus contributing to US efforts to deal with the existing problem of proliferation

118

Cornell HKHANE Aff

No Solvency- Conventional EMPs

No Solvency- the US has conventional EMPs that are just as powerful

Muumlller amp Schoumlrnig 1 Harald and Niklas- United Nations Institute for Disarmament Research ldquoRMA and nuclear weapons A calamitous link for arms controlrdquo Disarmament Forum 2001(4)

An alternative way to disrupt the opponentrsquos communication is the use of an Electro-Magnetic Pulse (EMP) weapon which produces a short wave of an intense electromagnetic pulse ruining basic electronic components in communication gear (and of course all electronically based equipment) Until recently a high altitude nuclear explosion was the only means to generate an EMP strong enough to seriously harm electronic devices in enemy territory Tests performed in the early 1960s confirmed that a detonation of a 14 megaton bomb 400 kilometres in orbit resulted in failures of electronic systems 1300 kilometres away13 The effects would be even more severe today as low powered electronic equipment tends to be more sensitive to voltage swings Up to now these scenarios based on nuclear weapons were banned by the Outer Space Treaty (OST) of 1967 signed by virtually all nations with certain and potential nuclear capabilities (with the exception of North Korea) However according to unconfirmed sources recent scientific progress in the United States has led to the design of workable conventional EMP weapons generating a less far reaching but similar shockwave14 With this development severe consequences for the OST are inevitable as nuclear-capable countries may feel the need to deploy nuclear EMP weapons in space as a counter-deterrent

119

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Conventional EMPs Shift

Military leaders would shift to HPM weapons ndash worse than an EMP because itrsquos just as dangerous but more usable

Global Security 5[ldquoHigh-power microwave (HPM) E-Bombrdquo httpwwwglobalsecurityorgmilitarysystemsmunitionshpmhtm]

High-power microwave (HPM) sources have been under investigation for several years as potential weapons for a variety of combat sabotage and terrorist applications Due to classification restrictions details of this work are relatively unknown outside the military community and its contractors A key point to recognize is the insidious nature of HPM Due to the gigahertz-band frequencies (4 to 20 GHz) involved HPM has the capability to penetrate not only radio front-ends but also the most minute shielding penetrations throughout the equipment At sufficiently high levels as discussed the potential exists for significant damage to devices and circuits For these reasons HPM should be of interest to the broad spectrum of EMC practitioners Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP) and High Powered Microwave (HMP) Weapons offer a significant capability against electronic equipment susceptible to damage by transient power surges This weapon generates a very short intense energy pulse producing a transient surge of thousands of volts that kills semiconductor devices The conventional EMP and HMP weapons can disable non-shielded electronic devices including practically any modern electronic device within the effective range of the weapon The effectiveness of an EMP device is determined by the power generated and the characteristic of the pulse The shorter pulse wave forms such as microwaves are far more effective against electronic equipment and more difficult to harden against Current efforts focus on converting the energy from an explosive munitions to supply the electromagnetic pulse This method produces significant levels of directionally focused electromagnetic energy Future advances may provide the compactness needed to weaponize the capability in a bomb or missile warhead Currently the radius of the weapon is not as great as nuclear EMP effects Open literature sources indicate that effective radii of ldquohundreds of meters or morerdquo are possible EMP and HPM devices can disable a large variety of military or infrastructure equipment over a relatively broad area This can be useful for dispersed targets A difficulty is determining the appropriate level of energy to achieve the desired effects This will require detailed knowledge of the target equipment and the environment (walls buildings) The obvious counter-measure is the shielding or hardening of electronic equipment Currently only critical military equipment is hardened eg strategic command and control systems Hardening of existing equipment is difficult and adds significant weight and expense As a result a large variety of commercial and military equipment will be susceptible to this type of attack The US Navy reportedly used a new class of highly secret non-nuclear electromagnetic pulse warheads during the opening hours of the Persian Gulf War to disrupt and destroy Iraqi electronics systems The warheads converted the energy of a conventional explosion into a pulse of radio energy The effect of the microwave attacks on Iraqi air defense and headquarters was difficult to determine because the effects of the HPM blasts were obscured by continuous jamming the use of stealthy F-117 aircraft and the destruction of Iraqs electrical grid The warheads used during the Gulf War were experimental warheads not standard weapons deployed with fielded forces Col William G Heckathorn commander of the Phillips Research Site and the deputy director of the Directed Energy Directorate of the Air Force Research Laboratory was presented the Legion of Merit medal during special retirement ceremonies in May 1998 In a citation accompanying the medal Col Heckathorn was praised for having provided superior vision leadership and direct guidance that resulted in the first high-power microwave weapon prototypes delivered to the warfighter The citation noted that Col Heckathorn united all directed energy development within Army Navy and Air Force which resulted in an efficient focused warfighter-oriented tri-service research program In December of 1994 he came to Kirtland to become the director of the Advanced Weapons and Survivability Directorate at the Phillips Laboratory Last year he became the commander of the Phillips Laboratory while still acting as the director of the Advanced Weapons and Survivability Directorate As with a conventional munition a microwave munition is a single shot munition that has a similar blast and fragmentation radius However while the explosion produces a blast the primary mission is to generate the energy that powers the microwave device Thus for a microwave munition the primary kill mechanism is the microwave energy which greatly increases the radius and the footprint by in some cases several orders of magnitude For example a 2000-pound microwave munition will have a minimum radius of approximately 200 meters or footprint of approximately 126000 square meters Studies have examined the incorporation of a high power microwave weapon into the weapons bay of a conceptual uninhabited combat aerial vehicle The CONOPS electromagnetic compatibility and hardening (to avoid a self-kill) power requirements and potential power supplies and antenna characteristics have been analyzed Extensive simulations of potential antennas have been performed The simulations examined the influence of the aircraft structure on the antenna patterns and the levels of leakage through apertures in the weapons bay Other investigations examined issues concerning the electromagnetic shielding effectiveness of composite aircraft structures Collateral damage from E-bombs is dependent on the size and design of the specific bomb An E-bomb that utilizes explosive power to obtain its damaging microwaves will result in typical blast and shrapnel damage Ideally an E-Bomb would be designed to minimize and dissipate most of the mechanical collateral damage Human exposure to microwave radiation is hazardous within several meters of the epicenter However there is a relatively low risk of bodily damage at further distances Any non-military electronics within range of the E-bomb that have not been protected have a high probability of being damaged or destroyed The best way to defend against E-bomb attack is to destroy the platform or delivery vehicle in which the E-bomb resides Another method of protection is to keep all essential electronics within an electrically conductive enclosure called a Faraday cage This prevents the damaging electromagentic field from interacting with vital equipment The problem with Faraday cages is that most vital equipment needs to be in contact with the outside world This contact point can allow the electromagentic field to enter the cage which ultimately renders the enclosure useless There are ways to protect against these Faraday cage flaws but the fact remains that this is a dangerous weakpoint In most circumstances E-bombs are categorized as non-lethal weapons because of the minimal collateral damage they create The E-bombs non-lethal categorization gives military commanders more politically-friendly options to choose from

120

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Conventional EMPs Shift

HPM triggers all your impacts

Danchev 6 Dancho Independent Security Consultancy Threat Intelligence Analysis (OSINTCyber Counter Intelligence) and Competitive Intelligence researcher ldquoEMP Attacks - Electronic Domination in Reverserdquo httpddanchevblogspotcom200605emp-attacks-electronic-domination-inhtml]

Why wouldnt a reported sponsor of terrorist nations wage EMP warfare or even try to over the US Because they would have the US in their backyard in less than a day but the opportunity to balance the powers or achieve temporary military advantage given the attack remains undetected is a tempting factor for future developments -- the ongoing miniaturization and the fact that intense energy effects can be can be produced without an A-Bomb makes it even worse Surgical HPM and EMP attacks without fear of retaliation is what possible adversaries could be aiming at and of course portability Other HPM weapons being tested by the military are portable and re-usable through battery-power and are effective when fired miles away from a target These weapons can also be focused like a laser beam and tuned to an appropriate frequency in order to penetrate electronics that are heavily shielded against a nuclear attack The deepest bunkers with the thickest concrete walls reportedly are not safe from such a beam if they have even a single unprotected wire reaching the surface

HPM or conventional EMP will be substituted

Krepinevich 1 Andrew- defense policy analyst executive director of the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments ldquoBeyond the Two-MTW Posturerdquo Testimony before the House Committee on Armed Services on June 20 2001

Strategic Strike The United States military is capable of moving beyond near-total reliance on nuclear weapons for prompt effective strategic strike operations Precision munitions have a significant substitution potential with respect to nuclear weapons Various forms of electronic attack (ie IW strikes conventionally generated EMP and HPM strikes) may also possess a significant substitution potential Such weapons are far more ldquouseablerdquo than nuclear weapons and may better deter an enemyrsquos attempts at coercion or aggression They can enable us to reduce the size of our nuclear arsenal (while encouraging others to follow suit)

121

Cornell HKHANE Aff

AT Warfighting Advantage

Their warfighting advantage is logically flawed

Burnham 83 David- co-director of the Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse (TRAC) ldquoUS Fears One Bomb Could Cripple The Nationrdquo The New York Times

Many experts question the likelihood that any nuclear war would be limited to the exchange of a handful of nuclear explosions My personal feeling is that if an attack ever came it would be a massive one on our cities and military bases and the effect of EMP on the civilian economy would be irrelevant said Dr Gordon K Soper a senior scientist in the Defense Nuclear Agency But there has been a good deal of talk about the possibility of a protracted nuclear war Mr Latham the Pentagon official expressed the same kind of ambivalence I dont think a cheap shot is likely but there is no way we can know for sure The possibility of using EMP as a oneshot weapon is not considered likely because of impossibility of predicting the exact response

122

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Nuclear Winter Imagery Good

Forecasts of nuclear winter spur change to abandon nuclear madness

Robock amp Toon 10 Alan- Department of Environmental Sciences Rutgers University and Owen Brian- Director and Professor Department of Atmospheric and Oceanic Sciences University of Colorado ldquoLocal Nuclear War Global Sufferingrdquo Scientific American January 2010

Twenty-five years ago international teams of scientists showed that a nuclear war between the US and the Soviet Union could produce a ldquonuclear winterrdquo The smoke from vast fires started by bombs dropped on cities and industrial areas would envelop the planet and absorb so much sunlight that the earthrsquos surface would get cold dark and dry killing plants worldwide and eliminating our food supply Surface temperatures would reach winter values in the summer International discussion about this prediction fueled largely by astronomer Carl Sagan forced the leaders of the two superpowers to confront the possibility that their arms race endangered not just themselves but the entire human race Countries large and small demanded disarmament Nuclear winter became an important factor in ending the nuclear arms race Looking back later in 2000 former Soviet Union leader Mikhail S Gorbachev observed ldquoModels made by Russian and American scientists showed that a nuclear war would result in a nuclear winter that would be extremely destructive to all life on earth the knowledge of that was a great stimulus to us to people of honor and morality to actrdquo Why discuss this topic now that the cold war has ended Because as other nations continue to acquire nuclear weapons smaller regional nuclear wars could create a similar global catastrophe New analyses reveal that a conflict between India and Pakistan for example in which 100 nuclear bombs were dropped on cities and industrial areasmdashonly 04 percent of the worldrsquos more than 25000 warheadsmdashwould produce enough smoke to cripple global agriculture A regional war could cause widespread loss of life even in countries far away from the conflict

123

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Regional Nuclear War

Newest studies indicate small scale nuclear wars would lead to extinction

Robock amp Toon 10 Alan- Department of Environmental Sciences Rutgers University and Owen Brian- Director and Professor Department of Atmospheric and Oceanic Sciences University of Colorado ldquoLocal Nuclear War Global Sufferingrdquo Scientific American January 2010

By deploying modern computers and modern climate models the two of us and our colleagues have shown that not only were the ideas of the 1980s correct but the effects would last for at least 10 years much longer than previously thought And by doing calculations that assess decades of time only now possible with fast current computers and by including in our calculations the oceans and the entire atmosphere mdash also only now possiblemdashwe have found that the smoke from even a regional war would be heated and lofted by the sun and remain suspended in the upper atmosphere for years continuing to block sunlight and to cool the earth India and Pakistan which together have more than 100 nuclear weapons may be the most worrisome adversaries capable of a regional nuclear conflict today But other countries besides the US and Russia (which have thousands) are well endowed China France and the UK have hundreds of nuclear warheads Israel has more than 80 North Korea has about 10 and Iran may well be trying to make its own In 2004 this situation prompted one of us (Toon) and later Rich Turco of the University of California Los Angeles both veterans of the 1980s investigations to begin evaluating what the global environmental effects of a regional nuclear war would be and to take as our test case an engagement between India and Pakistan The latest estimates by David Albright of the Institute for Science and International Security and by Robert S Norris of the Natural Resources Defense Council are that India has 50 to 60 assembled weapons (with enough plutonium for 100) and that Pakistan has 60 weapons Both countries continue to increase their arsenals Indian and Pakistani nuclear weapons tests indicate that the yield of the warheads would be similar to the 15-kiloton explosive yield (equivalent to 15000 tons of TNT) of the bomb the US used on Hiroshima Toon and Turco along with Charles Bardeen now at the National Center for Atmospheric Research modeled what would happen if 50 Hiroshimasize bombs were dropped across the highest population-density targets in Pakistan and if 50 similar bombs were also dropped across India Some people maintain that nuclear weapons would be used in only a measured way But in the wake of chaos fear and broken communications that would occur once a nuclear war began we doubt leaders would limit attacks in any rational manner This likelihood is particularly true for Pakistan which is small and could be quickly overrun in a conventional conflict Peter R Lavoy of the Naval Postgraduate School for example has analyzed the ways in which a conflict between India and Pakistan might occur and argues that Pakistan could face a decision to use all its nuclear arsenal quickly before India swamps its military bases with traditional forces Obviously we hope the number of nuclear targets in any future war will be zero but policy makers and voters should know what is possible Toon and Turco found that more than 20 million people in the two countries could die from the blasts fires and radioactivitymdasha horrible slaughter But the investigators were shocked to discover that a tremendous amount of smoke would be generated given the megacities in the two countries assuming each fire would burn the same area that actually did burn in Hiroshima and assuming an amount of burnable material per person based on various studies They calculated that the 50 bombs exploded in Pakistan would produce three teragrams of smoke and the 50 bombs hitting India would generate four (one teragram equals a million metric tons) Satellite observations of actual forest fires have shown that smoke can be lofted up through the troposphere (the bottom layer of the atmosphere) and sometimes then into the lower stratosphere (the layer just above extending to about 30 miles) Toon and Turco also did some ldquoback of the enveloperdquo calculations of the possible climate impact of the smoke should it enter the stratosphere The large magnitude of such effects made them realize they needed help from a climate modeler It turned out that one of us (Robock) was already working with Luke Oman now at the NASA Goddard Space Flight Center who was finishing his PhD at Rutgers University on the climatic effects of volcanic eruptions and with Georgiy L Stenchikov also at Rutgers and an author of the first Russian work on nuclear winter They developed a climate model that could be used fairly easily for the nuclear blast calculations Robock and his colleagues being conservative put five teragrams of smoke into their modeled upper troposphere over India and Pakistan on an imaginary May 15 The model calculated how winds would blow the smoke around the world and how the smoke particles would settle out from the atmosphere The smoke covered all the continents within two weeks The black sooty smoke absorbed sunlight warmed and rose into the stratosphere Rain never falls there so the air is never cleansed by precipitation particles very slowly settle out by falling with air resisting them Soot particles are small with an average diameter of only 01 micron (μm) and so drift down very slowly They also rise during the daytime as they are heated by the sun repeatedly delaying their elimination The calculations showed that the smoke would reach far higher into the upper stratosphere than the sulfate particles that are produced by episodic volcanic eruptions Sulfate particles are transparent and absorb much less sunlight than soot and are also bigger typically 05 μm The volcanic particles remain airborne for about two years but smoke from nuclear fires would last a decade Killing Frosts in Summer The climatic response to the smoke was surprising Sunlight was immediately reduced cooling the planet to temperatures lower than any experienced for the past 1000 years The global average cooling of about 125 degrees Celsius (23 degrees Fahrenheit) lasted for several years and even after 10 years the temperature was still 05 degree C colder than normal The models also showed a 10 percent reduction in precipitation worldwide Precipitation river flow and soil moisture all decreased because blocking sunlight reduces evaporation and weakens the hydrologic cycle Drought was largely

124

Cornell HKHANE Aff

concentrated in the lower latitudes however because global cooling would retard the Hadley air circulation pattern in the tropics which produces a large fraction of global precipitation In critical areas such as the Asian monsoon regions rainfall dropped by as much as 40 percent The cooling might not seem like much but even a small dip can cause severe consequences Cooling and diminished sunlight would for example shorten growing seasons in the midlatitudes More insight into the effects of cooling came from analyses of the aftermaths of massive volcanic eruptions Every once in a while such eruptions produce temporary cooling for a year or two The largest of the past 500 years the 1815 Tambora eruption in Indonesia blotted the sun and produced global cooling of about 05 degree C for a year 1816 became known as ldquoThe Year without a Summerrdquo or ldquoEighteen Hundred and Froze to Deathrdquo In New England although the average summer temperature was lowered only a few degrees crop-killing frosts occurred in every month After the first frost farmers replanted crops only to see them killed by the next frost The price of grain skyrocketed the price of livestock plummeted as farmers sold the animals they could not feed and a mass migration began from New England to the Midwest as people followed reports of fertile land there In Europe the weather was so cold and gloomy that the stock market collapsed widespread famines occurred and 18-year-old Mary Shelley was inspired to write Frankenstein Certain strains of crops such as winter wheat can withstand lower temperatures but a lack of sunlight inhibits their ability to grow In our scenario daylight would filter through the high smoky haze but on the ground every day would seem to be fully overcast Agronomists and farmers could not develop the necessary seeds or adjust agricultural practices for the radically different conditions unless they knew ahead of time what to expect In addition to the cooling drying and darkness extensive ozone depletion would result as the smoke heated the stratosphere reactions that create and destroy ozone are temperature-dependent Michael J Mills of the University of Colorado at Boulder ran a completely separate climate model from Robockrsquos but found similar results for smoke lofting and stratospheric temperature changes He concluded that although surface temperatures would cool by a small amount the stratosphere would be heated by more than 50 degrees C because the black smoke particles absorb sunlight This heating in turn would modify winds in the stratosphere which would carry ozone-destroying nitrogen oxides into its upper reaches Together the high temperatures and nitrogen oxides would reduce ozone to the same dangerous levels we now experience below the ozone hole above Antarctica every spring Ultraviolet radiation on the ground would increase significantly because of the diminished ozone Less sunlight and precipitation cold spells shorter growing seasons and more ultraviolet radiation would all reduce or eliminate agricultural production Notably cooling and ozone loss would be most profound in middle and high latitudes in both hemispheres whereas precipitation declines would be greatest in the tropics The specific damage inflicted by each of these environmental changes would depend on particular crops soils agricultural practices and regional weather patterns and no researchers have completed detailed analyses of such agricultural responses Even in normal times however feeding the growing human population depends on transferring food across the globe to make up for regional farming deficiencies caused by drought and seasonal weather changes The total amount of grain stored on the planet today would feed the earthrsquos population for only about two months [see ldquoCould Food Shortages Bring Down Civilizationrdquo by Lester R Brown Scientific American May] Most cities and countries have stockpiled food supplies for just a very short period and food shortages (as well as rising prices) have increased in recent years A nuclear war could trigger declines in yield nearly everywhere at once and a worldwide panic could bring the global agricultural trading system to a halt with severe shortages in many places Around one billion people worldwide who now live on marginal food supplies would be directly threatened with starvation by a nuclear war between India and Pakistan or between other regional nuclear powers Typically scientists test models and theories by doing experiments but we obviously cannot experiment in this case Thus we look for analogues that can verify our models Burned cities Unfortunately firestorms created by intense releases of energy have pumped vast quantities of smoke into the upper atmosphere San Francisco burned as a result of the 1906 earthquake and whole cities were incinerated during World War II including Dresden Hamburg Tokyo Hiroshima and Nagasaki These events confirm that smoke from intense urban fires rises into the upper atmosphere The seasonal cycle In actual winter the climate is cooler because the days are shorter and sunlight is less intense the simple change of seasons helps us quantify the effects of less solar radiation Our climate models re-create the seasonal cycle well confirming that they properly reflect changes in sunlight Eruptions Explosive volcanic eruptions such as those of Tambora in 1815 Krakatau in 1883 and Pinatubo in 1991 provide several lessons The resulting sulfate aerosol clouds that formed in the stratosphere were transported around the world by winds The surface temperature plummeted after each eruption in proportion to the thickness of the particulate cloud After the Pinatubo eruption the global average surface temperature dropped by about 025 degree C Global precipitation river flow and soil moisture all decreased Our models reproduce these effects Forest fires Smoke from large forest fires sometimes is injected into the troposphere and lower stratosphere and is transported great distances producing cooling Our models perform well against these effects too Extinction of the dinosaurs An asteroid smashed into Mexicorsquos Yucataacuten Peninsula 65 million years ago The resulting dust cloud mixed with smoke from fires blocked the Sun killing the dinosaurs Massive volcanism in India at the same time may have exacerbated the effects The events teach us that large amounts of aerosols in the earthrsquos atmosphere can change climate drastically enough to kill robust species

125

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Regional Nuclear War

Prefer our evidence- only current research

Robock amp Toon 10 Alan- Department of Environmental Sciences Rutgers University and Owen Brian- Director and Professor Department of Atmospheric and Oceanic Sciences University of Colorado ldquoLocal Nuclear War Global Sufferingrdquo Scientific American January 2010

Some people think that the nuclear winter theory developed in the 1980s was discredited And they may therefore raise their eyebrows at our new assertion that a regional nuclear war like one between India and Pakistan could also devastate agriculture worldwide But the original theory was thoroughly validated The science behind it was supported by investigations from the National Academy of Sciences by studies sponsored within the US military and by the International Council of Scientific Unions which included representatives from 74 national academies of science and other scientific bodies Our current work has appeared in leading peer-reviewed journals Still we seem to be the only ones pursuing research into the global environmental risks of nuclear exchanges We urge others to evaluate and repeat the calculations both for the effects of a superpower conflagration and for more regional nuclear wars

126

Cornell HKHANE Aff

No EMP- Norms Now

Berry 8 Ken Research Coordinator ICNND ldquoNew Weapons Technologyrdquo International Commission on Nuclear Non-proliferation and Disarmament

However it is unlikelymdashthough unfortunately not impossiblemdashthat any nuclear armed state these days would use EMP generated by nuclear weapons Using an atmospheric nuclear blast would attract international opprobrium both for its proliferation implications and also increasingly important for its effects on the environment As has been discussed above the same widespread effects of shutting down a nationrsquos power grid production lines water utilities chemical plants financial institutions telecommunications and transportation routes could be achieved by cyber attack Moreover given the difficulty of tracing the perpetrators of cyberwarfare responsibility for such an attack would be deniable44

No risk of EMP use now

Arquilla and Ronfeldt 2k[John and David RAND ldquoSwarming and the Future of Conflictrdquo]

One of the most effective means of breaking down communications is by an airburst of a nuclear weapon at a high altitude This generation of a highly disruptive electromagnetic pulse (EMP) would temporarily disable most communications in the battlespace it would also damage the many embedded information systems that make modern weapons systems able to fire with accuracy (eg the optical sights of a main battle tank) The fact that the EMP is generated by a nuclear detonationmdashagainst which there are strong normative inhibitionsmdashsuggests that there are few actors who might actually be able to undertake such an action Yet we note the frequent discussion of EMP as a likely threat in cold warndashera ruminations on nuclear strategy44 Further the high-altitude nature of the burst means that there would be virtually no collateral damage Finally it should be noted that the Russian militaryrsquos declaratory stance with respect to nuclear weapons has moved in recent years from ldquono first userdquo to a willingness to engage in ldquofirst userdquo It may be that their inability to match American advances in conventional warfighting will impel the Russians to try to make up for any deficiencies in this manner Indeed the recently announced new Russian military doctrine is clearly more permissive of the use of nuclear weapons from the tactical to the strategic level

127

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Russia CMR Link

Russian military doctrine supports the potential use of EMP

Arquilla and Ronfeldt 2k[John and David RAND ldquoSwarming and the Future of Conflictrdquo]

One of the most effective means of breaking down communications is by an airburst of a nuclear weapon at a high altitude This generation of a highly disruptive electromagnetic pulse (EMP) would temporarily disable most communications in the battlespace it would also damage the many embedded information systems that make modern weapons systems able to fire with accuracy (eg the optical sights of a main battle tank) The fact that the EMP is generated by a nuclear detonationmdashagainst which there are strong normative inhibitionsmdashsuggests that there are few actors who might actually be able to undertake such an action Yet we note the frequent discussion of EMP as a likely threat in cold warndashera ruminations on nuclear strategy44 Further the high-altitude nature of the burst means that there would be virtually no collateral damage Finally it should be noted that the Russian militaryrsquos declaratory stance with respect to nuclear weapons has moved in recent years from ldquono first userdquo to a willingness to engage in ldquofirst userdquo It may be that their inability to match American advances in conventional warfighting will impel the Russians to try to make up for any deficiencies in this manner Indeed the recently announced new Russian military doctrine is clearly more permissive of the use of nuclear weapons from the tactical to the strategic level

128

Cornell HKHANE Aff

Infrastructure CP

The United States federal government should implement the findings of the EMP Commission

Solvency ndash

EMP Commissionrsquos findings havenrsquot yet been implemented

Treadwell and Thompson 9[Mead Treadwell is a Senior Fellow in Security and Defense and Jeremy Thompson is a Research Associate in Security and Defense both at the Institute of the North ldquoEMP Attacks Infrastructure amp Public Policy Concernsrdquo Inside ALEC NovDec]

Yet the dots are not being connected The Department of Homeland Security has made no official move to implement or even accept the recommendations of the EMP Commission report on critical national infrastructures While some members of Congress understand the threat and wish to do something about it most of the ire has been directed at power industry figures as a Congressional hearing earlier this summer illustrates

Solves vulnerability to EMP

EMP Commission 4[ Report of the Commission to Assess the Threat to the United States from Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP) Attack Volume 1 Executive Report 2004 Dr John S Foster Jr Mr Earl Gjelde Dr William R Graham (Chairman) Dr Robert J Hermann Mr Henry (Hank) M Kluepfel GEN Richard L Lawson USAF (Ret) Dr Gordon K Soper Dr Lowell L Wood Jr Dr Joan B Woodard]

The Nationrsquos vulnerability to EMP that gives rise to potentially large-scale long-term consequences can be reasonably and readily reduced below the level of a potentially catastrophic national problem by coordinated and focused effort between the private and public sectors of our country The cost for such improved security in the next 3 to 5 years is modest by any standardmdashand extremely so in relation to both the war on terror and the value of the national infrastructures involved The appropriate response to this threatening situation is a balance of prevention protection planning and preparations for recovery Such actions are both rational and feasible A number of these actions also reduce vulnerabilities to other serious threats to our infrastructures thus giving multiple benefits

129

Cornell HKHANE Aff

NMD CP

McNeill amp Weitz 8 Jena Baker- homeland security policy analyst at The Heritage Foundation and Richard- Senior Fellow and Director of the Center for Political-Military Analysis at Hudson Institute ldquoElectromagnetic Pulse (EMP) Attack A Preventable Homeland Security Catastropherdquo Heritage Foundation Backgrounder 2199 httpwwwheritageorgresearchhomelandsecuritybg2199cfm_ftn19

Build a Comprehensive Missile Defense System The most likely method of EMP attack would be a ballistic missile armed with a nuclear warhead Building a comprehensive missile defense system would allow the US to intercept and destroy a missile bound for the United States The mere implementation of such a system would go a long way to prevent an attack by dissuading those who wish to carry out such actions and sending a clear message that the US takes this threat seriously

Those opposed to missile defense in Congress and elsewhere have attempted to paint such an endeavor as a waste of resources that does nothing to further American security 33 Minutes Protecting America in the New Missile Age A Reader a collection of essays by pre-eminent defense scholars emphasized the need for such measures and recent missile testing by Iran demonstrates that other countries are actively involved in developing missile programsmdashwhich could be used against the US[21]

130

Cornell HKHANE Aff

LoW key to Stability

Hair trigger alert serves as a warning light not to push conflicts too far Plan leads to dangerous confrontations

Perry amp Millot 98 Walter L- Senior Information Scientist and Marc Dean ldquoChapter Three Issues from the Winter Wargamerdquo Issues from the 1997 Army After Next Winter Wargame RAND Corporation 9

The possible exception to the above statement is strategic nuclear war In this instance the technology supporting military operations outstrips the timelines of political decision During the Cold War a Soviet SLBM launched off the eastern seaboard of the United States would have given a President less than 10 minutes to decide whether to order a limited number of response options contained in the Single Integrated Operational Plan or leave that decision to a successor The flight time of Soviet ICBMs allowed the United States less than 45 minutes to execute what might well turn out to be a single retaliatory response The damage done by Soviet nuclear strikes might conceivably deny the United States the capacity to retaliate with weapons other than SLBMs if national leaders chose to decide on a response only after ldquoriding outrdquo the attack and would probably lead to an incoherent response But the damage done by even an incoherent US retaliation would have decimated the Soviet Union and destroyed large portions of its structures for controlling war A Soviet nuclear attack would have left the fate of the United States indeed the world solely in the hands of the President He wouldmdashat bestmdashhave perhaps minutes to confer with his closest advisors and literally no time for consultation or even communication with the Congress the people allies or even the Soviets The requirement to ldquouse it or lose itrdquo would have left no room for a political leaderrsquos wellhoned techniques of crisis management The Soviet leadership faced the same problem and the symmetry provided a powerful incentive for the two superpowers to avoid direct confrontation engage in measures designed to control the risks and consequences of nuclear war and enter into vastly expensive efforts to buy their NCAs and successors some ability to control the conduct of war including limited nuclear options effective means of nuclear attack assessment as well as tactical warning continuity of operations and ultimately strategic defenses

131

• EMP AFF Index
• 1AC Plan
• Solvency
• Future Wars Adv
• Future Wars Adv
• Accidents Adv
• Accidents Adv
• Accidents Adv
• Rogue EMP Adv
• Rogue EMP Adv
• Rogue EMP Adv
• Rogue EMP Adv
• Rogue EMP Adv
• China Advantage
• China Advantage
• General Topicality 12
• General Topicality 22
• General Topicality 1AR 12
• General Topicality 1AR 22
• More Topicality
• Future Wars Conflicts Likely
• Future Wars Ext
• AT Limited War Winter
• Accidents- LoW Bad
• AT FS Remains - Russia
• AT FS Remains - China
• AT FS Remains - Subs
• Rogue- Seeking
• China Solves NoKo
• Rogue Satelites
• Rogue- AT No Tech
• Rogue- AT No Long Range Missiles
• Rogue- AT Uncertain Effects
• Rogue- AT Attribution
• Iran Ev
• NoKo Ev
• Terrorism Adv
• Terrorism Adv
• Terrorism Ext
• China- AT Attribution
• Space Militarization Adv 1
• Space Militarization Adv 2
• Space Militarization Adv 3
• Space Ext
• Data Sharing Adv
• Data Sharing Adv
• Data Sharing Adv
• Data Sharing- Uniqueness
• Data Sharing- Data Needed
• Russia Data Sharing (Testing)
• Russian ARMS control
• Modeling Advantage 1
• Modeling Advantage- Israel
• Modeling Advantage- Israel
• Modeling Advantage- China
• Modeling Advantage- Solvency
• Israeli Strikes Bad
• Testing Advantage
• EMPacts Econ
• EMPacts Heg
• EMPacts Earthquake
• EMPacts GPS
• EMPacts Satelites
• EMPacts Healthcare
• Morality Advantage
• AT Verifiability
• AT Verifiability
• Verifiability Extensions
• AT CMR
• Politics Link Answers
• Politics Link Answers
• Politics Link Turn
• AT Geomagnetic Storms
• AT Geomagnetic Storms
• AT Blackout Alt Causes
• AT Alternative EMP forms
• AT Protective Measures
• AT Protective Measures
• AT Low Altitude Nuclear Explosions
• CP Theories
• AT Hardening CP
• AT Hardening CP
• AT NMD CP
• AT PAROS CP
• AT Asteroids PIC
• AT Japan Rearm
• AT Consult Japan
• AT Primacy DA
• AT Primacy DA
• AT Damage Limitation
• AT Damage Limitation
• AT Damage Limitation
• AT Deterrence DA
• AT Deterrence DA
• AT Deterrence DA
• AT Deterrence DA
• No US Second Strike
• Yes US Second Strike
• Yes US Second Strike
• AT Security Kritik
• AT Kritiks
• AT Religion K
• AT Psychoanalysis
• Negative
• Not Topical
• Tix Links
• GOP Link
• AT Terrorist EMP
• AT State EMP
• AT RussiaChina EMP
• AT Proliferators EMP
• EMPacts False
• AT Strait of Hormuz
• Alt Cause- Geomagnetic Storms
• China Turn
• AT PGS Prolif
• No Solvency- Conventional EMPs
• Conventional EMPs Shift
• Conventional EMPs Shift
• AT Warfighting Advantage
• Nuclear Winter Imagery Good
• Regional Nuclear War
• Regional Nuclear War
• No EMP- Norms Now
• Russia CMR Link
• Infrastructure CP
• NMD CP
• LoW key to Stability