RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
DDI 2011
***TABLE OF CONTENTS***
***TABLE OF CONTENTS***.................................................................................................................................................. 1
***EXPLANATION*** ............................................................................................................................................................... 4
***RUSSIA CAN DO THE PLAN*** ......................................................................................................................................... 5
Russia Solves better than the US ........................................................................................................................................... 6
Constellation increases Russian Prestige ............................................................................................................................. 10
ISS / Soyuz Tradeoff ............................................................................................................................................................. 11
Russia solves Space Telescopes / Observatories ................................................................................................................ 14
Russia solves SSP ................................................................................................................................................................ 16
Russia solves Asteroids ........................................................................................................................................................ 17
Privatization kills Russian space ........................................................................................................................................... 19
Russia can solve nuclear propulsion .................................................................................................................................... 20
Russia solves Mars ............................................................................................................................................................... 21
Russia solves Moon / Mars ................................................................................................................................................... 22
Russia solves Space Debris ................................................................................................................................................. 23
Russia solves Helium 3 Mining ............................................................................................................................................. 25
Russia solves Moon .............................................................................................................................................................. 26
Russia solves Earth Observation .......................................................................................................................................... 27
Russia solves Colonization ................................................................................................................................................... 28
Russia solves robotics .......................................................................................................................................................... 29
Russia can solve space Tourism .......................................................................................................................................... 30
AT – US is better ................................................................................................................................................................... 31
AT – Russia = No money ...................................................................................................................................................... 32
AT – Not Reliable .................................................................................................................................................................. 33
***ECONOMY NET BENEFIT*** ........................................................................................................................................... 34
1NC Shell .............................................................................................................................................................................. 35
Space Investment Key .......................................................................................................................................................... 38
UX Invest High ...................................................................................................................................................................... 42
AT: Modernization Fails ........................................................................................................................................................ 45
AT: Perm/Both ....................................................................................................................................................................... 47
AT: Cooperation Perm .......................................................................................................................................................... 48
Shuttle Links .......................................................................................................................................................................... 49
AT: Won’t get revenue from satellites ................................................................................................................................... 52
Nuclear Rockets Link ............................................................................................................................................................ 53
***H3 SPECIFIC ECON NB*** .............................................................................................................................................. 54
1NC Shell [He3] .................................................................................................................................................................... 55
He3 k2 Russian econ ............................................................................................................................................................ 57
Russia He3 Now ................................................................................................................................................................... 58
***PRESTIGE COMPETITON NB***..................................................................................................................................... 59
1NC Shell .............................................................................................................................................................................. 60
Uniqueness- General Space Race ....................................................................................................................................... 62
Uniqueness- U.S. Losing ...................................................................................................................................................... 65
Uniqueness- Communication Satellites ................................................................................................................................ 66
Uniqueness- Manned Missions ............................................................................................................................................. 67
Uniqueness- Shuttle Program ............................................................................................................................................... 68
Link- Constellation ................................................................................................................................................................. 70
Link- ISS/ Soyuz .................................................................................................................................................................... 71
Link- Space Telescopes/Observatories ................................................................................................................................ 74
Link- Private Companies ....................................................................................................................................................... 76
Link- Mars.............................................................................................................................................................................. 77
Internal Link- Perception ....................................................................................................................................................... 78
Impacts- European Stability .................................................................................................................................................. 79
Impacts- Space Weaponization ............................................................................................................................................ 81
Impacts- US-Russo-Sino War ............................................................................................................................................... 83
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
1
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
DDI 2011
Economy Net Benefit ............................................................................................................................................................ 84
A2- The Soyuz Needs Replacement ..................................................................................................................................... 85
***PUTIN BAD *** .................................................................................................................................................................. 86
SHELL ................................................................................................................................................................................... 87
2NC Uniqueness—Close Race ............................................................................................................................................. 93
2NC Uniqueness—Gridlock .................................................................................................................................................. 94
2NC Uniqueness—AT: Putin won’t run ................................................................................................................................. 97
2NC Uniqueness—AT: Elections Rigged .............................................................................................................................. 98
2NC Uniqueness—AT: 3rd Party ........................................................................................................................................... 99
2NC Link—Space Key to Medvedev ................................................................................................................................... 100
2NC Link—Popularity Key to Medvedev ............................................................................................................................. 101
2NC Link—Space Popular .................................................................................................................................................. 102
2NC Link—Space Popular .................................................................................................................................................. 103
2NC Link—Space Popular .................................................................................................................................................. 104
2NC US Russia Relations EXT ........................................................................................................................................... 106
2NC US Russia Relations EXT ........................................................................................................................................... 107
2NC Relations Collapse Kills Heg ....................................................................................................................................... 108
Impact—Laundry List .......................................................................................................................................................... 110
Impact—Democracy............................................................................................................................................................ 111
Impact—Economy ............................................................................................................................................................... 112
2NC AT: Medvedev bad ...................................................................................................................................................... 115
Impact—Russia Econ .......................................................................................................................................................... 116
2NC Putin Kills Econ EXT ................................................................................................................................................... 117
2NC AT: Medvedev kills Econ............................................................................................................................................. 118
Impact—Terrorism .............................................................................................................................................................. 119
***AT PERM*** .................................................................................................................................................................... 121
Co-op fails ........................................................................................................................................................................... 122
Perm Links to Politics .......................................................................................................................................................... 125
***AFF*** ............................................................................................................................................................................. 127
Perm – coop Solves Relations ............................................................................................................................................ 127
Perm do both Solvency ....................................................................................................................................................... 128
No solve – Russia is Terrible at space ................................................................................................................................ 129
Russian Space kills their econ ............................................................................................................................................ 132
Econ alt causes ................................................................................................................................................................... 133
Space Not key to economy ................................................................................................................................................. 136
Non-Unique- US Winning .................................................................................................................................................... 137
Perm do both NB for telescopes ......................................................................................................................................... 139
A2- Privates tradeoff ........................................................................................................................................................... 140
Soyuz Bad- Russian Economy............................................................................................................................................ 142
US Dominance Good- Security/Economy ........................................................................................................................... 145
CP links to politics ............................................................................................................................................................... 146
***SPENDING DISAD TO CP*** ......................................................................................................................................... 147
Spending Shell .................................................................................................................................................................... 148
Uniqueness—Inflation ......................................................................................................................................................... 151
Uniqueness—Fiscal Discipline ............................................................................................................................................ 152
Uniqueness—Investment .................................................................................................................................................... 154
Uniqueness—Recovery ...................................................................................................................................................... 155
Link—Spending ................................................................................................................................................................... 157
Link—Capital Outflow .......................................................................................................................................................... 158
Link—Budget ....................................................................................................................................................................... 159
Link—Trade Off ................................................................................................................................................................... 160
Internal Link—Russia Key ................................................................................................................................................... 161
Internal Link—Fiscal Discipline ........................................................................................................................................... 162
Internal Link—Inflation ........................................................................................................................................................ 163
Internal Link—Pensions ...................................................................................................................................................... 164
Internal Link—Gas Tax ....................................................................................................................................................... 165
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
2
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
DDI 2011
Impact—Russian Economy ................................................................................................................................................. 168
Impact—Revolt .................................................................................................................................................................... 170
Impact—Nuclear War .......................................................................................................................................................... 171
***NEG AT SPENDING DA***............................................................................................................................................. 173
Aff—Fiscal Discipline Fails .................................................................................................................................................. 173
Aff—Non-Unique ................................................................................................................................................................. 174
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
3
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
DDI 2011
***EXPLANATION***
This counterplan advances the argument that Russia should do the plan. There are several internal net benefits.
There’s no shell, because the text will vary widely according to their plan. In general, the counterplan text should mandate that Russia
does the plan.
The net benefit menu can vary as well – we think they’re all pretty good. Obviously, US spending and US politics are net benefits to
this counterplan.
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
4
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
DDI 2011
***RUSSIA CAN DO THE PLAN***
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
5
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
DDI 2011
Russia Solves better than the US
Russia is more efficient than NASA
Andrei Kislaykov 05, RIA Novosti political commentator, December 2 2005, “Russian Technologies Can Put Cosmonauts on the
Moon”, http://www.spacedaily.com/news/lunar-05zzz.html, TJ
Despite Russia's 30-fold disadvantage in financing its space effort as compared with America's, it has greater chances of being the first
in reaching the Moon this time, or perhaps the Mars. The paradox is that the Americans have put all their money in the
transport system being developed by NASA (the National Aeronautics and Space Administration) and its budgetary
division. According to an article in the influential newspaper "The Washington Post" of November 24, the American
president's program of space research is having serious financial difficulties. Budgeted sums are just not enough. Most of them have
been spent on upgrading the space shuttle system and looking for causes of the Columbia disaster of February 1, 2003.
Reports also say that the idea is mooted to abandon the shuttle program altogether and save money for lunar and Martian
missions. But such a step is unlikely to meet the emerging deficit in NASA's budget, which may grow to $6 billion at the
peak of preparations (2006-2010) for interplanetary expeditions. Only extra cash injections can allow the agency to
develop and build a new generation manned spacecraft by 2012 that is necessary for a lunar mission scheduled by
President Bush for 2020. At the moment, however, the White House is flatly refusing to commit any more money to the
space effort. It appears that American astronautics is hostage to fortune, in fact, to one of its own programs, or rather to the
enormous sums sunk into its implementation. However, the odds are that it is neither shuttle craft, which can be
operational for a long interim period, nor the overspending, that are plaguing ambitious American space projects. The l1
ikeliest explanation is the sheer size of the task that keeps NASA from focusing on specific projects and grasping how much it needs
to spend on each of them. Meanwhile, Russian technologies, despite falling well behind in financing terms, promise to put cosmonauts
on the Moon's surface in seven to nine years' time, with the whole exercise to cost no more than $2 billion. "We could bring about a
landing," said Nikolai Sevastyanov, president of the Energia Rocket and Space Corporation, "as early as 2012-2014 by
using the technology of Soyuz-type spacecraft. If we had a $2 billion program, we could land on the Moon after mounting
only three expeditions."
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
6
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
DDI 2011
Russia Solvency
Russia can explore space more focused – means its solves better
Nader Elhefnawy 08, former University of Miami professor and has published many articles on space, November 17 2008, “A
Russian resurgence? (part two)” http://www. thespacereview.com/article/1251/1, TJ
Russian Minister of Economic Development and Trade Elvira Nabiullina estimated last year that should her country manage to
sustain its current rates of growth, it will have a roughly $5 trillion economy by 2020. This would make it the third largest
economy in the world today (or even second, depending on how it stacks up in nominal terms), and the fifth in 2020, after
only the United States and the Asian giants of China, India, and Japan. Russia would be a distant fifth, with about a
quarter the GDP of China, here projected to be the leader of the pack. Nonetheless, it would also have a higher per-capita
GDP than China and India, over $33,000 a head, on a par with many of today’s First World nations. The country’s greater
affluence (and a broad experience of being better off) would leave it in a position to commit a higher share of its national
income to projects like exploring and developing space. Moreover, culture should not be totally ruled out as a factor. The
experience of a broad improvement in living conditions aside, perhaps no country on Earth has derived as much of its national
prestige from space as Russia. And perhaps nowhere does a “futurist” streak, especially one bound up with space, run more deeply
than in the nation that gave the world Nikolai Fedorov and Konstantin Tsiolkovsky, a point acknowledged by Brian Harvey
in his writing on the Russian and Soviet space programs. All of these could well factor into the degree of commitment to a
space program in which Russia has historically had no peer, as not only the exceptional Soviet-era investment in that
program suggests, but also the survival of that program through the extraordinarily trying times of the 1990s. As a result,
what seems overambitious from the standpoint of 2008 might begin to be practical by 2020 if things go well. Still, a return
to Soviet-era funding levels even then (which would come within the realm of the possible if Russia achieves a $5 trillion
GDP) is implausible. Barring truly extraordinary adroitness on the part of the Russian government in dealing with its
developmental problems, these will absorb long overdue rubles. Additionally, the fact remains that even Soviet-era
budgets would not return Russia to its earlier standing because the US and China would remain in a position to outspend
it in any serious competition (barring a major upset like a sharp economic contraction due to rising energy prices, serious
political instability in China, or a debt-and-currency crisis in the case of the US). And of course, even they will not enjoy
the stature of the space superpowers of the 1960s, due to the broader diffusion of satellite ownership and space launch
capabilities evident since the beginning of the space age. That process would still be more advanced today than it was in
1989, even if the Soviet Union had managed to thrive and survive into the twenty-first century; and it will be that much
further along in 2020. The end result would be that rather than Russia (or any other state) being in a position to pursue
clear-cut dominance in orbital space, or settling for being one of two (or three) leviathans surrounded by comparative
minnows as remained the case during the Cold War, a successful and aggressive Russia will end up just one of the larger
participants in a much broadened arena. The Russia described here is still likely to be one of the world’s most prolific space
launchers (if not the most), and one of the very few to go on operating a manned space program at any level, if dependent
on existing rather than new system types and facilities. It is also likely to have a bigger budget and larger portfolio of space
assets than India, perhaps leaving it with the third- or fourth-biggest budget and portfolio of assets (depending on how the
European Union is measured, and also the level of effort Japan is willing and able to make). Russia’s constellation of
satellites may not be very much larger in total numbers than it is now, but a larger part of it would be functional, operating
within their normal service lives. More importantly, Russia would retain a robust base on which it could build, and a return
to something like Russian leadership may not be entirely ruled out should things continue to go favorably after that. This would
especially be the case if Russia’s leadership displays more will and insight on the issue at a fortuitous moment than other
states—as was the case where rocketry was concerned in the late 1940s and early 1950s, when the United States largely
neglected these possibilities. While it is a long shot, the next space age may yet see its own Sputnik moment.
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
7
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
DDI 2011
Russia Solvency
Russia’s space industry is rapidly improving
Deutche Welle 10, “Russian space program on the rise”, November 3 2010, http://www.dwworld.de/dw/article/0,,6185232,00.html, TJ
The Russian space industry, which had become a shadow of itself after the collapse of the Soviet Union, is once again enjoying
state support. The government has increased spending on the space industry by 40 percent for each of the past five years. In 2009, it
received a record $2.8 billion. Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin also confirmed this fall that Russia's new $800 million
Vostochny cosmodorome in the country's Far East should be up and running by 2015. "I must say that the construction of the
new space center, commissioned in 2007, is one of the biggest and most ambitious initiatives in Russia today," he said in a
speech earlier this year. "Not only will it confirm Russia's status as a technological leader and boost its potential in science and
technology, but, just as importantly, it will allow hundreds, if not thousands, of young specialists to prove themselves, to show their
talent, and to make their most ambitious plans come true."
NASA weak and giving up, Russia will surpass us.
Robert Wiener, Bob Weiner, a national issues and public affairs strategist, has been spokesman for and directed the public affairs
offices of White House Drug Czar and Four Star General Barry McCaffrey, the House Government Operations Committee and
Chairman John Conyers (D-MI), Congressman Charles Rangel (D-NY) and the House Narcotics Committee, and was Chief of Staff
for the House Aging Committee and Chairman Claude Pepper (D-FL), 7/6/09, Op Ed News.com,
http://www.opednews.com/articles/NASA-s-Weak-Dream-by-Robert-Weiner-090706-338.html
NASA is again snatching headlines with the news of Charles Bolden's nomination as NASA's new Administrator and the Atlantis
Shuttle crew's final upgrade of the Hubble telescope. There will be numerous TV documentaries as we celebrate the 40th Anniversary
of man's first Moon Landing this July 20. Yet the news for NASA now is a pale comparison to 1969, when two Americans first
stepped on the moon. Forty years later, we have to ask, what happened to the dream of a man and woman on Mars and Venus? By
now we thought we'd even be on the outer reach of the solar system, to Pluto. Yet as assuredly as Pluto has since become a nonplanet, after a few repeat Moon missions through 1972, we just stopped leaving earth. In August 1969, two weeks after the historic
moon walk, Rocket scientist and NASA Marshall Space Flight Director, Wernher Von Braun, presented a comprehensive plan for
human travel to Mars. He wrote a detailed book on the mission's potential years earlier, in 1951 and 52. His plan was never adopted.
At this point, we'll take returning to the moon. Or are we (rightfully) just too embarrassed to repeat that? Hubble is nice, even
spectacular. The photos are amazing, but not in the same breath as the earth-shattering significance of man on other planets. Even the
pilot of Apollo 11 and second man on the moon, Buzz Aldrin, agrees. He said recently, "Instead of a stepping stone to Mars, NASA's
current lunar plan is a detour." The Russians, in partnership with the European Space Agency, have a plan. At the end of March,
they launched Mars 500, a simulation of the effects of Mars' atmosphere on humans. Shades of 1957. Then, with their bold move, as
they placed Sputnik and Yuri Gagarin in orbit, the Russians jumped a light-year ahead of the USA in the space race. It took us a
decade to catch up. Hopefully we won't have to repeat this �still a sore point. We need a get-there mentality with a time frame.
President Barack Obama recently told the Space shuttle Atlantis astronauts, "It is a high priority of mine to restore that sense of
wonder that space can provide." Returning to the moon is no longer wonder; we already did that, the wonder is gone. Most of us are
not scientists, but that's the point. NASA executes the dream for all of us, the outreach to the beyond we know is there. When our
supply of everything from oil to food to water is in peril, shouldn't we be exploring the virtually limitless bounds of other planets? As
we seek cures to illnesses from new earthly frontiers like stem cells, are there are elements and compounds on other planets that might
be useful beyond our wildest dreams? Do we not want to live beyond the usual 80-years-old-and-out formula? Shouldn't we see
what's out there? Many argue that a mission to Mars would cost beyond NASA's annual budget of 18.7 billion dollars. NASA
estimates the cost of a manned trip to Mars to be at 100 billion dollars; yet Apollo 11 cost 150 billion dollars. There were individuals
in 1969 who protested against its funding. What would have happened if we didn't have the right stuff and backed off? By the way,
we spend 150 billion dollars a year (a trillion so far) in Iraq only to finally have the realization that Al Qaeda is concentrated in
Afghanistan and Pakistan. Claiming that close-in shuttle missions and robots sent afar are all we can do, when we saw that's nonsense
with our own eyes (and if someone is too young, look at the videotape) is no longer acceptable. Man on the Moon was the most
profound scientific achievement of our lifetimes because of all it symbolized in the conquering of human knowledge gaps -- and it
happened too long ago. It's time for "change" to reverse NASA satisfaction with the mundane, and replace it with the other-worldly �
so that potentially all mankind can benefit.
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
8
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
DDI 2011
Russia is far ahead of the US in space
Gwynne Dyer, While still in the naval reserve, he obtained a BA in History from Memorial University of Newfoundland in 1963; an
MA in Military History from Rice University, Houston, Texas, in 1966; and a PhD in Military and Middle Eastern History at King's
College London in 1973, 7/20/11, Arab News, http://arabnews.com/opinion/columns/article474804.ece
The Sun always shines in space, so it was no surprise when Sir Paul McCartney called the crew of Atlantis, the last Space Shuttle, on
Friday and sang “Good Day Sunshine” to them. Later in the day President Barack Obama called and told the astronauts that their
mission “ushers in an exciting new era to push the frontiers of space exploration and human spaceflight.” Pity it was all happy-face
lies. The last Shuttle mission actually ushers in an era when the only hope of getting into space for the few remaining American
astronauts will be to hitch a ride on a Russian or Chinese rocket. Most of them will have to find jobs elsewhere. And however brightly
the Sun shines, the day when the United States finally gives up on manned space flight is not a good day. US rockets will still put
satellites into orbit. The older ones were built by the military or the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA); the
newer models will be built by private companies that claim they can boost cargo into space at a much cheaper price. But they won’t be
able to put a human being in orbit for a very long time, if ever. This is not to say that the US should have kept the Shuttles going
indefinitely. They weren’t safe: two of the four original Shuttles were lost, with 14 crew, in a total of only 135 trips. They were not
cost-effective either: they each flew on average only once a year during their thirty years of service. NASA had perfectly sensible
plans to replace the Shuttles. In 2004, former President George W. Bush approved an ambitious NASA plan to build a new generation
of powerful rockets to deliver people and materials into near-Earth orbit more cheaply, but also to put a permanent manned base on
the Moon by 2020. NASA calculated that the “Constellation” program would cost about $8 billion a year until 2020 (the US defense
budget burns through that much every five days). Maybe the cost would have risen considerably over time, but that’s not such a big
deal: creating big, new technology always takes longer and costs more. When President Obama cancelled the “Constellation” project
in 2010, he talked about doing things in a “smarter way,” and how private enterprise would develop “space taxis” that would put
people into orbit more cheaply. In reality, however, he was ending federal government support for manned space flight — though he
did promise to invest a little more than a billion dollars a year in those “clever” private companies. That is not serious money: the US
defense budget gets through that much every twelve hours. Lacking federal financial support, the clever companies will concentrate on
doing things that make a profit. Putting people into space does not make a profit. Not in the short run, anyway, and the bean counters
are notoriously uninterested in the very long run. The space entrepreneurs — Virgin Galactic, Northrop Grumman, Interorbital
Services, XCOR, Orbital Sciences Corp. and all their rivals — make well-honed pitches about how NASA was a bloated bureaucracy,
and how private enterprise will do the same jobs more cheaply and more safely. Which may be true for launching communications
satellites and the like, but is certainly not true for manned space flight and deep space exploration. When Christopher Columbus had
this idea for a new way to reach Asia, he did not talk to some Spanish fishermen about scaling up their voyages (making a profit at
each stage) until eventually they would cross the entire ocean. He went to the Spanish court and got state support for his venture.
Almost all of the early European voyages of discovery had state backing, because the profits were not going to flow for quite a while.
The analogy is less than perfect, but it is relevant. Building a permanent space station, establishing a human base on the Moon,
designing and funding the first voyage to Mars — such things are not going to be undertaken by clever companies operating out of old
hangars at the Mojave Air and Space Port in the California desert. They haven’t the resources, and it makes no commercial sense.
Does it make sense at all? That depends on whether you share the vision of the human future that Arthur C. Clarke brought to his
collaboration with Stanley Kubrick in the film “2001: A Space Odyssey.” Back in 1968, most people assumed that that was indeed the
future. It is much behind schedule, but many people still think it should be the future: that human beings should escape the confines of
this single planet and get out into the universe. That enterprise has not been abandoned. The Russians, who were the first into space,
have not given up on manned space flight despite their relative lack of resources. The Chinese are catching up fast, and the Indians
plan to put their first person into orbit in 2015. Even the Japanese are not to be counted out. It’s just the Americans who are quitting.
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
9
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
DDI 2011
Constellation increases Russian Prestige
Keeping Russia in charge of the Constellation program increases prestige
Farrar 08- Lara Farrar- Staff Writer for CNN (8/14/08, “Experts: Reliance on Russia Makes NASA Weak,”
http://edition.cnn.com/2008/TECH/space/08/14/nasa.russia.soyuz/) SP
Observers say the situation is all the more worrying as after NASA announced a delay in the launch of its next-generation
Orion spacecraft. NASA's dependency upon the Russian Soyuz space capsules and rockets to carry astronauts to the station
is the result of a five-year gap between the scheduled retirement of the shuttle in 2010 and the debut of its replacement in
2015. The agency had hoped it could narrow this gap by accelerating the initial launch of the craft to 2013 but announced
Monday that because of inadequate funding and technical issues, the Constellation space program would not be ready for
testing until September 2014. Although the new date is still within the March 2015 absolute deadline, many experts say
NASA's reliance upon Russia to take astronauts into space has placed the agency in an unnecessary position. "It is a
vulnerability," said John Logsdon, director of the space policy institute at George Washington University. "Any time you
are relying on a single system to do a critical task, you are vulnerable if that system has problems. "It is our fault for not
having a replacement for the shuttle much earlier than Orion will be available. It puts Russia in a very powerful position,"
Logsdon said. Although China has launched an astronaut into space in 2003, it still doesn't have the launching capabilities
of the U.S. and Russia. But its space infrastructure is fast developing. According to Howard McCurdy, a space expert at
American University in Washington, Russia will be the only country capable of providing human access to space not only
for the Americans but for the rest of the world in the near future. "It is like a monopoly position where you are at the mercy
of that supplier," McCurdy said. "You don't want to be dependent on a single provider, no matter who it is."
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
10
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
DDI 2011
ISS / Soyuz Tradeoff
Russia’s space supremacy over the ISS will create hundreds of millions of dollars, but the plan trades off
Leonard 11- Peter Leonard, Staff Writer for the Associated Press (7/19/11, “Russia Relishes Chances Created By End of Shuttle,”
http://www.boston.com/news/world/europe/articles/2011/07/19/russia_relishes_chances_created_by_end_of_shuttle/) SP
The mothballing of the space shuttle will be mourned by many astronauts, but Russia is relishing the prospect of serving as
the only carrier to the International Space Station. That honor will earn Russia hundreds of millions of dollars in fees for
ferrying U.S. and other astronauts to the orbiting laboratory in its Soviet-vintage Soyuz spacecraft. Some experts have
noted, however, that Russia has done little to design a replacement to the Soyuz, which is more than 40 years old, and risks
falling behind the U.S. soon when NASA launches a new generation spacecraft. Some, like veteran U.S. astronaut John
Glenn, are wary of the United States relying too much on the Soyuz and point to some technical problems with the craft in
the past few years.
The Soyuz space capsules allow Russia to maintain its dominance over NASA
Leonard 11- Peter Leonard, Staff Writer for the Associated Press (7/19/11, “Russia Relishes Chances Created By End of Shuttle,”
http://www.boston.com/news/world/europe/articles/2011/07/19/russia_relishes_chances_created_by_end_of_shuttle/) SP
The final flight of the Apollo spacecraft, which took man on the first voyage to the moon in 1969, saw the completion of a
groundbreaking scientific and diplomatic mission in 1975 to dock in space with a Soyuz. Six years later, the shuttle made
its first manned flight. Now, even the shuttle is almost gone, while the hardy Russian craft is still around. A space shuttle
left the International Space Station for the last time Tuesday, heading home in what marks the historic closure of a program
that has become synonymous to many with space travel. The Atlantis was targeting a pre-dawn landing Thursday at Cape
Canaveral, Florida. Sergei Krikalyov, chief of the Russian cosmonaut training center, praised the shuttle program as a
"grandiose achievement." "It has been a big, complex and interesting program that has achieved a lot," said Krikalyov, who
holds the world record for total time spent in space with 803 days on six space missions. He said that the shuttle's ability to
carry bulky cargo was key for building the International Space Station, but now smaller ships are able to ferry supplies and
components. Krikalyov noted that Russia long ago took over the delivery of rotating crews to the station, after the 2003
Columbia disaster.
Russia generates $56 million per astronaut sent to the ISS by the United States
Leonard 11- Peter Leonard, Staff Writer for the Associated Press (7/19/11, “Russia Relishes Chances Created By End of Shuttle,”
http://www.boston.com/news/world/europe/articles/2011/07/19/russia_relishes_chances_created_by_end_of_shuttle/) SP
"Since 2003, crews have been going up and returning on the Soyuz. Shuttles fly there and back, but they haven't left behind
crew," he told The Associated Press after a Soyuz launch last month from the Russian-leased Baikonur facility deep inside
the former Soviet republic of Kazakhstan. Sensing a commercial opportunity, Russia has regularly raised its prices for
berths in what is described derisively by some as a "space cab." The Soyuz's imminent monopoly status has given Russia
even more bargaining leverage. The $56 million price that the Russian Space Agency charges NASA to send up astronauts
is set to go up to $63 million per passenger from 2014. A recent contract extension totals $753 million and covers trips for a
dozen NASA astronauts from 2014 through 2016. If NASA is annoyed, then it is trying not to show it. "When you look at
inflation, when you look at what they are providing with the service and the capability, I look at it as a good investment. It's
necessary," said Patrick Buzzard, NASA's representative to Russia. James Oberg, a NASA veteran and currently a space
consultant who has closely followed the Russian space program, played down concerns about excessive dependence on the
Soyuz, saying the Russians "are equally dependent on us for power and communications at the space station."
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
11
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
DDI 2011
Russia – ISS / Soyuz
Future American space exploration efforts trade off with Russian economic revenue from Soyuz
Spinks 7/18/11- Peter Spinks, Staff Writer for the Age, The Education Resource Center (7/18/11, “Goodbye Shuttle, Hello Soyuz,”
http://education.theage.com.au/cmspage.php?intid=142&intversion=99) SP
NASA has been busily — though reluctantly — booking seats for astronauts on the three-seat Soyuz, which will cost
$US63 million a ticket by 2016, about 175 per cent more than in 2005. Still, the race for space is far from over. Spurred by
keen competition from the Russians, Europeans, Chinese, Indians and even Brazilians, the US space agency has ambitious
blueprints for future exploration. Among these are well-advanced plans to develop rocket systems capable of ferrying
astronauts into deep space, while relying to an extent on private companies to service space stations in low earth orbit —
and perhaps one day taking tourists there. Space Exploration Technologies, in California, for instance, has been contracted
to build the experimental Dragon craft, to be launched by Falcon rocket. Sad as it may seem, most of NASA’s plans are
unlikely to involve rocketing astronauts into the firmament. ‘‘The lesson of the past decades is that putting humans into
space is a very costly undertaking,’’ says renowned physicist Paul Davies, the director of the Beyond Centre at Arizona
State University, in the US.
Russians are monopolizing space transport to the ISS
Hotz 7/7/11- Robert Lee Hotz, Staff Writer for the Wall Street Journal (7/7/11, “Shuttle’s Last Flight Leaves Russia With Space
Monopoly,” http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702303982504576428080248680032.html) SP
Circling the Earth every 90 minutes, the International Space Station is the most expensive project ever assembled in space.
Within days, it will hang by a single, costly thread. And Russia, the U.S.'s historic rival in space, is holding it. The last U.S.
space shuttle is scheduled to blast off Friday. After that, the U.S. and other nations will rely on vintage Russian spacecraft
to ferry their astronauts to the $100 billion station. Russia will hold a monopoly over manned spaceflight, and tensions
already are rising. The Russians are in the process of nearly tripling the cost of using their Soyuz crew capsules for
transport to the orbiting base, and other countries have little choice but to pay up. "We are not in a very comfortable
situation, and when I say uncomfortable, that is a euphemism," said Jean-Jacques Dordain, director general of the European
Space Agency, one of five international agencies that jointly manage the orbiting laboratory. "We made a collective
mistake." The Soyuz represents the triumph of a low-cost approach to human space exploration. The Russian capsules are
launched on massive expendable rockets, carrying astronauts in a kind of guided cannonball to and from orbit. By contrast,
the U.S. built its space program around the most complex flying machine ever, the reusable space shuttle.
Soyuz missiles are economical and efficient- Russia will hold space shuttle dominance for at least 5 more
years
Hotz 7/7/11- Robert Lee Hotz, Staff Writer for the Wall Street Journal (7/7/11, “Shuttle’s Last Flight Leaves Russia With Space
Monopoly,” http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702303982504576428080248680032.html) SP
While the U.S. has spent $209.1 billion on the space shuttle since its inception, the entire Russian space program currently
costs just $2 billion a year. "Today, reusable ships are a very expensive pleasure, and economically they're not really
justified," Vladimir Popovkin, the newly appointed head of Roskosmos, the Russian space agency, told a Russian
newspaper last month. Officials at Roskosmos didn't provide comment for this article. The Russian monopoly on manned
spaceflight won't last forever. If all goes as NASA plans, the Russian monopoly will end in 2016 when the agency hopes to
take its pick of several new commercial crew transports currently on the drawing board. NASA is now seeking a
commercial space-taxi service—designed, built and operated by the private sector—to cut costs while speeding the pace of
development. "We are working aggressively to get our own crew capability," said William Gerstenmaier, NASA's associate
administrator for space operations, the chairman of the international board that oversees the space station.
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
12
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
DDI 2011
Russia – ISS / Soyuz
Russia has won control of the International Space Station
Antonova 7/2/11- Maria Antonova, Staff Writer for the AFP (7/2/11, “Russia Gains Edge in Space Race as US Shuttle Bows
Out,” http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5hGADnIqGh-ZfhBj6DhJYbEgvQpg?docId=CNG.929e9c254b0a78971b4b58b7a3749ac8.241) SP
MOSCOW — As the United States winds down its shuttle programme in a symbolic twist in a long-running space rivalry,
Russia will gain complete control of access to the International Space Station. The Russian space agency plays down any
triumphalism, but US astronauts will remain dependent on Russia for access to the ISS at least until 2015 and will have to
pay for seats in its Soyuz space capsules. "We cannot say that we have won the space race, but simply that we have reached
the end of a certain stage," the deputy head of the Russian space agency, Vitaly Davydov, said in an interview. On July 8,
four US astronauts will board the Atlantis shuttle for its last flight, wrapping up a three-decade-long programme in which
the United States took turns to ferry supplies and crews to the ISS with Russia's Proton and Soyuz rockets. Henceforth,
Washington will have to pay $51 million per seat in Russia's space capsules until a new crew vehicle can be built by private
companies, which US space agency NASA has estimated could be between 2015 and 2020. Davydov of the space agency
Roskosmos rejected any talk of rivalry, however, emphasizing that the ISS was primarily a story of successful international
cooperation. "I cannot think today of another international space project that is so effective in its scale, its significance and
its results as the ISS," he said.
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
13
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
DDI 2011
Russia solves Space Telescopes / Observatories
Russia has the capability for using and deploying space telescopes- empirically proven by Spectrum-R
Farivar 7/19/11- Cyrus Farivar, Staff Writer for the AFP (7/19/11, “Russia launches advanced space telescope,” http://www.dwworld.de/dw/article/0,,15250208,00.html) SP
Spectrum-R is the most advanced space radio telescope ever built, experts say. Russia is eager to show its resurgence in
space exploration, particularly as NASA shuts down its shuttle program. A new Russian space telescope has "reached the
targeted orbit," as of Monday morning, Russia time, the Russian space agency Roscosmos said in an English-language
statement on its website. The new observatory, known as Spectrum-R, is designed to study sources of radio waves from
stellar phenomena, including pulsars, quasars, black holes, and neutron stars. The agency added that the space telescope
will have a minimum lifetime of "no less than five years." telescope being loadedRussian scientists say that the telescope is
designed to last for at least five years"We will be able to observe very remote parts of the universe and to receive a highly
accurate data about various galactic phenomena," said Viktor Khartov, the chief of the Lavochkin Research and Production
Association, in an interview with the Russian news agency ITAR-TASS. "The scientists in the whole world are looking
forward for this," he added.
Russia has better technology for space telescopes than the US- empirically proven by Spektr-R
Weir 7/19/11- Fred Weir, Correspondent and Staff Writer for the Christian Science Monitor (7/19/11, “Russian Telescope Launch
Pulls National Space Program Out of Black Hole,” http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Europe/2011/0719/Russian-telescope-launchpulls-national-space-program-out-of-black-hole/%28page%29/2) SP
Russian scientists are jubilant at news that the Spektr-R, a powerful space telescope conceived in the depths of the cold war,
was finally lofted into orbit aboard a Zenit rocket Monday from the Baikonur Cosmodrome in Kazakhstan. Skip to next
paragraph The Zenit - 3F carrier rocket with the Spektr-R radio astronomy observatory aboard takes off from the Bakinour
Cosmodrome. Once it is fully operational, the new radio telescope will sync up with ground-based observatories to form the
biggest telescope ever built. It will be known as RadioAstron, with a "dish" spanning 30 times the Earth's diameter. Experts
say it will be able to deliver images from the remote corners of the universe at 10,000 times the resolution of the US Hubble
Space Telescope. "We've been waiting for this day for such a long time," says Nikolai Podorvanyuk, a researcher at the
official Institute of Astronomy in Moscow. "It's been planned since the 1980s, but has repeatedly fallen through for a
variety of reasons. But now it's here, and we're bracing for all the new information it's going to deliver, especially about
black holes," he says. The space-based component is actually a small radio telescope, with a 10-meter dish that's far smaller
than Earth-based radio telescopes, planted in an elliptical orbit about 340,000 kilometers (more than 212,000 miles) from
Earth. But when its signals are combined with those of ground-based radio telescopes through a process known as
interferometry, it effectively becomes one single telescope with a "dish" as large as the distance between its components,
which will be able to deliver unprecedented pictures of mysterious cosmic phenomenon, such as quasars, pulsars, and
supernovae. According to its co-designer, Russian astrophysicist Nikolai Kardashev, one of RadioAstron's key objectives
will be to seek out the truth about black holes, which are intense concentrations of matter thought to exist in the centers of
most galaxies with gravity so powerful they even swallow up light signals. "Building this telescope was Academician
Kardashev's idea," to enable us to actually see what's happening around the edges of black holes, says Vladimir Fortov,
director of the official Institute of Thermophysics in Moscow. "This is going to open up a whole new era in astronomy and
astrophysics," he says. "It's a huge contribution to world science.
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
14
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
DDI 2011
Russia has better technology than the US with regards to space telescopes- the US is only minimally
contributing to the Spektr-R observatory
Selding 7/19/11- Peter B. Selding, Staff Writer for Fox News (7/19/11, “Russia Launches Long-Delayed Deep Space Radio
Telescope,” http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2011/07/19/russia-launches-long-delayed-deep-space-radio-telescope/#ixzz1SenzEDc3)
SP
Russia's long-delayed Spektr-R radio telescope successfully launched July 18 aboard a Zenit rocket from the Baikonur
Cosmodrome in Kazakhstan, the country's Federal Space Agency said. There was no immediate word on the operational
status of the new radio observatory beyond the fact that it was placed into the planned elliptical orbit that peaks nearly
207,000 miles (330,000 kilometers) above the Earth, and reaches a low of about 621 miles (1,000 km). Featuring a giant
30-foot (10-meter) wide antenna, the Spektr-R observatory is part of the international Radioastron astronomy project.
Featuring a giant 30-foot (10-meter) wide antenna, the Spektr-R observatory is part of the international Radioastron
astronomy project. "The aim of the mission is to use the space telescope to conduct interferometer observations in
conjunction with the global ground radio telescope network in order to obtain images, coordinates, motions and evolution
of angular structure of different radio emitting objects in the universe," Federal Space Agency officials said in a statement.
"Scientists also expect to obtain more information about pulsars and interstellar plasma, black holes and neutron stars in the
Milky Way." [Strangest Things in Space] Scientists from more than 20 nations, including the United States, are
participating in the project, either through contributions of on-board hardware or access to the terrestrial antennas that,
working with Spektr-R, will permit interferometry measurements during the observatory's planned five years of operations.
Spektr-R was originally scheduled for launch in 2004 or 2005 before encountering multiple delays in its construction. It has
been in development for more than a decade. Most recently, the launch date was put into question following a dispute
between commercial and Russian government satellite missions, notably Spektr-R, on which Zenit customer would receive
the limited supply of Zenit rocket parts. Spektr-R was launched aboard a Russian-Ukrainian Zenit-3M rocket equipped with
a Fregat-SG upper stage. It was built by Lavochkin Association of Moscow. The Radioastron mission is being coordinated
by the Astro Space Center of Moscow, which is part of the Lebedev Physical Institute of the Russian Academy of Sciences.
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
15
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
DDI 2011
Russia solves SSP
Russia developing SSP now
Yury Zaitsev 07, expert with the Space Research Institute of the Russian Academy of Sciences, March 8 2007,
“Tapping into space for energy”, http://en.rian.ru/analysis/20070803/70324027.html, TJ
The largest deposits of very pure quartzites are found in Russia, which had vast reserves of them. Recently the Joint Institute for
Nuclear Research in Dubna, near Moscow, developed a photo cell with an efficiency of almost 50%. Scientists describe their product
as a "star battery." It is an example of how nanotechnology can improve the workings of well-known processes.
Russia is pursuing SSP and is able to develop it now
Michael Taverna 10, European editor at aviationweek.com, January 27 2010, “Power System: Lased-Based
Safer Than Microwave”, http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2438212/posts, TJ
Researchers in the U.S., Russia and Japan also are pursuing space-based -solar power projects, but most employ microwave
technology (AW&ST Apr. 20, 2009, p. 39). Astrium engineers think an operational network using 20-50-kw.
-lasers could be ready as soon as 2020. Laine says internally funded demonstrations using 5-watt lasers a few hundred
meters apart have shown the feasibility of the concept. The company is now seeking to scale up ground testing with higherpower laser assemblies. In parallel, it is trying to interest public agencies and corporations in doing an in-orbit demonstration,
perhaps on the International Space Station. Company engineers estimate they could have a 10-20-kw. demonstrator in orbit
within five years.
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
16
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
DDI 2011
Russia solves Asteroids
Russia can solve for any asteroid threat
Yury Zaitsev 09, expert with the Space Research Institute of the Russian Academy of Sciences, April 23 2009, “Deflecting
Asteroids Difficult But Possible”, http://www.spacedaily.com/reports/Deflecting_Asteroids_Difficult_But_Possible.html, TJ
Col. Gen. Vladimir Popovkin, commander of the Russian Military Space Forces, told a news conference Friday that the national satellite network lacked a spacecraft
capable of preventing an asteroid strike. He also said chances of such a collision were infinitely small, and it was inexpedient to spend huge sums on
neutralizing this unlikely threat. Still, the general might be underestimating the scale of the asteroid threat. Over the last few decades there has been a great
deal of debate about the level of danger posed by impacts from asteroids and comets. It appears the world needs to take the threat of asteroid strikes a lot more seriously.
Astronomers have already spotted about 800 asteroids, solid rocky celestial bodies, with a diameter of over 1,000 meters (3,250 feet) moving along
circumsolar elliptical orbits. However, there may be as many as 2,000 large asteroids, and some 135,000 rocks with a diameter of 100 meters (325 feet) and more. It
should be noted that asteroid orbits are unstable and tend to change under the influence of gravitational fields of the terrestrial planets - Mercury, Venus, Earth and
Mars. An asteroid, which flashed past our planet at a distance of 5 million kilometers (3.1 million miles) in November 1996, returned in September 2004
and flew by just 1.5 million kilometers (930,000 miles) from Earth's surface. In March 1989, a 300 meter (975 foot) asteroid crossed the terrestrial orbit
and missed the Earth by just six hours. Astronomers spotted the rock only when it was receding into space. An asteroid measuring over 1,000 meters in
diameter is potentially capable of destroying human civilization. Chances of a major asteroid impact in the 21st century are a mere 0.0002 percent,
although there is a 2 percent probability of Earth colliding with a 100 meter asteroid before the year 2100. The blast would equal to 100 Megatons in
trinitrotoluol equivalent, and it would kill millions of people if it hit a populous industrial region harboring many hazardous enterprises. Scientists are quite
alarmed, because they register additional asteroids buzzing the Earth. Spaceguard Survey, an international service responsible for detecting and
tracking potentially dangerous space objects, has now been established. Russia established the Space Shield Foundation east of the Urals. The
organization involved scientists from the Snezhinsk (Chelyabinsk-70) nuclear center and the Makeev State Rocket Center in Miass. The foundation
eventually set up subsidiaries in Novosibirsk and Korolev, outside Moscow. The Planetary Defense Center, which was established in Russia three years ago,
comprises the best defense-industry facilities, aerospace enterprises, in the first place, as well as academic and sectoral research. Scientists say the best way to cope with
the asteroid problem is to register and observe all potentially dangerous space objects. However, it is not enough to spot an asteroid, because most of them have
unstable orbits; consequently such asteroids may disappear later on. Every terrestrial hemisphere must therefore have three or four telescopes with
primary mirrors 4 meters to 5 meters in diameter for observing asteroids round the clock. Such observations would make it possible to catalog asteroids
with a diameter of less than 1,000 meters. Many observatories - Russian observatories included - are now working on the asteroid catalog. Scientists claim that it
would become possible to warn about impending asteroid strikes 80 to 100 years in advance if 90 percent of asteroids are registered, and in case of regular observations.
But long-term asteroid protection remains in the realm of science fiction. Two scenarios exist for shielding this planet from a dangerous space object. First, any
hostile object can be shattered in deep space, before it reaches Earth. Second, its orbit can be changed, so the asteroid steers clear of our planet. Some scientists think a
nuclear device could be detonated on the asteroid's surface or in direct proximity to it, making it possible either to shatter that asteroid, whose fragments may still
threaten Earth, or heat up one of its sides and vaporize large segments, thereby changing the asteroid's flight path. Technically speaking, a powerful nuclear
explosion can change the orbit of the asteroid several months before it impacts the planet. Russian scientists suggest using the kinetic energy of
asteroids in order to destroy them. This can be accomplished by creating an artificial dust cloud in the asteroid's path. That cloud's particles would interact with the
asteroid surface and gouge craters. The dangerous object would finally disintegrate because the mass of crater particles would be directly proportional to the kinetic
energy of colliding bodies. The United States demonstrated this effective method on July 4, 2005, when part of the Deep Impact spacecraft, a copper ball,
65 centimeters (about 3 feet) in diameter and weighing 140 kilograms (300 pounds) hit the comet Tempel 1, an object with a radius of 3 kilometers (1.9
miles) and carved a 200 meter crater. It would be much harder to build a catapult with the help of robots on the asteroid's surface for launching rocks
into space and altering the asteroid's trajectory. A rocket engine on the asteroid's surface likewise could change its flight path. Both options present problems,
because of the precision needed to deflect an asteroid correctly. Another method suggests using laser or solar beams to heat up a small asteroid-surface section and to
propel it in the required direction. But it would be difficult to deliver a laser unit or a mirror-lens to the asteroid and to ensure the required attitude control for
a long time. An asteroid patrol would prove quite expensive; consequently, it would be expedient to streamline its elements during current space
programs, which is being done. The Deep Impact project shows scientists are working in the right direction. Russia's Lavochkin NPO has suggested the
demonstration project Space Patrol for perfecting various asteroid-protection methods and systems. A small spacecraft with a mass of just 200
kilograms, now being developed within this project's framework, would act as navigator or pilot and could liftoff atop converted ballistic missiles such as
the Strela and the Rokot. The European Space Agency also is working on its Don Quijote mission, intended to investigate the possibility of deflecting a
dangerous asteroid. A Russian Soyuz-Fregat rocket would launch the Sancho and Hidalgo spacecraft, which would reach the asteroid within six or
seven months. Sancho would be the first to arrive at its destination, taking position in orbit around the asteroid. Hidalgo eventually would slam into it at
10 kilometers per second (22,300 miles per hour). Sancho would then inspect the damaged asteroid and assess its changed trajectory. ESA will select
the target asteroid in 2007, and Sancho and Hidalgo are scheduled to lift off in between 2010 and 2015
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
17
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
DDI 2011
Russia solves Asteroids
Russia has the technology to repel asteroids from Earth
Agence France-Presse 06, the oldest French news agency in the world, October 24 2006, “Russia Can Repel
Asteroids To Save Earth”, http://www.spacedaily.com/reports/Russia_Can_Repel_Asteroids_To_Save_Earth_999.html , TJ
Russia is prepared to repel asteroids to save Earth "if necessary," deputy head of the Russian space agency Viktor Remishevsky
said Tuesday, ITAR-TASS news agency reported. "If necessary, Russia's rocket-manufacturing complex can create the means
in space to repulse asteroids threatening Earth," Remishevsky said, without giving further details. The official stressed that
saving Earth from the threat of asteroids demanded international cooperation. "Above all, space research institutions,
telescopes, and the infrastructure of the Russian Academy of Sciences should warn about the threat of asteroids falling to Earth,"
Remishevsky said. According to Russia's Institute of Applied Astronomy, about 400 asteroids and over 30 comets currently present
a potential threat to the planet.
Russia is preparing to solve for Apophis
Nancy Atkinson 09, space journalist, December 30 2009, “Russia May Head Mission to Deflect Asteroid
Apophis”, http://www.universetoday.com/48912/russia-may-head-mission-to-deflect-asteroid-apophis/, TJ
Russia is considering sending a spacecraft to deflect a large asteroid and prevent a possible collision with Earth,
according to a radio interview by the head of the country’s space agency. Anatoly Perminov said the space agency will hold a
meeting soon to assess a mission to asteroid Apophis, and said NASA, ESA, the Chinese space agency and others would be
invited to join the project. Apophis is a 270-meter (885-foot) asteroid that was spotted in 2004. It is projected to come within 29,450
kilometers (18,300 miles) of Earth in 2029, and currently has an estimated 1-in-250,000 chance of hitting Earth in 2036. A panel at the
recent American Geophysical Union conference stressed that asteroid deflection is a international issue.
“There is a geopolitical
misconception that NASA is taking care of it,” said former Apollo astronaut Rusty Schweickart, who is part of the B612
Foundation, which hopes to prove the technology to significantly alter the orbit of an asteroid by 2015. “They aren’t and
this is an international issue. The decisions have to be world decisions.” Perminov seemed unaware that NASA’s Near
Earth Object program recently downgraded the possibility of a 2036 asteroid impact and also for a subsequent pass in
2068. Perminov said that he heard from a scientist that Apophis asteroid is getting closer and may hit the planet. “I don’t remember
exactly, but it seems to me it could hit the Earth by 2032,” Perminov said. “People’s lives are at stake. We should pay several hundred
million dollars and build a system that would allow to prevent a collision, rather than sit and wait for it to happen and kill hundreds of
thousands of people.” Perminov wouldn’t disclose any details of the project, saying they still need to be worked out. But he
said the mission wouldn’t require any nuclear explosions. “Calculations show that it’s possible to create a special purpose
spacecraft within the time we have, which would help avoid the collision without destroying it (the asteroid) and without
detonating any nuclear charges,” Perminov said. “The threat of collision can be averted.” Boris Shustov, the director of the
Institute of Astronomy under the Russian Academy of Sciences, hailed Perminov’s statement as a signal that officials had
come to recognize the danger posed by asteroids like 2036 Apophis. “Apophis is just a symbolic example, there are many
other dangerous objects we know little about,” he said, according to RIA Novosti news agency.
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
18
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
DDI 2011
Privatization kills Russian space
Allowing private military contractors to deploy missions in space will trade-off with Russian Soyuz space
capsules efforts
Hanks 7/19/11- Douglas Hanks, Staff Writer for McClatchy Newspapers and Tribune News, “New Space Race: Orbital Will
Outsource,” http://www.nashuatelegraph.com/business/926427-192/new-space-race-orbital-will-outsource.html) SP
She was referring to the lean years at the Kennedy Space Center, as the United States ended its Moon missions on Apollo
rockets while gearing up for the shuttle trips to Earth’s orbit. “There is work to be done,’’ she said. “The space station is
there.’’ Space “tourism” gets much of the attention when it comes to private spaceflight. Richard Branson’s Virgin Galactic
has already collected $57 million in deposits for flights 60 miles into the sky, high enough to experience weightlessness and
see the Earth’s curvature, a spokeswoman said. The spacecraft is going through tests before it can make an inaugural flight;
tickets cost $200,000. But replacing the shuttle has prompted a more high-stakes space race as companies compete to snag
lucrative delivery contracts – cargo and crew. Until private firms are cleared for human space travel, NASA plans to pay
Russia to bring astronauts to the space station. The cost should be about $65 million per seat. SpaceX is testing a vessel it
says can do the job for about $20 million per passenger. Even the space program’s biggest supporters concede private
companies can probably put payloads and astronauts into orbit faster and cheaper than NASA can. Space flight has gotten
routine enough that the margins are squeezable. SpaceX is run by Elon Musk, the founder of PayPal, the leading processor
of online transactions. Among its competitors for NASA contracts for human spaceflight: Blue Origin LLC, a company
based in Washington State and backed by Jeff Bezos, founder of Amazon.com Inc. NASA awarded Blue Origin about $25
million in seed money to help develop a spaceship for the post-shuttle era. Two other companies are in the running to take
over the shuttle’s delivery route to the ISS: Sierra Nevada Corp., of Sparks, Nev., and Boeing Co., long one of NASA’s
primary contractors. “The space shuttle had its job. It was like a big moving truck,’’ said Sierra Nevada Chairman Mark
Sirangelo, referring to the shuttle’s central role in assembling the ISS. “Now you’ve moved into your house. You just want
an SUV to get you around town.’’
Private enterprise trades off with Russia and China regarding future space travel
Boychuk 7/20/11- Associate Editor of the Manhattan Institute’s City Journal (7/20/11, “Is Space Race Over for America?”
http://www.koreatimes.co.kr/www/news/opinon/2011/07/137_91260.html) SP
In an era of multi-trillion-dollar budget deficits and a national debt of $14 trillion and climbing, pouring billions of tax
dollars into manned space travel may not be the wisest use of limited resources. Especially not when the private sector is
stepping up and investing hundreds of millions of perfectly good dollars to advance the space race. Billionaires such as
Microsoft's Paul Allen, Amazon's Jeff Bezos and, of course, Virgin's Richard Branson are clearly committed to making
commercial space travel a viable business. "Governments are not going to be running the future of space travel," Branson
told an audience at Microsoft's Worldwide Partner Conference on Wednesday. "Private enterprise is." He's right. Branson's
Virgin Galactic plans to begin regular launches into low Earth orbit next year. Other companies are looking even beyond
the moon. True, Russia and China remain heavily invested, too. And China's planned lunar mission is bold and exciting ―
and the precise opposite of our federal government's posture toward space exploration for much of the past 30 years. It isn't
difficult to imagine an American team exploring not just the moon but also Mars within the next decade. But why should it
be a crew from NASA? Robert Zubrin, president of Pioneer Astronautics in Colorado, noted in the Wall Street Journal
recently that a company called SpaceX is close to launching a new rocket that could conceivably take people to Mars as
early as 2016, at a fraction of the cost of a government-funded mission. Will there be risks? Oh, yes. But as Zubrin argues:
"For NASA managers to demand that the mission be delayed for decades while hundreds of billions are spent to marginally
reduce the risk to a handful of volunteers, when the same funds spent on other priorities could save the lives of tens of
thousands, is narcissistic in the extreme." Who dares wins.
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
19
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
DDI 2011
Russia can solve nuclear propulsion
The Russian government is building a nuclear-powered spacecraft
Kevin O’Flynn 10, space policy analyst for Guardian, “New Space Race Hots Up”, May 4 2010,
http://indrus.in/articles/2010/05/04/new_space_race_hots_up.html , TJ
Meanwhile, the Russian government has this year set aside 500m roubles ($17.2 mn) for the development of nuclear-powered
spacecraft, which could be used “for long-distance missions to the moon and Mars”, explains Anatoly Perminov, head of
Russia’s Space Agency, which is hoping that the new engines will be ready for use “within nine years”. Vitaly Lopota, head of
the Energiya corporation, added that “the solar system could only be conquered on the basis of nuclear energy”. Between
1970 and 1988, the Soviet Union sent 32 crafts into orbit that had thermo-electric nuclear-powered engines. But nuclearpowered spacecraft was outlawed by a series of international treaties in the Eighties due to fears of their potential
collapse. Russian space officials now hope the treaties can be re-examined amid global plans for more long-distance
space missions. Lopota assures that nuclear spacecraft would not be sent “to orbits from which they could fall to the
earth”.
Russian nuclear propulsion solves asteroids, colonization, and satellites
RT.com 10, “Russian nuclear rocket engine may get mankind to other planets”, June 22, http://rt.com/news/scitech/nuclear-rocket-engine-space/, TJ
Humans on Mars and beyond and protecting the Earth from asteroids… A new nuclear propulsion system to be used in spacecrafts is
set to be developed in Russia. The technology will allow bigger vehicles to be sent into space, making manned missions to Mars
possible. It will also mean new and more efficient type of satellites to monitor weather and gather intelligence. “It’s a kind of interorbital tow spacecraft for launching new heavy satellites and spacecraft to far-destined orbits, as well as to the Moon and other planets
in the Solar system. At present we have rockets with chemical fuel that can launch a vehicle weighing 5-6 tonnes. While
these new vehicles will weigh two, or even four times more,” explained Igor Afanasyev from Cosmonautics News
Magazine. The Kremlin has set aside some 17 billion rubles to help develop a nuclear-powered rocket engine. 500 million
rubles of that money are set aside for 2010. Russia's space company Energia, which helps to develop the engine,
estimates the new spacecraft could be tested by 2015. Currently rockets use solid or liquid fuel boosters, which are very energyinefficient. With the new system, once the payload gets into space using conventional fuel, they can then stop using that booster and
switch over to the new nuclear-powered drive that has the potential to bring payloads to much greater distances. That is something
that can help get payloads to the ISS, and this is even more important, as the US space shuttle program is going to end in
2010 and not resumed until 2015. It also has implications for getting mankind even further to the Moon, possibly to Mars, and
even exploration further in the cosmos. This new technology also has potential applications for military defense. For instance
it could be used to monitor troop movements in the field. But what rocket and space corporation Energia is trying to really
stress is the new system’s civil defensive potential. “Some media outlets have misinterpreted our words on the application
of the system – saying it might be used to propel a military spacecraft with offensive capabilities into space. In reality the
system will help provide communications in regions hit by natural disasters and military conflicts. It will also be used to avert an
asteroid threat and to monitor our territories,” Energia’s statement says.
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
20
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
DDI 2011
Russia solves Mars
Russia and China are currently working on launching an unmanned Mars probe in late 2011
Keating 7/7/11- Joshua E. Keating, Associate Editor at Foreign Policy (7/7/11, “Houston, We Have a Problem,”
http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2011/07/07/houston_we_have_a_problem?page=full) SP
With the end of the U.S. shuttle program, Russia will have a monopoly on transporting astronauts to the International Space
Station, using its ageing Soyuz rockets, until at least 2016. It's a lucrative business -- the United States is paying Russia
about $43.4 million per astronaut -- but Prime Minister Vladimir Putin has said that Russia should not content itself to be a
mere "ferryman" to the stars. Russia and China will jointly launch an unmanned Mars probe later this year. The Russian
space agency's more ambitious plans include a manned mission to the moon by 2025, potentially followed by an "inhabited
station."
Russia planning trip to Mars now
Huffington Post 11, American news website, April 10 2011, “Russia Space Program Expansion”,
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/04/10/russia-space-program-expansion-_n_846702.html, TJ
Russia is planning a massive increase in its space launches and may even build a base on the moon as part of a manned mission to
Mars in the next two decades, according to reports. Prime Minister Vladimir Putin said Thursday that his country's plans go well
beyond transporting crews to the International Space Station. With a 2010-2011 space budget estimated at 200 billion rubles
($7.09 billion), Russia is the world's fourth-largest spender on space after U.S. space agency NASA, the European Space
Agency and France, Reuters reports. "Russia should not limit itself to the role of an international space ferryman. We
need to increase our presence on the global space market," Putin is quoted as having said at his residence outside
Moscow. The meeting was planned specifically to coincide with the 50th anniversary of Yuri Gagarin's pioneering space
flight. Other reports cite official documents which claim a manned Russian mission to Mars could be possible in 2030
following the creation of a moon base. "Above all, we are talking about flights to the moon and the creation of a base close to its
north pole where there is likely to be a source of water," read one of the documents, according to the Telegraph. Russian
scientists are also said to have touted the moon as a potential source of energy, saying it contains large reserves of helium 3, a soughtafter isotope that may be the key to a new way of generating power.
Russia’s budget is best for Mars trips and Russia is key to future trips
Alan Boyle, Science editor for MSNBC, September 29 2005, “Russia Thriving Again Final Frontier”,
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9509254/ns/technology_and_science-space/t/russia-thriving-again-final-frontier/, TJ
Today, boosted by Russia's oil revenue, the government has committed to a 10-year plan for space exploration, funded to the tune of
$1 billion a year. That's far less than the price tag for NASA's 13-year, $104 billion plan to return to the moon. But while America's
space effort is struggling with safety issues and tight budgets, Russia is now seen as having the world's safest, most cost-effective
human spaceflight system. Like NASA, the Russians plan to develop a new breed of spaceship: a winged craft called the Kliper ,
capable of carrying a crew of six and built in partnership with the European Space Agency. Like NASA, the Russians plan to work
toward lunar landings in the latter half of the next decade, leading to the establishment of permanent moon bases as steppingstones to
Mars and beyond.
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
21
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
DDI 2011
Russia solves Moon / Mars
Russia is preparing to land on both the moon and Mars
Anatoly Zak 08, Russian space program: A decade
review
(2000-2010),
January
3
2008,
http://www.russianspaceweb.com/russia_2000_2010.html, TJ
Not coincidently, during 2005 and 2006, the Russian space agency and its European partners rejected a proposal from
the industry to build a new-generation reusable spacecraft, which would be best suited for operations in the low-Earth
orbit. The idea of a new all-Russian space station fielded around the same time did get some traction as a possible
foundation for lunar and martian exploration, but only as a secondary goal. Instead, both Russian and European space
officials favored the concept of a lunar-oriented project, known as ACTS. To be developed cooperatively in Europe and
Russia, the future program would include a new spacecraft capable of entering lunar orbit and, eventually, a lunar lander designed to
deliver humans on the surface of the Moon. Unlike the United States, Europe represented a natural partner for Russia, since the two
sides have been closely involved in every aspect of economic cooperation from energy to aviation for more than a decade. During the
first years of the 21st century, Russia's chief spacecraft developer, RKK Energia, served as a major contractor in the
development of the European ATV cargo ship, designed to resupply the ISS. Still mutually suspicious of each other,
Europe and Russia would have to resolve difficult and politically loaded issues of rights and responsibilities in the new
project. Given limited budgets for space, both sides needed each other to accomplish such an expensive and risky
enterprise as a lunar expedition; yet, both had to keep their internal constituencies and industrial lobbies satisfied. On one
side, Europe wanted independent access to space for its astronauts, instead of being a mere sub-contractor for traditional
Russian spacecraft developers. On the other hand, Russia was adamant about preserving its own technical
independence with a full complement of spacecraft, rockets and workforce to support it. Unlike post-Soviet 1990s,
Russian space industry was no longer a beggar willing to take any paying job. All these conflicting political requirements
could be as important as the reentry capsule's shape and the crew size for the future lunar ship. In the end, conflicting
technical requirements backdropped by the tense political atmosphere between Europe and Russia in the wake of the
War in Georgia in 2008, derailed a cooperative project. Still, according to the long-term planning of the Russian space
program till 2040, manned missions to the Moon could take place within a 2025-2030 time period, while an expedition to Mars
could be achieved in 2035-2040. (321) This is despite a wisdom of going to the Moon first was challenged by RKK Energia's
planners, who hoped to accomplish an expedition to Mars during 2022-2035 period, pushing lunar exploration to 20302040.
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
22
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
DDI 2011
Russia solves Space Debris
Russia solves for space debris
Nancy Atkinson 10, space journalist, November 29 2010, “Russia Wants to Build Sweeper to Clean Up Space
Debris”, http://www.universetoday.com/80643/russia-wants-to-build-sweeper-to-clean-up-space-debris/, TJ
Russia is looking to build a $2 billion orbital “pod” that would sweep up satellite debris from space around the Earth. According to a
post on the Russian Federal Space Agency, Roscosmos’ Facebook site, (which seems to confirm an earlier article by the
Interfax news agency) the cleaning satellite would work on nuclear power and be operational for about 15 years. The Russian rocket
company, Energia proposes that they would complete the cleaning satellite assembly by 2020 and test the device no later than in 2023.
“The corporation promises to clean up the space in 10 years by collecting about 600 defunct satellites on the same
geosynchronous orbit and sinking them into the oceans subsequently,” Victor Sinyavsky from the company was quoted as
saying.
Russia solving for space debris in the status quo
Kit Eaton 10, science and technology analyst for fastcompany.com, “Space Debris? Russia’s Got It Covered”,
November 24 2010, http://www.fastcompany.com/1705137/space-debris-meh-russias-got-it-covered?partner=rss, TJ
Russia has announced it will be investing $2 billion in a program to capture some of the thousands of pieces of dangerous debris
that threaten the future of space technology. How might it work? Energia, Russia's space corporation, has revealed plans to build a
special space "pod" which will grab around 600 defunct satellites and then safely deorbit them so that they either burn up in the
atmosphere or splash down into the ocean. The pod will rely on a nuclear power core, and cost around $2 billion to develop and
deploy. Energia plans to complete design and testing by 2020 and have it in service no later than 2023, with an operational lifespan
of around 15 years. The company also said it has been working on a space interceptor capable of tackling any dangerous
objects from the outer solar system that may be on a collision course with Earth. If it seems odd to think of Russia as Earth's
space junk and comet defender, it's also welcome news. Space debris in the form of defunct or malfunctioning satellites is an
increasingly severe problem. Numerous orbits are becoming inaccessible, or at least hopelessly dangerous, because of
wandering hulls or showers of shredded metal debris--like the one caused by a collision between a working U.S. Iridium
satellite and a dead Russian Cosmos satellite in 2009. How might the system operate? Energia hasn't offered much in the
way of details, but its long mission life span and nuclear power source point to its drive tech. Radio thermal space waves can
generate electricity over a long time, making it an ideal power source for ion drives (which use electric fields to accelerate ionized
gas, rather than the typical chemical rockets). The pod's stated targets, dead satellites, also suggests it won't use an exotic form of
debris capture, like a space net. Instead it's more likely to power its way up to a dead satellite in or near its main orbit, and then
use the ion drive to gently push the spent vehicle into a decaying orbit that'll end with a burn-up. Similar technology could be used in
the "interceptor" spacecraft, only on a bigger scale. If you can identify and encounter an incoming threatening comet in time, you
may only need to deviate its trajectory by a tiny amount so that it misses Earth rather than hits it.
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
23
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
DDI 2011
Russia solves Space Debris
Russia developing new technology now
Clara Moskowitz, 10 Space.com Senior Writer, November 24 2010, “Russia Nuclear Powered Spaceships
Space Debris Shields”, http://www.space.com/9596-russia-nuclear-powered-spaceships-space-debris-shields.html, TJ
Russia has begun some ambitious space projects, including a new system to protect spacecraft from space junk and a nuclearpowered engine for future spaceships, according to Russian news reports. The space debris protection system is designed to
safeguard future outposts on the moon and Mars, officials at Russia's Central Research Institute of Machine Building said, the
Russian Ria Novosti newspaper has reported. "Protection of spacecraft modules against micrometeorite impact and space debris,
based on the use of protective screens, that is passive protection, is at the limit of its technical capability due to weight restrictions,"
the institute's experts said. "This is why we need to develop new protection based on self-sealing systems capable of independently
and quickly restoring the object's air-tightness in case of leaks." [Most Memorable Space Debris Events] Space junk is such a risk
that Russia is also reportedly developing a $2 billion spacecraft that would sweep the orbital space around Earth from satellite debris,
according to China's state-run Xinhua news service and Russia's Interfax news agency. "The corporation promised to clean
up the space in ten years by collecting about 600 defunct satellites on the same geosynchronous orbit and sinking them into
the ocean subsequently," said Victor Sinyavsky from RSC Energia, Xinhua quoted from an Interfax report. Another project
to develop nuclear-powered spaceships will also be a complex undertaking. Officials from Russia's main space contractor,
RSC Energia, said on Tuesday the company is planning to start working on space modules with nuclear-powered propulsion systems
next year, and the first launches of such modules could come in 2020, according to Ria Novosti. Anatoly Perminov, director of
Russia's Federal Space Agency Roscosmos has said the development of nuclear-powered manned spacecraft is crucial if Russia wants
to maintain a competitive edge in the space race, including the exploration of the moon and Mars. Such an effort will likely cost 17
billion rubles (more than $580 million in U.S. currency), Ria Novosti reported. Russia is also reportedly targeting a moonor Mars-based nuclear power station, according to the newspaper. That station could operate for 10 to 15 years, Russian
space officials said.
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
24
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
DDI 2011
Russia solves Helium 3 Mining
Russia already planning on mining for Helium-3
Pravda.ru 06, Russian newspaper, March 17 2006, “Russia to launch industrial mining of helium-3 on the Moon in 2020”
http://english.pravda.ru/science/tech/17-03-2006/77404-moon-0/, TJ
According to an official statement released in January, the mining of helium-3 on the Moon will be the main purpose of the
Russian space exploration program. “We are planning to set up a permanent station on the Moon by 2015. The industrial mining of
helium-3, a rare isotope, is expected to begin on the Moon in 2020,” said Nikolai Sevastianov, head of the Rocket and Space
Corporation Energia. The lunar mission will involve the use of a Russian space shuttle Kliper and an interplanetary space tug Parom.
The National Aeronautics and Space Administration, NASA, also regards the presence of helium-3 in the lunar crystals as
a good reason for kicking off a lunar exploration program. Meanwhile, NASA is not planning to send any missions to the Moon
until 2018. The United States remains the only country whose astronauts walked the Moon. NASA sent six manned
missions to the Moon between 1969 and 1972. China and Japan also intend to build lunar stations. However, the above
countries are likely to commence their lunar exploration programs in the 2020s.
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
25
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
DDI 2011
Russia solves Moon
Russia planning to pursue moon missions
Space-Travel.com 07, December 19 2007, “Russia to Launch Space Base for Missions to Moon and Mars after
2020”,
http://www.spacetravel.com/reports/Russia_To_Launch_Space_Base_For_Missions_To_Moon_And_Mars_After_2020_999.html , TJ
Russia plans to deploy an orbiting base for manned and unmanned missions to the Moon and Mars after 2020, the head of the space
agency said on Tuesday. "After 2020, Russia plans to create and put into orbit a near-Earth experimental manned complex to
ensure transport operations to the Moon and Mars," Anatoly Perminov said. He also said Russia has tentative plans for manned
missions to Mars, but since substantial technical and financial resources would be needed, a Mars expedition should be
international. The agency chief had said previously that Russia planned to send cosmonauts to the Moon by 2025 and establish a
permanently-manned base there in 2027-2032. He also said that in accordance with Russia's space program through 2040, a manned
flight to Mars was due to be carried out after 2035. The space official went on to add that in 2016-25, after the International
Space Station (ISS) is removed from service, Russia plans to deploy a platform in a low-earth orbit to assemble
spacecraft. The United States has said the ISS should be scrapped in 2015, while Russia has proposed using the
Russian segment until 2020. Perminov said: "The ISS will be transformed into a laboratory complex where research will
be conducted."
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
26
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
DDI 2011
Russia solves Earth Observation
Russia launched a new observation satellite recently
Spacedaily.com 7/20/11, exploration and tourism, July 20 2011, “Russia Sends Observation Satellite into
Space”, http://www.space-travel.com/reports/Russia_sends_observation_satellite_into_space_999.html, TJ
A Russian Zenith-3M rocket with an observation satellite blasted off early Monday, the Russian space agency Roscosmos said.
The rocket with Fregat-SB upper stage and Russian astrophysical observatory Spectrum-R lifted off at 6:31 a.m. Moscow time
(0231 GMT) from Baikonur Space Center in Kazakhstan, said the agency. And separation of the spacecraft from the
upper stage which is to deliver Spectrum-R into the targeted orbit is expected to take place at about 10 a.m.(0600 GMT),
it said. Spectrum-R was designed under the Radioastron international project by prime contractor Lavochkin R and D
while scientific payloads were developed by the Astro Space Center of Lebedev.
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
27
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
DDI 2011
Russia solves Colonization
Russia better at space col – resources and water searching
Tabitha Smith and Josh Wilson 09, reporters for the School of Russian and Asian studies, September 29 2009, “Russia in
Space”, http://www.sras.org/russia_in_space, TJ
Beyond the realm of radio astronomy, funding for Russia's space projects has boomed in recent years. As political and military
analysts have talked about a "resurgent Russia" pushing its policy objectives on the back of rising oil prices, so too has Russia's
space program been resurgent, striving to initiate and lead more projects on its own and with less assistance from NASA or
the European Space Agency. Russia's Federal Space Agency (which is often known by the shortened name Roscosmos)
has set short-term (2015-2020) and long-term goals (2020-2040). Source for both graphs: Roscosmos.ru Anatoly
Perminov, the current head of Roscosmos, has stated that industries focused on building space vehicles and equipment are
actually seeing growth during the economic crisis and that Roscosmos is continuing to implement its ambitious projects. Short-term
plans include the Russian Virtual Observatory, an effort to digitize and connect the various scientific databases in the
countries of the former Soviet Union, and the OSIRIS project, a space telescope which would allow the locations of stars
to be measured to far greater accuracy than they are today. Russia and India also hope to launch a joint project to search for
water on the moon. The space agencies believe that there may be water on the Moon because it is believed that the Moon was
formed from material from Earth after Earth was struck by a meteor. Any material present on Earth could have been
transferred to the Moon. That water molecules exist on the Moon's surface has been confirmed by multiple space
agencies. Although water in a form that would be usable by humans has not been found (such as deposits of ice), nobody
has ruled out the possibility that it may exist. If there is water on the moon, this would help advance what is the centerpiece of
Russia's long-term space projects of placing humans in space for long-term missions and far-reaching exploration.
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
28
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
DDI 2011
Russia solves robotics
Russia currently preparing new robot to rival the X-37
Fred Weir 11, The Christian Science Monitor correspondent, February 3 2011,
http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Europe/2011/0203/Can-Russia-rival-the-X-37B-space-plane-with-its-own-robotic-spacecraft, TJ
Moscow Russia's reviving space industry might be working on its own version of the US Air Force's reusable unmanned space
plane. After all, Russian space experts seemed surprised, a little alarmed, and possibly in awe of the American X-37B when it was
successfully flight-tested from Cape Canaveral Air Force Station on April 22. The head of Russia's Space Forces, Lt. Gen. Oleg
Ostapenko, dropped a tantalizing hint last week that suggested that Russian researchers were working on a similar design.
"Something has been done along these lines, but as to whether we will use it, only time will tell," General Ostapenko was
quoted by the official RIA-Novosti agency as saying. IN PICTURES: The X-37 space plane The American X-37B, which
spent seven months in orbit doing secret research before returning last December, is a remotely controlled, scaled-down
space shuttle-like craft that appears to be dedicated mainly to military tasks. Most Russian media coverage about the
mini-shuttle was dominated by fear. Would the US use the enhanced orbital capabilities the space plane makes possible
to undercut Russia's national security? Would the X-37B threaten Russian satellites or even install space-based
antimissile weapons? "The original idea of this space plane was to destroy the enemy's sputniks," says Vladimir
Shcherbakov, deputy editor of Vzlyot (Liftoff), a leading Russian aerospace journal. "It's a kind of space fighter. If your
enemy loses all his sputniks – which provide his communication, intelligence, navigation, etc. – he will be in a panic, he'll
be helpless. So it's critical, if you're going to build one, that you state what it's for and whom it's directed against," he says.
"The Americans haven't declared who their X-37 is to be used against. They just say they're developing new
technologies."
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
29
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
DDI 2011
Russia can solve space Tourism
Russia can expand space tourism
RIA Novosti 10, July 20, 2010, “Putin To Discuss Russian Space Program with Industry Officials”,
http://www.spacedaily.com/reports/Putin_To_Discuss_Russian_Space_Program_With_Industry_Officials_999.html, TJ
Russia plans to increase its share in the global space market by designing new models of unmanned and manned spacecraft,
participating in a large number of international space projects and building a new space center. Russian Soyuz and Progress
spacecraft will continue to play a crucial role in maintaining the International Space Station after NASA folds its outdated
shuttle program later this year. The Energia corporation recently said it had the capacity to build five Soyuz spacecraft per year
instead of four, meaning that at least one Soyuz spacecraft could be used for space tourism purposes in the future.
Increasing launch capacity solves
Arkhipov and Pronina 11, writers at Bloomberg.net, April 4 2011, “Russia Speeds Up Moon Mars Plans as
US May Cut Space Funds”, http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-04-04/russia-speeds-up-moon-mars-plans-as-u-s-may-cutspace-funds.html?cmpid=yhoo, TJ
The need to accommodate expanded crews has halted travel by paying space tourists 2009, Perminov said, adding that space tourism
may resume in 2013.Astronauts from other countries have to wait in line as demand for flights to the ISS is growing and Russia’s
capacity is limited by the number of spacecraft, Perminov said. Russia would be able to earn $1 billion a year if it could carry out all
requested launches, including commercial flights on its Proton and Soyuz rockets, he said.“It would be good to have two, three or
more tourists a year,” Perminov said. Roscosmos is in talks with Russian spacecraft maker RKK Energia to increase production,
he said.
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
30
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
DDI 2011
AT – US is better
Be skeptical of their evidence - The US has underestimated the Russian’s program for fifty years
Robert Zimmerman 05, award-winning space historian, January 28 2005, “Space Watch: The Russians are Coming”,
http://www.spacedaily.com/news/oped-05r.html, TJ
Nowhere in his presentation, however, was there any mention of a Russian system, even though since
1971 the Russians have built seven successful space
stations prior to the ISS with a remarkable track record of efficient and practical atmospheric and water recycling systems. When asked by
this reporter why he had left the Russians out of his presentation, he explained that he did not take their systems very seriously. "We don't have faith in them," he
said. To put it mildly, when it comes to space exploration, U.S. space officials have deve loped the annoying habit of underestimating
the Russians. In 1957, the Soviet Union made no secret of its plans to put a satellite in orbit as its contribution to the International Geophysical
Year, a worldwide research event organized by scientists from July 1957 through December 1958. No one in the United States government paid much
attention, and so the nation was shocked when Sputnik suddenly appeared in orbit on Oct. 4, 1957. Nothing, it seems, has changed in nearly
50 years. With all the talk about space tourism and Bush's space exploration initiative, it becomes crucially important to recognize the competitive nature of nations, and how
the United States is not the only country with a desire and skills to colonize the solar system . So it might be prudent to consider the possibility that
the first humans to reach Mars might be speaking Russian -- not English -- when they get there.
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
31
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
DDI 2011
AT – Russia = No money
Space funding in Russia has dramatically increased
Anatoly Zak 08, Russian space program: A
decade
review
(2000-2010),
January
3
2008,
http://www.russianspaceweb.com/russia_2000_2010.html, TJ
One of the unintended consequences of the post-September 11 global instability, combined with economic boom in Asia, became
soaring oil prices, which quickly turned Russia's natural resources-driven economy from bust to boom. With the Kremlin coffers full
with oil revenues, the Russian government managed not simply to postpone a "social catastrophe," but to take steps to reverse
its "strategic irrelevance." On the international stage, Russian President Vladimir Putin made his official doctrine the creation
of a "multi-polar world," which would challenge America's military and economic dominance. By the end of his two terms in
office, President Putin consolidated so much power in his hands that he could make his old secret service bosses red with
envy. Putin promised to use his new financial and political muscle to repair Russia's battered economy and military might.
In 2006, Russian military spending approached 600 billion rubles, or double of its annual budget in 2000. (240) By the end
of 2007, a Russian aircraft carrier group was heading back on patrol of the high seas, in a rare show of military power
since the end of the Cold War. Strategic bombers, land- and submarine-based ballistic missiles resumed regular
doomsday rehearsal missions. Oil money also started trickling down into the previously underfunded space industry. To the
delight of Russian space officials, increased funding was accompanied by President Putin's declaration that "...without
astronautics, Russia can not compete for one of the leading positions in the world's civilization, and will not be able to
provide its defense at a necessary level." (270) To restore Russian presence beyond Earth, the Putin administration started
drafting the nation's long-term space strategy. On October 22, 2005, the Russian government signed a decree No. 635,
approving Federal Space Program for 2006-2015 and worth 305 billion rubles. (299) The industry was directed to propose
its projects and plan its activities in the timeframe of a two-phase Federal Space Program, FKP: Short-term projects and
goals until 2015-2020 Long-term projects planning for the period 2020-2040 The Russian space budget continued growing
during the 2000s, almost doubling by 2009.
Russian space program has lots of cash
Reuters 4-10-2011 (“Analysis: Stagnation fears haunt Russian space program,” http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/04/10/usrussia-space-gagarin-idUSTRE73910C20110410)
Addressing concerns about Russia's role, Prime Minister Vladimir Putin said on Thursday the country could take pride
in handling over 40 percent of global space launches but must not be confined to the role of a "ferryman." "Now
Russia is returning to researching the planets of the solar system," he said. Russia's space agency will receive
$753 million to ferry 12 U.S. astronauts to the space station from 2014-2016, NASA announced last month. Russia
raked in some $2.5 billion from NASA and partner agencies for 42 seats on Soyuz craft from 2007. Russia has
increased space spending by some 40 percent per year during the last five years, according to Euroconsult, a
consulting body that tracks the industry. It has earmarked 200 billion roubles ($7 billion) for space programmes
from 2010-2011. Some of the money will fund a new launch facility in Vostochny in far eastern Russia, where the
first launches are anticipated in 2015 and the first manned launch in 2018.
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
32
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
DDI 2011
AT – Not Reliable
The Soyuz rocket is more reliable that the US’s shuttle
Pravda 10, February 8 2010, “Soyuz 100 Times More Reliable Than Shuttle”,
http://www.spacedaily.com/reports/Soyuz_100_Times_More_Reliable_Than_Shuttle_999.html, TJ
Richard Garriott, a videogame developer, who once boarded Russia's Soyuz rocket for a space flight said that the Russian-made
ship was much more reliable than its foreign analogues. Garriott, whose father is a former NASA astronaut, paid $30 million for a
flight to the iInternational Space station. He said in a televised conference that Soyuz was 100 times more a reliable spacecraft
than USA's shuttles.
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
33
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
DDI 2011
***ECONOMY NET BENEFIT***
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
34
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
DDI 2011
1NC Shell
With the US backing down Russia has massively increased its investments in space
Kevin O’Flynn ‘10 (a journalist at The Moscow Times who has lived and worked in Russia for ten years, 3/24/10,
http://rbth.ru/articles/2010/03/24/240310_space.html)
On April 2, new Soyuz crew members, two Russians and one American, are scheduled to launch from the Baikonur Cosmodrome in
Kazakhstan. Circling the planet, the crew will engage in intense cooperation unknown on the ground. Down on earth, RussianAmerican space cooperation has increased, but there is also unease as the power of the players is shifting. Russia will fuel space
exploration once again, while the U.S. vision appears dampened. America is relying more and more on the Russian federal space
program for key assistance. As the United States reprioritizes its programs, the country will rely on Russia to take its astronauts into
space. NASA has long spent more money on more programs than Russia’s space agency. But President Barack Obama has slashed
NASA’s dreams of going to the moon again. Building new spacecraft for the exploration of Mars is again a flight of fancy. At the
same time, the Russian space industry is feeling the warm glow of state backing once again. There has been concerted investment in
recent years, an investment that fits in well with the Putin doctrine of trying to restore Russian pride through capacity. And while both
countries feel they are the front runners, their dominance could be challenged in the next decade by India and China as they fund their
own programs. The Russian government has increased spending on the space industry by a remarkable 40 percent for each of the past
five years, spending $2.8 billion in 2009, Euroconsult reported. “It’s like night and day,” said Igor Lissov, editor of News of
Cosmonautics (Novosti Kosmonavtiki), comparing funding today with funding in the penurious 1990s. President Putin launched an
initial $10 billion program for the space industry between 2006 and 2015. When Putin congratulated space industry workers in 2008
on Cosmonauts' Day (April 12), he called on them to pursue “really ambitious projects.” The U.S. Constellation human-flight program
that Obama has all but abandoned was designed, according to President George W. Bush, to “establish an extended human presence
on the Moon” that would then lead to flights to Mars. Obama cut it from the 2011 budget as the effects of the financial crisis continue
to be felt and program expenditure soared. The government said that though NASA has already spent $9 billion on it, the program is
“fundamentally unexecutable.” Instead, America will look to private companies to invest in future spacecraft. In the meantime, U.S.
astronauts will hitch a lift on Russian spacecraft, a move that has NASA supporters crying foul. In the wake of recent criticism,
Obama announced he will make a visit to Cape Canaveral, Fla., the home of NASA, in April. Russian and American space watchers
wonder if this may herald another policy shift. For now, the United States will rely solely on the Russian space program as the U.S.
Shuttle retires from service. No private companies have so far secured investment for spacecraft, so this arrangement will likely
continue for much longer. Russian academic Yury Zaitsev told Interfax news agency that he thought the United States would be
dependent on Russia to transport its astronauts until at least 2020. “In order to bring a craft to the standards of quality and safety for a
piloted flight, you need years and years,” he said. NASA has signed a $306 million contract with the Russian Federal Space Agency
(Roscosmos) for U.S. astronauts to fly to the International Space Station in 2012.
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
35
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
DDI 2011
The perception that Russia can close the gap with the US is the key driver of these investments – the plan
ends that perception
Ilya Arkhipov and Lyubov Pronina 4/5/11 (Staff writers for Bloomberg news, Bloomberg,
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-04-04/russia-speeds-up-moon-mars-plans-as-u-s-may-cut-space-funds.html)
Russia may accelerate planned missions to the moon and Mars as it seeks to maintain its lead over China in space exploration and
close the gap with the U.S. Russia may start manned flights to the moon by the end of the decade, 10 years earlier than previously
planned, and establish a base there by 2030, according to Russia’s Roscosmos space agency. Russia may also send a man to Mars by
2040. “It is the first time that the government has allocated decent financing to us,” Anatoly Perminov, head of the Russian space
agency Roscosmos, said in a phone interview on April 2. The agency’s $3.5 billion budget for 2011 has almost tripled since 2007,
reaching the highest since the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991. “We can now advance on all themes a bit,” Perminov said. Unlike
50 years ago, when beating the U.S. into space marked a geopolitical victory in the Cold War, Russia is focusing on the commercial,
technological and scientific aspects of space travel. President Dmitry Medvedev has named aerospace one of five industries the
government plans to nurture to help diversify the economy of the world’s largest energy supplier away from resource extraction. “We
are increasing the space budget as the time has come for a technological breakthrough,” Dmitry Peskov, the spokesman for Prime
Minister Vladimir Putin, said by phone yesterday. “We need to replace outdated infrastructure and continue to support the flagship
status of the space industry.” Space Station Cooperation Russia’s Soyuz TMA-21 spacecraft with three astronauts on board was
launched early today from the Baikonur Cosmodrome in Kazakhstan to the International Space Station. The launch marks the 50th
anniversary on April 12 of Yuri Gagarin’s first mission to space. Alexander Samokutiaev and Andrey Borisenko of Roscosmos and
NASA’s Ron Garan are scheduled to arrive at the station on April 7, Roscosmos said on its website. Russia is working on the ISS with
the U.S. It will provide the only way for U.S. astronauts to travel to the station following a decision to end the almost 30-year-old
space shuttle program this year, with the last two flights scheduled for April and June. U.S. Funds Russia receives $752 million from
the U.S. for sending crews to the ISS through 2015. The country is using the launch fee of $63 million per member on craft
development, maintenance and upgrade, Perminov said. U.S. President Barack Obama in February last year announced an end to
NASA’s Constellation program, developed under former President George W. Bush’s administration, which would have built rockets
and spacecraft for a return to the moon by 2020. The decision has been criticized by former NASA astronauts and officials, including
the agency’s previous administrator and Neil Armstrong, the first man to walk on the Moon, saying it will sideline the American space
program. With no manned government rockets ready to go, routine trips to so-called low- earth orbit will be outsourced to private
companies. NASA is seeking an $18.7 billion budget for next year, $300 million less than the funding targeted for this year. Russia
intends to continue allocating more funds for the space industry, Peskov said. “We’ll increase financing if possible, depending on the
budget balance, because the industry was and remains one of our priorities,” he said.
Space investments are key to sustaining Russia’s economy
USA Today 11/12/09 (Newspaper, citing Medvedev http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2009-11-12-russia-economy_N.htm)
MOSCOW (AP) — Russia needs to shed its dependence on exports of raw materials and to build a new high-tech economy to survive,
President Dmitry Medvedev said in his annual state-of-the-nation address Thursday. In a challenge to his predecessor and mentor,
Vladimir Putin, Medvedev also called for reducing state involvement in the economy and promised to offer support to civil society.
Medvedev said the country has continued to rely on an aging Soviet industrial base and to draw most of its revenues from exports of
energy resources. "The nation's prestige and welfare can't depend forever on the achievements of the past," he said. Medvedev said in
the Kremlin speech that Russia's oil, gas and other production facilities as well as its nuclear arsenals were built during Soviet times.
"All that has kept the country afloat, but it is rapidly aging," he added. Medvedev said that years of burgeoning energy prices have
stymied efforts to modernize the economy and created an illusion that structural reforms could wait. "We can't wait any longer," he
said. "We need to launch modernization and renovation of the entire industrial base. Our nation's survival in the modern world will
depend on that." He said that Russia needs to focus on innovative know-how, including research on new nuclear reactors and space
technologies, and even think about preparing for space flights to other planets. Medvedev said that the economic downturn hit Russia
more severely than other countries but refused to shift the blame onto the U.S. as Putin, now Russia's powerful prime minister, did.
"We shouldn't be looking for the guilty party abroad," Medvedev said. "We haven't done enough."
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
36
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
DDI 2011
Russian econ collapse triggers internal collapse that goes global and nuclear
David 99 (Steven, Proffesor of Political Science at Johns Hopkins University, “Internal War: Causes and Cures”, July,
https://muse.jhu.edu/journals/world_politics/related/v049/49.4er_brown.html)
If internal war does strike Russia, economic deterioration will be a prime cause . From 1989 to the present, the GDP has fallen by
50 percent. In a society where, ten years ago, unemployment scarcely existed, it reached 9.5 percent in 1997 with many
economists declaring the true figure to be much higher. Twenty-two percent of Russians live below the official poverty line
(earning less than $ 70 a month). Modern Russia can neither collect taxes (it gathers only half the revenue it is due) nor
significantly cut spending. Reformers tout privatization as the country's cure-all, but in a land without well-defined property
rights or contract law and where subsidies remain a way of life, the prospects for transition to an American-style capitalist
economy look remote at best. As the massive devaluation of the ruble and the current political crisis show, Russia's
condition is even worse than most analysts feared. If conditions get worse, even the stoic Russian people will soon run
out of patience. A future conflict would quickly draw in Russia's military. In the Soviet days civilian rule kept the powerful
armed forces in check. But with the Communist Party out of office, what little civilian control remains relies on an
exceedingly fragile foundation -- personal friendships between government leaders and military commanders. Meanwhile,
the morale of Russian soldiers has fallen to a dangerous low. Drastic cuts in spending mean inadequate pay, housing,
and medical care. A new emphasis on domestic missions has created an ideological split between the old and new guard
in the military leadership, increasing the risk that disgruntled generals may enter the political fray and feeding the
resentment of soldiers who dislike being used as a national police force. Newly enhanced ties between military units and
local authorities pose another danger. Soldiers grow ever more dependent on local governments for housing, food, and
wages. Draftees serve closer to home, and new laws have increased local control over the armed forces. Were a conflict
to emerge between a regional power and Moscow, it is not at all clear which side the military would support. Divining the
military's allegiance is crucial, however, since the structure of the Russian Federation makes it virtually certain that
regional conflicts will continue to erupt. Russia's republics, krais, and oblasts grow ever more independent in a system
that does little to keep them together. As the central government finds itself unable to force its will beyond Moscow (if
even that far), power devolves to the periphery. With the economy collapsing, republics feel less and less incentive to pay taxes
to Moscow when they receive so little in return. Three-quarters of them already have their own constitutions, nearly all of
which make some claim to sovereignty. Strong ethnic bonds promoted by shortsighted Soviet policies may motivate nonRussians to secede from the Federation. Chechnya's successful revolt against Russian control inspired similar
movements for autonomy and independence throughout the country. If these rebellions spread and Moscow responds
with force, civil war is likely. Should Russia succumb to internal war, the consequences for the United States and Europe will be
severe. A major power like Russia -- even though in decline -- does not suffer civil war quietly or alone. An embattled Russian
Federation might provoke opportunistic attacks from enemies such as China. Massive flows of refugees would pour into central and
western Europe. Armed struggles in Russia could easily spill into its neighbors. Damage from the fighting, particularly attacks on
nuclear plants, would poison the environment of much of Europe and Asia. Within Russia, the consequences would be even
worse. Just as the sheer brutality of the last Russian civil war laid the basis for the privations of Soviet communism, a
second civil war might produce another horrific regime. Most alarming is the real possibility that the violent disintegration of
Russia could lead to loss of control over its nuclear arsenal. Nonuclear state has ever fallen victim to civil war, but even without a
clear precedent the grim consequences can be foreseen. Russia retains some 20,000 nuclear weapons and the raw material for tens of
thousands more, in scores of sites scattered throughout the country. So far, the government has managed to prevent the loss of any
weapons or much material. If war erupts, however, Moscow's already weak grip on nuclear sites will slacken, making weapons and
supplies available to a wide range of anti-American groups and states. Such dispersal of nuclear weapons represents the greatest
physical threat America now faces. And it is hard to think of anything that would increase this threat more than the chaos that would
follow a Russian civil war.
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
37
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
DDI 2011
Space Investment Key
Tech investments are crucial to end Russian export reliance and maintain long-term economic
sustainability
Prof. Arun Mohanty ’11 (PhD from Academy of Sciences USSR, Prof @ the Centre for Russian and Central Asian Studies, and
recipient of the prestigious Pushkin Gold Medal, 2/8/11, http://indrus.in/articles/2011/02/08/medvedev_doctrine_12139.html)
Russia for the first time in its post-Soviet history drafted in 2008 a long-term economic development strategy up to the year 2020. The
long term development strategy was approved by the State Council after thorough discussion. The central thrust of the development
strategy up to 2020 is to transfer the economy from the rails of raw-material export to innovation-driven development. The strategy
has been approved by the Medvedev-Putin tandem. The main problem with the Russian economy is that while it remains extremely
dependent on energy exports, the global economy is becoming increasingly competitive, driven by a shifting balance of financial
power in favour of developing countries, regional economic integration and technological innovation. Heavy dependence
predominantly on revenues collected from energy and raw-material resources leaves Russia in an unstable and unenviable economic
and financial situation. If Russia wants to be a global economic power, it must move towards innovation- based development. The
strategy based on Russia’s current competitive advantage in energy, transport and agriculture aims at creation of a scientific and
technological complex to promote specialisation in high- technology and diversification of the structure of the economy. It gives
importance to creation of economic and social conditions that would facilitate development of best human capital and democracy in
the country.
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
38
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
DDI 2011
Space Investment Key
Space is the key tech investment
Johann-Dietrich Wörner 4/26/11 (President of the German Aerospace Center and Prof @ Technical University of Darmstadt,
Modern Russia, a Russia oriented news/think tank group, http://www.modernrussia.com/content/german-twist-russian-space-program)
As Russia and the world celebrated the 50th anniversary of Yuri Gagarin’s first flight into space, President Medvedev recently stated
that space will remain a key priority in Russia’s efforts to modernize its economy. Professor Johann-Dietrich Wörner, chairman of the
Executive Board of the German Aerospace Center (DLR) spoke to Modern Russia on the future of the Russian space program and on
German-Russian relations in the aerospace sector. Russia and Germany have been working closely together in the aerospace sector for
several decades. What common projects are you currently carrying out? As you said, Russia and Germany have a long and successful
tradition of working together in the aerospace sector, and they will of course continue beyond the 50th anniversary of man’s first flight
into space. The German Technology Experiment Carrier TET-1 as well as the European Express Capsule, which was partially
developed in Germany, will be launched into orbit by Russian carrier rockets. Furthermore, German experiments will take place on
board Russian science satellites, while Russian cosmonauts conduct experiments designed by German scientists on the International
Space Station (ISS). This cooperation is indispensable for Germany, as it underlines the peaceful character of space travel and also
shows that the use of space technology can contribute to common success. After a relative decline in investment following the
collapse of the Soviet Union, President Medvedev recently said in his speech marking the 50th anniversary of Yuri Gagarin's
spaceflight that space remains a key priority for Russia and that new initiatives will be launched to revive the sector. Are we on the
eve of a new era for the Russian space program and what would some of these projects be? Ever since the great achievements of
Russian space travel in 1957 - even during the political upheavals of the 1990s - Russia has been a reliable partner in the international
space industry. However, today we face new, bigger challenges. We are planning joint activities up to 2020 and beyond, in which
Russia can, and must, play an important role regarding access to space, among other things. The operation of manned space travel
infrastructure is another area where Russia is an important partner due to its many years of experience. Together we can bring about a
paradigm shift from the space race of the Cold War to the closer global cooperation between all space-faring nations. Space is one of
the five strategic areas of economic modernization identified by President Medvedev. How can space contribute to the modernization
of Russia’s economy as a whole? From the outset, space travel has influenced life on earth. Not only has it had a cultural impact but it
is also a driver of technological advancement. This is something that can be of great use to the Russian economy. At the German
Aerospace Center (DLR) we take technologies developed in the space sector and give them a practical application on earth.
FIREWATCH, an early warning system for forest fires, is a perfect example. Developed on the basis of research results stemming
from a comet mission, FIREWATCH is currently used in Germany and other European countries, to detect forest fires at an early
stage, thereby limiting the devastating effect they can have. Russia is planning to organize a manned mission to the moon by 2025,
and to establish an inhabited lunar base by 2032. How realistic is this plan for the Russian space program and what are some of the
challenges facing it? Russian scientists and engineers will continue to play a significant role in the development of international space
exploration. It is important in that regard that political will and thus the necessary financial means are available. The return of man to
the moon as a further step in space exploration will require international cooperation, which has already proved successful in the
construction and the operation of the ISS.
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
39
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
DDI 2011
Space Investment Key
Reliance on tech imports kills their economy
Mikhail Prokhorov 6/18/09 (Graduate from Moscow State Financial School and investment banker since, Mikhail Prokhorov in the
News center, website news blog, http://mprokhorov.com/media/inthenews/104/)
Russia imports too much high technology and cutting-edge innovations and must do more to free the economy from its reliance on
heavy industries like oil and gas, President Dmitry Medvedev said Thursday. Medvedev called for the government to work with big
business groups to help modernize the economy — an initiative that could involve billions of public and private dollars. "It's easier to
buy everything abroad and to deliver (abroad) our natural wealth, but we must strive for business to have the motivation to produce
the best commodities and to create the most competitive conditions in our country," he said. Speaking to a new presidential
commission, Medvedev said Russia had for too long relied on importing what he called "intellectual products"_ an area he sees as a
Russian speciality. Medvedev said Russia should be a global leader in five areas — energy use and storage; nuclear technology; space
and communications technology; medical know-how and equipment; and information technology including supercomputers.
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
40
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
DDI 2011
Space Investment Key
Moving off oil exports is crucial to maintaining their economy – the squo makes disaster inevitable
Fiona Hill ‘2 (Senior Fellow, Foreign Policy @ the Brookings Institute, Spring,
http://www.brookings.edu/articles/2002/spring_russia_hill.aspx, Brookings Institute, Policy think tank)
Limits on Russian Oil
But for all its recent success, Russia will never displace OPEC in world oil markets. Over the long term, it cannot match OPEC's oil
reserves. In oil production, Russia ranks third behind Saudi Arabia and the United States, at just over 7 mbd. In exports, it ranks
second, at about 4 mbd, behind Saudi Arabia with close to 7 mbd. But it ranks seventh in proven oil reserves, with only 5 percent—as
against the OPEC countries' collective 77 percent. Because of OPEC's huge reserve base the International Energy Agency predicts that
increases in world production during 2010-20 will primarily be from Middle East OPEC countries. One sign of Russia's reserve limits
is that its recent oil industry boom was caused by increases in oil prices, not production. In fact, Russia has yet to restore production to
the 11 mbd peak it reached before the collapse of the USSR. And high production costs, together with its limited reserves, will keep
Russia from increasing its production capacity far beyond that point. It costs Saudi Arabia a little more than $5 to produce a barrel of
oil; it costs Russia, on average, twice that. If global recession and depressed world demand send oil prices down again, Russian oil
companies could easily slide back into the troubles of the 1990s. For Russia, oil is too volatile a commodity on which to bet its entire
future.
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
41
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
DDI 2011
UX Invest High
Decline of the US space program is resulting in exponential growth of Russia’s space investments
David Mack 3/25/11 (Vice President, The Middle East Institute of the CSIS, Center for Strategic and International Studies,
http://csis.org/blog/russias-new-space-odyssey)
SHRINKING THE BUDGET GAP Throughout the 2000s, the annual budget for Russia’s Federal Space Agency, Roscosmos, grew at
a steady rate. Despite the global financial crisis which had the countries of the world tightening their fiscal belts, surprisingly,
Roscosmos’ budget nearly doubled from 2008 to 2009 (the height of the crisis). This year, 115 billion rubles ($3.8 billion) have been
allocated for Russia’s national space programs. While the United States’ National Aeronautics and Space Administration’s (NASA)
2011 budget is substantially greater at $18.7 billion, Anatoly Perminov, Director of Roscosmos, points out that “[the gap] is not
growing but decreasing. About two or three years ago NASA’s budget was 17-18 times that of Roscosmos. Now…it is seven to eight
times.” In fact, according to Interfax, Russia conducted twice as many space launches as did the U.S. in 2010. Currently, budget
battles on Capitol Hill have led the House Appropriations Committee to propose legislation that would cut NASA’s budget by $579
million; meanwhile, Russia has no intention of putting on the brakes regarding its revived space program. In fact, it is looking
forward to taking full advantage of NASA’s reliance on Russian Soyuz spacecraft for trips to the International Space Station (ISS)
over the next four to five years. RUSSIA IN THE DRIVER’S SEAT This spring NASA will be retiring its thirty year old fleet of
space shuttles (Discovery, Endeavor, and Atlantis) in an effort to free up funds to invest in domestic commercial companies such as
Space Exploration Technologies (SpaceX), and Orbital Sciences Corp., based in California and Virginia respectively. It is expected
that the private sector will soon dominate the market for near-Earth space travel because of cost effectiveness and innovation. Elon
Musk, SpaceX CEO and Chief Technology Officer explains that “[SpaceX’s] Dragon spacecraft is capable of carrying the same
number of astronauts as the Space Shuttle at one tenth of the cost. It will also be much safer due to technological improvements such
as a launch escape system, automatic stability on reentry, and a far more robust heat shield.” The Director of NASA, Charles Bolden,
concurs with the decision to move towards private contractors, citing that “this new approach…will create good jobs and expand
opportunities for our American economy.” However, commercially built spacecrafts designed to carry humans will not be made
available until mid-decade at the earliest. In the interim, the U.S., as previously mentioned, will rely on the increasingly pricy
Russian Soyuz spacecraft to ferry astronauts back and forth to and from the ISS. The new contract allows for twelve U.S. astronauts
on board of Soyuz spacecrafts from 2014 to 2016 for the hefty price of $753 million. This contract is an extension of a previous deal
for six round trips to the ISS from 2013-2014. The price per seat has gone up by $7 million between contracts and has doubled the
current price, but the lack of alternatives leaves the U.S. without much elbow room in negotiations. Meanwhile, U.S. concerns over
the reliability of Russia’s space hardware have been growing. The next launch, scheduled to take two Russians and one American to
the ISS, has been delayed two weeks due to technical problems with the spacecraft’s communications system. The U.S. should get
used to these kinds of frustrations due to the fact that Russia has not been vigilant to update their space-rocket industry and, as a result,
the life-expectancy of over 80 percent of its production equipment has already expired. WITH GLONASS COMES CREDIBILITY
For those who view Russia’s space program as a mere “rocket taxi service”—a relic of its former glory—by the end of this year,
Russia will finally complete the Soviet Union’s most ambitious (and expensive) space project. GLONASS (Global'naya
Navigatsionnaya Sputnikovaya Sistema or Global Navigation Satellite System) was a Soviet-initiated project begun in 1976 which by
the mid-1990s had fallen to the wayside. In the first years of Vladimir Putin’s tenure as president, work began to reprieve GLONASS
with updates for the twenty-first century. The new GLONASS is intended for both military and civilian use and will compete with
rival satellite positioning systems such as GPS (United States), Galileo (European Union), and Compass (China). Russia’s national
navigation system suffered many setbacks in recent years due to foolish mistakes, but Roscosmos is confident that there will be 100
percent coverage by the end of this year. Currently 22 operational GLONASS satellites (out of 26 total) orbiting the Earth cover 99
percent of the planet. The achievement is already sparking new possibilities within the realms of business and security. Russia's
largest telecommunication provider, OAO Mobile Telesystems, has been advertising the country's first smart phone with the ability to
access GLONASS navigation capabilities which will go on sale this April; meanwhile a special program called “Safe Sochi” will rely
on GLONASS for its security surveillance operations during 2014’s Winter Olympic Games at the doorstep of Russia’s most volatile
region. The completion of GLONASS, however, should be viewed, above all else, as a symbolic act. PUSHING THE ENVELOPE
In this decade Russia is looking to take on a leading role in the international arena, as exemplified by their playing host to a number of
the world’s most sought after events, namely, the World Cup and the Olympic Games. It’s no secret that Russia intends to use the
public eye to highlight their incredible achievements since the collapse of the Soviet Union, and the resurrection of their space
program will be at the forefront of that list. Russia is mulling over the possibility of sending the Olympic flame (a torch which travels
around the world before stopping at the host city to mark the start of the games) into space – a novel proposal, and one that would
make a bold statement about the clear path that a resurgent Russia is on. Recently Russia has revealed its space strategy up to the year
2035 which details plans for exploration and development of the Moon, Mars, and projects in deep space, as well as a new launch site
to be built in Eastern Russia (Vostochniy Cosmodrome), and an all-Russian space station in low-Earth orbit to replace the ISS after the
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
42
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
DDI 2011
UX Invest High
[Continued]
end of its operation in 2020. While logistically speaking manned-missions to the Moon and Mars are still some years away for Russia,
they are not wasting any time in preparation. An elaborate experiment is currently underway to test, as accurately as possible, the
psychological and physiological strains of a voyage to deep space. Mars500, as it is dubbed, is a $15 million collaborative effort of
Russia, China, and the EU to simulate a manned round-trip mission to Mars. Six male crewmembers have been locked in a 1,720square-foot windowless mock space shuttle located on the outskirts of Moscow for the duration of 520 days with limited contact to the
outside world. The simulation is sure to break down some barriers on what is possible concerning the capabilities for manned deep
space travel, and could potentially spark a space race for the red planet. [Infographic courtesy of Space.com] CONCLUSION
Russia’s space program in recent years has been given a breath of new life. This new decade, and in particular the next four to five
years, will be a critical timeframe for Roscosmos. The retirement of the American fleet of space shuttles will leave a void, and Russia
can use this opportunity to step up and take a leading role in the international space arena, not to mention the profits they will rake in
by monopolizing the market for near-Earth space travel. That is not to say that Russia should simply use this time to capitalize on the
favorable supply/demand situation, but use it wisely to invest back into their rocket-space industry and build partnerships with up-andcoming space powers such as India and China so as to aid research and development and remain competitive for the future. The
completion of GLONASS by the end of 2011 is certainly as symbolic an accomplishment as it is a strategic one for Russia, and though
they have restored some of their lost grandeur, Roscosmos still has a lot to prove. But Russia’s space program is surely on its way
forward as true pioneers of mankind’s final frontier.
Investment is high now AND its crucial to economic growth
Klaus Schmidt 4/8/11(once a student trainee at DaimlerChrysler also attended the University of Stuttgart, Space Fellowship, Klaus
once a student trainee at DaimlerChrysler also attended the University of Stuttgart)
NOVO-OGARYOVO (Moscow region) – Russia needs to increase its presence on the global space market and increase its share of
launches from 40% to 50%, Prime Minister Vladimir Putin said on Thursday. “Our country presently provides up to 40% of all space
launches in the world. I believe it is well within our power to increase this share by another 5% or maybe even 10%,” he said. He
stressed, however, that Russia should not confine itself to the role of an “international space cabbie.” “We need to expand our
presence on the global space market, which, incidentally, has grown 150% since 2003 and is now worth around $200 billion. That’s
big business,” Putin said. Russia currently has over 100 satellites in orbit and will continue to increase their number, he added. Putin
also said the government earmarked about 200 billion rubles ($7 billion) in funding for space programs in 2010-11. “In the far-fromeasy post-crisis conditions we are increasing the volume of funding for our space programs,” he said. Putin said Russia would
develop a whole range of new capabilities over the next five years. “We need new-generation space equipment, featuring greater
reliability and service life,” he said. This requires a “deep modernization” of space industry enterprises, as well as significant
investment in R&D programs, the prime minister said. Putin ordered the Russian space agency Roscosmos, in conjunction with the
Russian Academy of Sciences, to draw up long-term space research plans by this August.
Xinhua News 4/7/11 (Newspaper, http://news.xinhuanet.com/english2010/world/2011-04/07/c_13817843.htm0
MOSCOW, April 7 (Xinhua) -- The Russian government had earmarked about 200 billion rubles (about 7 billion U.S. dollars) for
space programs in 2011, Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin said Thursday. During a conference on the future of Russian space
exploration and its rocket-building industry, Putin said the government was increasing funding for space programs and Russia would
develop more than 30 new space complexes and systems over the next five years. "We need new generation space equipment,
featuring greater reliability and service life," he was quoted by RIA Novosti news agency as saying. This required a "deep
modernization" of the space industry and significant investment in research and development programs, the prime minister said. He
also ordered the Russian Space Agency (Roscosmos) and Academy of Sciences to prepare a long-term space exploration project and
report the research results to the government in August. Meanwhile, Putin said the government would institute 10 1-million-ruble
prizes named after the first man in space, Yuri Gagarin, to award specialists for outstanding contribution to the development of
Russian cosmonautics. The same day, Roscosmos said Russia would build a base near the Moon's pole by 2030, with manned flights
to Mars to follow.
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
43
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
DDI 2011
UX Invest High
Russia is taking advantage of US inaction to invest in space sciences
The Daily Galaxy ’11 (Space Newspaper, 7/20/11, http://www.dailygalaxy.com/my_weblog/2011/07/news-flash-russialaunches-most-advanced-space-radio-telescope-ever-built.html)
A new Russian space telescope, Spectrum-R, has "reached the targeted orbit," as of Monday morning, the Russian space agency
Roscosmos announced in an English-language statement on its website. Russia is eager to show its resurgence in space exploration,
particularly as NASA shuts down its shuttle program. The new observatory, known as Spectrum-R, is designed to study sources of
radio waves from stellar phenomena, including pulsars, quasars, black holes, and neutron stars. The agency added that the space
telescope will have a minimum lifetime of "no less than five years." "We will be able to observe very remote parts of the universe and
to receive a highly accurate data about various galactic phenomena," said Viktor Khartov, the chief of the Lavochkin Research and
Production Association, in an interview with the Russian news agency ITAR-TASS. The space telescope was initially conceived of
decades ago, during the early days of the Soviet space program, but was perpetually postponed, and was mothballed after the collapse
of the Soviet Union in 1991. "For 20 years, it was always five years away," said Ken Kellermann of the National Radio Astronomy
Observatory in the United States, in an interview with New Scientist. Russian space authorities said the telescope reached its target
orbit several hours after launch the telescope, which is also known as RadioAstron, has a 10-meter (32.8-foot) diameter, a small size
when compared to many current terrestrial radio telescopes. However, given that its data will be combined with signals collected from
Earth stations, and the fact that it will have a large 340,000-kilometer (around 211,000-mile) orbit, the telescope is expected to have a
resolution 100,000 times better than the American-built Hubble Space Telescope, which was launched in 1990. Russian space
authorities are planning on coordinating the new telescope's observations with radio telescopes in the United States, Puerto Rico and
Germany. This year is significant for the Russian space program, as it takes advantage of the hiatus of manned American space
missions. Earlier this year, Moscow feted the 50th anniversary of the first manned spaceflight, by Soviet cosmonaut Yuri Gagarin. All
subsequent international space missions ferrying humans into space will have to be launched via the Russian Soyuz capsule from the
Baikonur Cosmodrome in Kazakhstan. "The main point is that Russia is returning to scientific programs in space after a long break,"
said Vladimir Popovkin, the head of Roscosmos, according to ITAR-TASS.
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
44
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
DDI 2011
AT: Modernization Fails
All their indicts of modernization conflate Putin with Medvedev – Economic and political transformation
will yield success
Dr Adrian Pabst 10/15/10 (a lecturer at the School of Politics and International Relations of Rutherford College, University of Kent,
the UK, Russia in Global Affairs, Russia study group, http://eng.globalaffairs.ru/number/Medvedevs-Third-Way-The-UnrealizedPotential-14997)
MODERNIZATION IN QUESTION Both at home and abroad, critics of President Dmitry Medvedev dismiss his modernization
strategy as little more than window-dressing that masks his determination to preserve the ruling regime led by Prime Minister
Vladimir Putin. Modernization Medvedev-style, so the critics claim, is too narrowly focused on technology and won’t work without
wholesale political liberalization and legal reform that will certainly be blocked by Putin and the siloviki faction which dominate the
Russian government and business. Pointing to a succession of recent polls, the liberal commentariat accuses the president of ignoring
popular calls for a systemic form of modernization that offers a new social contract. Critics have a point but fail to see the bigger
argument. Since he took office, Medvedev has crafted a transformational vision for Russia’s domestic politics and foreign policy. The
ongoing economic crisis and the aftermath of the war with Georgia have persuaded the president that the old, conventional approaches
and measures are outmoded and don’t serve Russian or global interests. Based on a critique of the status quo, Medvedev has begun to
chart a radical alternative path that outflanks both liberal and conservative ideology. His proposed “third way” gestures towards a
pluralist, associational account of the state and the market – fostering groups, intermediary institutions, small-and medium-sized
enterprise as well as regions, instead of relying exclusively on the sovereign will of the individual or the sovereign power of the
collectivity. In terms of Russia’s role in the world, this alternative modernization strategy suggests a stronger emphasis on forging
links with countries and organizations that offer mutually advantageous cooperation – starting with the export of primary resources in
exchange for technology and investment. Chief of all, Medvedev looks to the U.S. and other member-states of the OECD in order to
reinforce bilateral relations, but he also pursues multilateral projects such as WTO membership and the new Partnership for
Modernization” with the EU. To a lesser extent, he seeks closer ties with emerging markets as part of new pan-regional associations
such as the Eurasian Economic Community or the BRIC group, an expression of Russia’s “multi-vectored” foreign policy that
provides greater opportunities for shaping the international system. That is what underpins Medvedev’s project of economic
modernization, social renewal, a new Euro-Atlantic security framework from Vancouver to Vladivostok and reforms of global
governance. All this is set out in his landmark article 'Forward Russia' of 10 September 2009 and his major foreign policy address of
12 July 2010. In the latter intervention, he argues that the global economic crisis has brought about a "paradigm shift in international
relations [which] opens for us a unique opportunity to put Russia’s foreign policy instruments to the most effective use possible to
assist the country’s modernization." Central to his overarching vision is the argument that neither the individual nor the state can
exercise their sovereignty and power without some form of association with other individuals within and across regions and nations.
Of course, all this could come to nothing very significant at all. The prevailing political and economic elites seem to have a higher
stake in their own power than in changing the country or the world. But at the same time, there are certain developments that have the
potential to transform Russia’s domestic condition and international role. Key to the success of President Medvedev’s modernization
strategy is to pluralize Russia’s dual state – the constitutional, political order and the para-constitutional, administrative regime (here I
draw on the work of my colleague Richard Sakwa, notably his forthcoming book The Crisis of Russian Democracy: The Dual State,
Factionalism and the Medvedev Succession (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2010), esp. Chapter 1). This could be done by
separating political office from state corporations and by strengthening associational arrangements within Russia and with other
countries (more about that below). Some degree of political competition and policy difference between Medvedev and Putin indicates
that the ruling regime is perhaps not quite as static or monolithic as has been suggested. This approach, coupled with genuinely
different ideological outlooks, could presage democratic renaissance and systemic transformation within the existing constitutional
order – even though the risk of further authoritarian consolidation within the para-constitutional administrative remains real. What’s
genuinely radical is that the current president links the ongoing economic disaster to a profound social and cultural crisis. In Forward
Russia, he calls on Russian society to tackle “persistent social ills” like lack of initiative and dependence on the state, centralized
paternalism, “legal nihilism” or the corrosive effect of financial and moral corruption – including “bribery, theft, intellectual and
spiritual laziness, and drunkenness.” It is those social and cultural problems that underlie the indifference of “owners, directors, chief
engineers and officials” vis-a-vis high levels of inefficiency and low levels of productivity. As such, Russia’s socio-economic crisis is
for Medvedev also a moral crisis – not in the sense of bourgeois moralism but in terms of social vices that “offend our traditions” of
“interethnic and interfaith peace, military valor, faithfulness to one’s duty, hospitality and the kindness inherent in our people.”
Medvedev’s argument about social virtue and social vice cannot be mapped on the conventional ideological spectrum: it is more
traditional than the reactionary nostalgia of many contemporary conservatives yearning for a golden age that never existed, and more
progressive than the abstract cosmopolitanism of the post-Soviet, self-righteous liberal commentariat. Crucially, his cogent critique is
of a piece with his insistence on empowering individuals, families and communities in politics and the economy (a theme to which I
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
45
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
DDI 2011
AT: Modernization Fails
[Continued]
will return). Nor does Medvedev gloss over Russia’s profound political problems. His point that “as a whole democratic institutions
have been established and stabilized but their quality remains far from ideal” is, of course, a vast understatement. Nor does he openly
acknowledge the recent shift from an imperfect representative democracy to an administrative semi-authoritarian system. However,
Medvedev’s wider point is that market economies and democracies require not just formal liberal institutions but also the informal
social bonds of civil society. Indeed, his remark that “civil society is weak, and the levels of self-organization and self-government are
low” is not merely an attempt to appease liberal critics at home and abroad. Much rather, it is integral to his modernization strategy –
whose mark is to change the age-old top-down approach of command-and-control in favor of more individual initiative and civic
participation. This central point is repeated in his foreign policy address of 12 July 2010 where he states that the second challenge of
modernization is “strengthening democratic and civil society institutions in Russia. We must promote the humanization of social
systems around the world and especially at home.” Indeed, Medvedev has repeatedly attacked the centralization of power and
concentration of wealth at the heart of the powerful state apparatus which nevertheless has extremely weak institutional and
administrative capacities. Medvedev’s scathing critique highlights the complicit collusion of bureaucrats and businessmen who share
the rents accruing from their joint monopolistic ownership of the country’s assets, especially energy resources and other primary
commodities. These patrimonial practices reinforce the overall inefficiency and shockingly low levels of capital productivity which
the president has repeatedly denounced. As a result, he has called for an entirely new economic settlement whereby Russia finally
moves beyond the “primitive economy based on raw materials and endemic corruption” – a sharp contrast with other emerging
markets where local corruption is punished severely and a far larger proportion of state resources is invested in high-tech industries,
like in China and India. Once again, it is clear that Medvedev’s modernization strategy is the glue that binds together his domestic
reform agenda and his shift foreign policy towards the OECD, WTO and the EU’s “Partnership for Modernization.”
Plans for tech modernization are in place and political transformations will follow
Rajorshi
Roy
12/8/10
(Research
Assistant
@
Institute
for
Defence
Studies
and
Analyses,
http://indrus.in/articles/2010/12/08/skolkovo_drive_towards_modernization04972.html)
Therefore, President, Dmitri A. Medvedev has chalked out a diversification plan that would enable the economy to ride out future
economic crises and fostered enhanced technological cooperation with the developed world, especially ‘modernization alliances’ with
the United States and the European Union. The development of a robust national innovation system and a knowledge based economy
with the help of the world’s smartest money has been accorded top priority in economic planning. Russia is home to some of the best
engineers and scientists in the world and therefore the State seems to be in a position to implement radical ideas in collaboration with
foreign capital and technology. Modernization will be accompanied by a thorough integration of cutting-edge dual use technology,
maximizing the human and intellectual potential of the country, capacity building and creating entirely new areas of world-class
technology. In February 2010, President Medvedev announced the establishment of a modern technological innovation centre in
Skolkovo (on the outskirts of Moscow) for research and development, with an area of 1.5 million square meters, dubbed as Russia's
own Silicon Valley after its namesake in the United States. The innovation hub will have its own police department, tax and customs
services and patent authority. Individuals involved in research activities in Skolkovo will be exempted from VAT, property and land
taxes until their annual sales reach 1 billion roubles ($34 million) and eventually until their accrued profits amount to 300 million
roubles ($10 million). The centre will focus on research in five priority areas: energy, information technology, communication,
biomedical research, and nuclear technology. These include research on nuclear energy, satellite technology (communications and the
GLONASS system), medicine (diagnostics systems and new drugs), and information technology (software and supercomputers).
Scientific research premises along with graduate schools, laboratories, housing, offices, kindergartens, schools and hospitals will be
built in Skolkovo. Highway infrastructure has been earmarked for completion within four years. There will be no local authorities, and
the Skolkovo Board itself will take care of lighting, plumbing and street naming. This is an exception to the law of local governance in
a country which is otherwise over-centralized and state controlled.
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
46
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
DDI 2011
AT: Perm/Both
US reinvigorating its space program kills Russian incentive for investment
Benjamin Quenelle 7/21/11 (Writer for Worldcrunch news agency, World Crunch, http://www.worldcrunch.com/america-s-shuttlenow-grounded-russia-looks-edge-ahead-global-space-race/3461)
The end of the U.S. space shuttle program could be just what the doctor ordered for NASA’s old rival, the Russian Federal Space
Agency, whose Soyuz rockets are now the only show in town when it comes to sending humans into the great beyond. LES
ECHOS/Worldcrunch BAIKONUR -- At the old Baikonur cosmodrome, the site of so many glorious moments for the Soviet space
program, a Russian engineer proudly points to the Soyuz rocket just about to leave the ground. This will be a world record 1,774th
launch for the brand of Russian-made rockets. It is the 23rd time the legendary engine wears the Arianespace logo. Onboard the vessel
are a number of communication satellites owned by the U.S. company Globalstar. “The United States needs us now, just like Europe
does,” the engineer insists. It is, of course, a reference to the recent “retirement” of America’s space shuttle program. The final space
shuttle voyage is set to conclude this week, meaning that for now, Russia’s Soyuz rocket is the only machine available to transport
humans to the International Space Station (ISS). The commercial space transportation company operating many of those launches,
Arianespace, just celebrated the 15th anniversary of its partnership with the European-Russian company Starsem. In the future,
Arianespace plans to launch its Soyuz rockets not from Baikonur – located in the middle of the steppe in the former Soviet republic of
Kazakhstan – but from a new facility in Guyana. The first Guyana launch will take place on Oct. 20, two years behind schedule.
Tensions ensure the plan won’t help Russia’s program
GREGORY FEIFER 4/9/9 (Editor and Senior Correspondent for NPR,
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=103296402
In the near future, the fate of America's manned space program rests, in part, at a massive, hangarlike building outside Moscow. At
the Star City complex — the Russian equivalent of NASA's Houston command center — cosmonauts, astronauts and scientists from
other countries train to work cooperatively in the international space station program. After the U.S. space shuttle program is retired,
scheduled to happen next year, the space station will rely solely on Russia's Soyuz launch vehicle for transportation until the next
generation of U.S. spacecraft is built. Signs Of Tension But there are signs of tension among the U.S. and Russian space agencies,
mirroring tensions in the broader Russian relationship with the West. Just before he blasted off earlier this month, the space station's
current commander, Gennady Padalka, told a newspaper that squabbles over equipment and supplies are harming work on the station.
He said the Russian government started charging other astronauts for using Russian facilities in 2003. Now the Russians eat their own
food and the other astronauts eat theirs and use separate toilets, Padalka said. Russian space program spokeswoman Marina Driga
blames NASA. "It was NASA that started prohibiting Russian cosmonauts from going onto American sections and banned others
from eating their food. Before they all used to eat together like one happy family," Driga said. Problems On The Ground U.S.
astronaut Michael Fincke denies there are problems in space but concedes that there are some differences that officials on the ground
need to resolve. "Once we're onboard, there's no politics," Finke said earlier this month after returning from a six-month stint as the
space station's commander. Fincke conceded that Russians have been barred from using American exercise equipment. "The
Americans definitely never said that the Russians could never use our toilet, that's unfounded. And the Americans, of course, can use
the Russian toilet — always — so that's not a problem," he added.
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
47
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
DDI 2011
AT: Cooperation Perm
Cooperation kills Russia’s program, independent Russian action is key
Ade Carbonnel ’11 [Staff writer for Reuters, Alissa de Carbonnel, 4/10/11, Reuters, “Stagnation fears haunt Russian space
programme”]
SPACE ‘STAGNATION’: In the 1960s, Gagarin’s flight seemed to leap off the pages of fantasy novels, inspiring dreams of Martian
colonies and imminent deep-space travel. But much of that initial rapture has now faded, leaving nostalgia among many in Russia for
the days when the struggle between the two nuclear-armed superpowers fuelled and financed the pursuit of new horizons in science.
US astronauts and Russian cosmonauts “were never enemies in space, but when we began cooperating on the ground they cut the
funding,” said veteran cosmonaut Georgy Grechko, 79. “Even the Americans would call us and say ‘launch something new, so they’ll
give us money’.” With competition eclipsed by coperation, Russia’s space agency has survived over the past two decades by hiring
out the third seat aboard the Soyuz to foreigners. “Cooperation is good, but as the example of the international space station shows, it
also leads to stagnation,” Russian space policy analyst Yuri Karash said, according to state-run news agency RIA. Gubarev said
Russia had fallen so far behind it could achieve little better than a supporting role today in the most cutting-edge projects. “In the
meantime, America will take its time out and build an entirely new spacecraft, so that five or six years down the line our Soyuz will be
entirely redundant,” he said. “No serious money is spent on breakthrough projects.” Experts say China could soon challenge both
Russia and the United States in space. “The most important role will be played by our Russian Soyuz craft now. But we cannot
discount the Chinese, who are following their own path and doing all this independently,” Shamsutdinov said. NASA officials have
voiced worries that the current budget financing will not be enough to fund a new rocket and capsule system for deep space travel.
NASA’s proposed budget for fiscal 2011 is $18.7 billion, some five times higher than Russia’s. Russian industry insiders say
President Barack Obama’s decision to halt work on NASA’s next-generation Orion capsule threatens to take the wind out of a parallel
Russian effort to design a replacement for the Soyuz that can fly beyond the International Space Station’s low 354-km (220 mile)
orbit. “A little residual competition is a good thing,” Sergei Krikalev, 52, who heads Russia’s cosmonaut training centre after
chalking up a record 803 days in space, said.—
Uniqueness proves – Russia’s investing now because they think they are the only one with the capabilities
- cooperation ends political will for government investment
AFP ’11 (Agency France Press, Newspaper, 7/3/11, http://www.france24.com/en/20110703-russia-gains-edge-space-race-usshuttle-bows-out)
To recoup its costs, Roskosmos hopes to build a stronger presence in the commercial space market, such as satellite launches, its
newly appointed chief Vladimir Popovkin said at the Saint Petersburg Economic Forum last month. "The goal is to take up a suitable
position in the commercial market: about 10 to 12 percent" of a market worth $300 billion per year, Popovkin said. "This is one of the
few things in our country that is competitive on the international level." While Russia holds 40 percent of the world's space launches
and constructs 20 percent of its space craft, currently "its share in the space business is unfairly small, not more than three percent,"
Popovkin said. Russia also faces new rivals, notably China, which in 2003 became the third country in the world after the Soviet
Union and the United States to send a man into space in its own ship. In ambitious plans, China hopes to put a robot on the Moon in
2013 and to build its own space station due to enter service in 2015. Davydov acknowledged that China had become a rival, albeit still
far behind, but said Russia did not feel threatened. "There is a place for everyone in space," he said. "In a certain sense, (China) is our
competitor... but that is absolutely normal and we have not been afraid of the market for a long time now." Ironically, the new
commercial realities of the Russian space programme, with reduced budgets and the need to cooperate on large-scale projects, make
some Soviet space veterans yearn for the competitive edge of the Cold War. "It's strange that during the Cold War, when we
cosmonauts and constructors dreamt of cooperation, there were a lot of new launches, but then cooperation came and now we are
mostly repeating ourselves," lamented retired cosmonaut Georgy Grechko, 80. The US space shuttle programme's goal of making
launches less expensive was not ultimately reached, he said, and its end sees a return to single-use "sausage-like" rockets little
different to those used 50 years ago. "Mankind has lost its stimulus to go into space using more complicated machines," he
complained.
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
48
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
DDI 2011
Shuttle Links
Russia’s shuttle monopoly is the driver of investments in: a new launch site, Soyuz modernization, and
their broader space program
Wolfgang Jung ’11 (Austrian parliament representative, Member of European Parliament, 7/14/11,
http://www.monstersandcritics.com/news/europe/news/article_1651067.php/Russia-s-Soyuz-capsule-gains-space-monopoly)
Moscow - As the space shuttle Atlantis spends its last days in orbit, the space flight community is preparing for a shift in the balance
of power. The end of the US space shuttle programme later this month after 30 years will hand Russia's Soyuz spacecraft an
unprecedented monopoly in carrying people to the International Space Station (ISS). The small, sturdy Soyuz capsules have barely
changed since they were first deployed in 1966, making them the Volkswagen Beetle of spacecraft. New Russian manned spacecraft
are not expected to be in operation for many years. Meanwhile, US efforts to develop a commercial space industry to fly astronauts
into orbit could take at least a few years, and government plans for a long-distance vessel are even farther off. For now, Russia hopes
to make the most of this unprecedented exclusivity to raise the millions of dollars it needs to build a new spaceport to launch its
rockets from its own far east. Moscow is currently spending more than 140 million dollars per year for use of the old Soviet
cosmodrome on the central Asian steppe in Baikonur, Kazakhstan. The Soyuz will be key, not only for the shuttle-less US space
programme, but for the Europeans, as the international partners shift their ISS focus from construction to scientific experiments. 'We
Europeans will also need Russian Soyuz spacecraft in the future,' said Johann-Dietrich Woerner, head of the German Aerospace
Centre (DLR) in Cologne. Moscow will be able to demand high, but hardly astronomical, prices for trips to the ISS. The cost for the
US space agency NASA works out to more than 55 million dollars per seat through 2014, and 62.7 million dollars after that.
'Contracts establish that Europe can claim in exchange for services like the construction of a laboratory on the ISS, other services, for
example flights to the space station,' Woerner said. Still, he has some concerns. 'If the Soyuz suffers a serious breakdown in the
coming years, we would have a problem with the ISS,' he said. The Soyuz spacecraft is regarded as cost-efficient and rugged, though
technologically backward. For this reason, Russia is modernizing its space vehicles: last year, the Russian space authority Roscosmos
changed its analogue control system to a digital equivalent. The switch eliminated some 70 kilogrammes of technical equipment from
the craft, freeing that weight for the addition of an extra passenger - a paying customer. 'In order to earn money, Russia will again
carry into space wealthy tourists,' says former German astronaut Sigmund Jaehn. 'Capitalism rules in space, too.' But Russia is not just
a 'taxi driver' for US astronauts and adventurous tycoons. It is also a carrier for telecommunications companies, which will bring in
further revenues.
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
49
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
DDI 2011
Soyuz modernization is key to maintain Russian economic competitiveness
Borenstein and Bulay ’11 (AP science writer Seth Borenstein in Washington and Andrey Bulay in Moscow, 7/19/11,
http://www.mail.com/business/economy/570530-russia-relishes-chances-created-shuttle.html)
AIKONUR, Kazakhstan — The mothballing of the space shuttle will be mourned by many astronauts, but Russia is relishing the
prospect of serving as the only carrier to the International Space Station. That honour will earn Russia hundreds of millions of dollars
in fees for ferrying U.S. and other astronauts to the orbiting laboratory in its Soviet-vintage Soyuz spacecraft. Some experts have
noted, however, that Russia has done little to design a replacement to the Soyuz, which is more than 40 years old, and risks falling
behind the U.S. soon when NASA launches a new generation spacecraft. Some, like veteran U.S. astronaut John Glenn, are wary of
the United States relying too much on the Soyuz and point to some technical problems with the craft in the past few years. "What if
something goes wrong with the Soyuz?" Glenn asked in a phone interview with The Associated Press. "If we have a hiccup on the
Soyuz right now, we don't have a manned program." Unlike NASA's distinctive fin-tailed shuttle, which is reusable albeit
exorbitantly expensive to run, the Soyuz can be used only once. It is a relatively streamlined affair consisting of a tiny capsule sitting
atop powerful booster rockets. The first manned Soyuz mission in April 1967 ended in tragedy when its pilot, Col. Vladimir
Komarov, died on re-entry when a braking parachute failed. Three more cosmonauts died in 1971 when their Soyuz capsule lost
pressure on re-entry due to a faulty ventilation valve. The Russian space program has seen no fatalities since then, and the Soyuz has
come to form the backbone of international efforts to maintain a permanent human presence in space. The final flight of the Apollo
spacecraft, which took man on the first voyage to the moon in 1969, saw the completion of a groundbreaking scientific and diplomatic
mission in 1975 to dock in space with a Soyuz. Six years later, the shuttle made its first manned flight. Now, even the shuttle is
almost gone, while the hardy Russian craft is still around. A space shuttle left the International Space Station for the last time
Tuesday, heading home in what marks the historic closure of a program that has become synonymous to many with space travel. The
Atlantis was targeting a pre-dawn landing Thursday at Cape Canaveral, Florida. Sergei Krikalyov, chief of the Russian cosmonaut
training center, praised the shuttle program as a "grandiose achievement." "It has been a big, complex and interesting program that
has achieved a lot," said Krikalyov, who holds the world record for total time spent in space with 803 days on six space missions. He
said that the shuttle's ability to carry bulky cargo was key for building the International Space Station, but now smaller ships are able
to ferry supplies and components. Krikalyov noted that Russia long ago took over the delivery of rotating crews to the station, after the
2003 Columbia disaster. "Since 2003, crews have been going up and returning on the Soyuz. Shuttles fly there and back, but they
haven't left behind crew," he told The Associated Press after a Soyuz launch last month from the Russian-leased Baikonur facility
deep inside the former Soviet republic of Kazakhstan. Sensing a commercial opportunity, Russia has regularly raised its prices for
berths in what is described derisively by some as a "space cab." The Soyuz's imminent monopoly status has given Russia even more
bargaining leverage. The $56 million price that the Russian Space Agency charges NASA to send up astronauts is set to go up to $63
million per passenger from 2014. A recent contract extension totals $753 million and covers trips for a dozen NASA astronauts from
2014 through 2016. If NASA is annoyed, then it is trying not to show it. "When you look at inflation, when you look at what they are
providing with the service and the capability, I look at it as a good investment. It's necessary," said Patrick Buzzard, NASA's
representative to Russia. James Oberg, a NASA veteran and currently a space consultant who has closely followed the Russian space
program, played down concerns about excessive dependence on the Soyuz, saying the Russians "are equally dependent on us for
power and communications at the space station." The Soyuz makes for a cramped and uncomfortable two-day ride from Earth to the
space station, yet it inspires affection among international astronauts for its reliability and deceptive simplicity of design. Some crew
members have said that taking off in a Soyuz is actually less physically demanding then blasting off in a shuttle, but admit that
landings are often rough. Two consecutive landings in 2007 and 2008 were steep "ballistic" descents, subjecting the crew to high Gloads and sending one capsule far off target. The Soyuz has remained largely unchanged in appearance over its long history, but it has
been constantly subjected to modifications. Last year saw the maiden voyage of the all-digital Soyuz, a lighter model that is able to
carry more cargo. Russian Space Agency officials say minor glitches experienced on that flight in October have now been resolved.
Despite the updates, critics complain that little has been done to develop a successor to the Soyuz, leaving Russia at the risk of
scrambling to keep up once a replacement for the shuttle is built and as new space powers such as China and India emerge. Krikalyov
acknowledged that government funding for design work on a Soyuz successor ship has been insufficient. "The Soyuz has been
upgraded, but we need a qualitative leap," he told AP Television News this week at Star City cosmonaut training center outside
Moscow. "It's a matter of priorities. If we consider that important, then funding priorities need to change. If we think we can accept
some average results, then we will eventually get them."
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
50
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
New launch site is key to future investments
AFP 9/21/07 (Agence France Press, Newspaper,
Space Travel, a space
travel.com/reports/Russia_aims_for_new_far_east_space_launch_pad_by_2020_999.html)
DDI 2011
news
website,
http://www.space-
The head of the Russian space agency Roskosmos said on Friday he hoped a new spacecraft launch site would be built in the Russian
far east by 2020 to supplement the Baikonur cosmodrome in Kazakhstan. In comments carried by Interfax news agency, Roskosmos'
head, Anatoly Perminov, also said India had applied to become a full member of the International Space Station (ISS) programme.
Perminov said that Russia would need a new launch site partly so it can launch a new type of manned spacecraft, which is still to be
developed. "I'm absolutely sure that a new cosmodrome should exist in the far east and be developed for launches of various space
vehicles for civilian use and also launches for manned space exploration," Perminov said.
US creation of a new shuttle ends all these economic benefits
Vladimir Isachenkove 4/11/11 (Writer for USA Today, USA TODAY, http://www.usatoday.com/tech/science/space/2011-04-11russia-gagarin.htm)
MOSCOW — Russia risks losing its edge in space by relying exclusively on Soviet-era achievements and doing little to design new
spacecraft, a Russian cosmonaut warned Monday as the nation marked the 50th anniversary of the first human spaceflight by Yuri
Gagarin. Svetlana Savitskaya, who flew two space missions in 1982 and 1984 and became the first woman to make a spacewalk,
harshly criticized the Kremlin for paying little attention to achievements in space after the 1991 collapse of the Soviet Union. “There’s
nothing new to be proud of in the last 20 years,” said Savitskaya, a member of Russian parliament from the Communist Party. While
Russian’s aging spacecraft will serve as the only link to the International Space Station after the U.S. space shuttle Atlantis closes out
the U.S. program this summer, the Americans are working on a next-generation space ship and Russia has done virtually nothing to
design a replacement to the 43-year old Soyuz spacecraft, Savitskaya said. STORY: Recalling a 50-year-old feat “If we won’t be
catching up on what we have missed in the last 20 years … we will be left with nothing,” Savitskaya told a news conference.
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
51
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
DDI 2011
AT: Won’t get revenue from satellites
Soyuz takes private satellites
Stephen Clark 7/16/11 (Writer for the newspaper Space Flight Now, a space newspaper, http://www.space.com/12314-soyuzrocket-launch-globalstar-satellites.html)
Six fresh spacecraft for Globalstar's mobile communications satellite fleet were deployed Wednesday (July 13) by a Russian Soyuz
rocket, propping up the company's degraded two-way voice service for more than 400,000 subscribers around the world. The
successful launch continued Globalstar's campaign to replace aging satellites launched more than a decade ago. The satellites, each
weighing 1,543 pounds at launch, will enter Globalstar's constellation circling a few hundred miles above Earth. Thales Alenia Space
assembled the satellites in Rome and built their communications equipment in Toulouse, France. U.S.-based Globalstar Inc. provides
mobile satellite telephone and data transmission services to customers in more than 120 countries. 1The Soyuz 2-1a rocket launched
at 0227 GMT Wednesday (10:27 p.m. EDT Tuesday) from the Baikonur Cosmodrome in Kazakhstan, where it was 8:27 a.m. local
time. After soaring into a cloudless blue sky, the Soyuz rocket's three core stages accelerated the six satellites to nearly orbital
velocity, then a Fregat upper stage took over for two firings to inject the payloads at the correct altitude. The mission featured an
upgraded version of the Soyuz booster including a digital control system, which allows the rocket to fly a larger 13.4-foot-diameter
nose conse for commercial flights.
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
52
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
DDI 2011
Nuclear Rockets Link
Nuclear Rockets would end cooperation which is key to Russia’s long-term space investments
PASZTOR ’10 (Writer for WSJ, ANDY PASZTOR, 5/19/10, Wall Street Journal,
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704912004575252842393481092.html?mod=WSJ_hpp_MIDDLTopStories)
Mr. Ivanov, who has oversight of Russia's aerospace efforts, said after the speech he was "pleased with the tenor of the discussions"
with the NASA chief. A NASA spokesman said Tuesday that "building upon several decades of successful cooperation," agency
officials and their Russian counterparts "are continuing discussions on potential future cooperative activities in space." Preliminary
discussions have focused on ways to team up to develop more-powerful rockets capable of reaching Mars and other destinations,
according to people familiar with the matter. But even with both sides eager for cooperation, major difficulties remain. Mr. Ivanov, for
example, was quoted in the Russian media as saying his country wants to aggressively push ahead to develop nuclear-powered engines
for rockets. But such a project would run into huge political and technical opposition in the U.S., which instead is looking to develop
less-costly conventional boosters for longer space flights.WASHINGTON -- Russian leaders are trying to use the current thaw in
relations with the U.S. to enhance cooperation in space, pushing for joint exploration efforts extending past the life of the international
space station. Russian Deputy Prime Minister Sergei Ivanov spoke over the weekend with Charles Bolden, head of the National
Aeronautics and Space Administration, and gave the Kremlin's strongest indication to date that it wants to team with the U.S. to
explore more deeply into the solar system. In a speech and brief interview Monday, Mr. Ivanov said the time is right for the two
countries to share financial and engineering resources on possible ventures that would be launched past 2020 and travel beyond lowearth orbit. The two countries already collaborate extensively on the space station, an international consortium that includes Russia,
the U.S. and several other countries. The station, which operates in low-earth orbit, is slated to continue for at least another decade.
The Obama administration has also opened the door for enhanced space cooperation, and Kremlin officials appear persuaded the time
is right to begin talks about new ventures. Mr. Ivanov said in the speech that "I firmly believe that all our cooperation in space" so far
"should bring more and more fruits." Although he didn't mention details, Mr. Ivanov said that "it's time to look beyond" low-earth
orbit.
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
53
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
DDI 2011
***H3 SPECIFIC ECON NB***
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
54
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
DDI 2011
1NC Shell [He3]
US getting He3 first undermines Russia’s energy export economy and kills US/Russian relations
Blomfield ‘7 (Staff writer in Moscow for the Telegraph, Adrian Blomfield, 5/1/07, Telegraph,
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/1550246/Russia-sees-moon-plot-in-Nasa-plans.html)
Mankind's second race for the moon took on a distinctly Cold War feel yesterday when the Russian space agency accused its old rival
Nasa of rejecting a proposal for joint lunar exploration. The claim comes amid suspicion in Moscow that the United States is seeking
to deny Russia access to an isotope in abundance under the moon's surface that many believe could replace fossil fuels and even end
the threat of global warming. A new era of international co-operation in space supposedly dawned after the United States, Russia and
other powers declared their intention to send humans to the moon for the first time since 1972. But while Nasa has lobbied for support
from Britain and the European Space Agency, Russia claims its offers have been rebuffed. RELATED ARTICLES Nasa plans another
giant step for mankind 06 Dec 2006 Helium-3 factfile 01 May 2007 Yesterday Anatoly Perminov, the head of Russia's Federal Space
Agency Roscosmos, said: "We are ready to co-operate but for some reason the United States has announced that it will carry out the
programme itself. Strange as it is, the United States is short of experts to implement the programme." Nasa announced in December
that it was planning to build an international base camp on one of the Moon's poles, permanently staffing it by 2024. Russia's space
rocket manufacturer Energia revealed an even more ambitious programme last August, saying it would build a permanent Moon base
by 2015. While the Americans have either been coy or dismissive on the subject, Russia openly says the main purpose of its lunar
programme is the industrial extraction of helium-3. Dismissed by critics as a 21st-century equivalent of the medieval alchemist's
fruitless quest to turn lead into gold, some scientists say helium-3 could be the answer to the world's energy woes. A non-radioactive
isotope of helium, helium-3 is a proven and potent fuel for nuclear fusion - so potent that just six metric tons would supply Britain
with enough energy for a year. As helium-3 is non-polluting and is so effective in such tiny quantities, many countries are taking it
very seriously. Germany, India and China, which will launch a lunar probe to research extraction techniques in September, are all
studying ways to mine the isotope. "Whoever conquers the moon first will be the first to benefit," said Ouyang Ziyuan, the chief
scientist of China's lunar programme. Energia says it will start "industrial scale delivery" of helium-3, transported by cargo space ships
via the International Space Station, no later than 2020. Gazprom, the state-owned energy giant directly controlled by the Kremlin, is
said to be strongly supportive of the project. The United States has appeared much more cautious, not least because scientists are yet
to discover the secrets of large scale nuclear fusion. Commercial fusion reactors look unlikely to come on line before the second half
of this century. But many officials in Moscow's space programme believe Washington's lunar agenda is driven by a desire to
monopolise helium-3 mining. They allege that President Bush has moved helium-3 experts into key positions on Nasa's advisory
council. The plot, says Erik Galimov, an academic with the Russian Academy of Sciences, would "enable the US to establish its
control of the energy market 20 years from now and put the rest of the world on its knees as hydrocarbons run out."
Energy exports key to Russian economy
Solanko ’11 (a Senior Economist with the Bank of Finland, Laura Solanko, International Association for Energy Economics, “Why
Energy Efficiency is Vitally Important for Russia”)
The severity of the global financial crisis in Russia underlined the dependency of the Russian economy on the smooth functioning of
global markets for raw materials and on the global financial markets. Despite the desire to stress sovereignty and stability in Russian
economic parlance, the federal budget is largely based on export tax revenues. On the other hand, the domestic financial system does
not meet the investment needs of large Russian corporations. Therefore, the world’s largest producer of oil and natural gas is
inherently open and dependent on the global economy. The future challenge is how to manage this dependency and to secure energy
exports given only slowly increasing domestic production volumes. A key ingredient in any successful strategy has to include
increasing the efficiency of domestic energy use in Russia.
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
55
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
DDI 2011
1NC Shell [He3]
Russian econ collapse triggers internal collapse that goes global and nuclear
David 99 (Steven, Proffesor of Political Science at Johns Hopkins University, “Internal War: Causes and Cures”, July,
https://muse.jhu.edu/journals/world_politics/related/v049/49.4er_brown.html)
If internal war does strike Russia, economic deterioration will be a prime cause . From 1989 to the present, the GDP has fallen by 50
percent. In a society where, ten years ago, unemployment scarcely existed, it reached 9.5 percent in 1997 with many economists declaring the true
figure to be much higher. Twenty-two percent of Russians live below the official poverty line (earning less than $ 70 a month). Modern Russia can
neither collect taxes (it gathers only half the revenue it is due) nor significantly cut spending. Reformers tout privatization as the country's cure-all, but in
a land without well-defined property rights or contract law and where subsidies remain a way of life, the prospects for transition to an American-style
capitalist economy look remote at best. As the massive devaluation of the ruble and the current political crisis show, Russia's condition is even worse
than most analysts feared. If conditions get worse, even the stoic Russian people will soon run out of patience. A future conflict would quickly draw in
Russia's military. In the Soviet days civilian rule kept the powerful armed forces in check. But with the Communist Party out of office, what little civilian
control remains relies on an exceedingly fragile foundation -- personal friendships between government leaders and military commanders. Meanwhile,
the morale of Russian soldiers has fallen to a dangerous low. Drastic cuts in spending mean inadequate pay, housing, and medical care. A new
emphasis on domestic missions has created an ideological split between the old and new guard in the military leadership, increasing the risk that
disgruntled generals may enter the political fray and feeding the resentment of soldiers who dislike being used as a national police force. Newly
enhanced ties between military units and local authorities pose another danger. Soldiers grow ever more dependent on local governments for housing,
food, and wages. Draftees serve closer to home, and new laws have increased local control over the armed forces. Were a conflict to emerge between a
regional power and Moscow, it is not at all clear which side the military would support. Divining the military's allegiance is crucial, however, since the
structure of the Russian Federation makes it virtually certain that regional conflicts will continue to erupt. Russia's 89 republics, krais, and oblasts grow
ever more independent in a system that does little to keep them together. As the central government finds itself unable to force its will beyond Moscow (if
even that far), power devolves to the periphery. With the economy collapsing, republics feel less and less incentive to pay taxes to
Moscow when they receive so little in return. Three-quarters of them already have their own constitutions, nearly all of which make some
claim to sovereignty. Strong ethnic bonds promoted by shortsighted Soviet policies may motivate non-Russians to secede from the Federation.
Chechnya's successful revolt against Russian control inspired similar movements for autonomy and independence throughout the country. If these
rebellions spread and Moscow responds with force, civil war is likely. Should Russia succumb to internal war, the consequences for the
United States and Europe will be severe. A major power like Russia -- even though in decline -- does not suffer civil war
quietly or alone. An embattled Russian Federation might provoke opportunistic attacks from enemies such as China.
Massive flows of refugees would pour into central and western Europe. Armed struggles in Russia could easily spill into its
neighbors. Damage from the fighting, particularly attacks on nuclear plants, would poison the environment of much of
Europe and Asia. Within Russia, the consequences would be even worse. Just as the sheer brutality of the last Russian civil war laid the basis for
the privations of Soviet communism, a second civil war might produce another horrific regime. Most alarming is the real possibility that the
violent disintegration of Russia could lead to loss of control over its nuclear arsenal. Nonuclear state has ever fallen victim
to civil war, but even without a clear precedent the grim consequences can be foreseen. Russia retains some 20,000
nuclear weapons and the raw material for tens of thousands more, in scores of sites scattered throughout the country. So
far, the government has managed to prevent the loss of any weapons or much material. If war erupts, however, Moscow's
already weak grip on nuclear sites will slacken, making weapons and supplies available to a wide range of anti-American
groups and states. Such dispersal of nuclear weapons represents the greatest physical threat America now faces. And it
is hard to think of anything that would increase this threat more than the chaos that would follow a Russian civil war.
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
56
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
DDI 2011
He3 k2 Russian econ
Russian Helium access is key to their economy
Shiryaevskaya ’11 (Staff writer for Bloomberg, Anna Shiryaevskaya, 3/8/11, Bloomberg,
http://www.airshipman.ca/uncategorized/03/russia-set-to-boost-helium-production-as-u-s-sells-stockpile/)
Today, Russia lags behind the U.S., Algeria and Qatar, where Exxon Mobil Corp. and industrial gas producers Linde Group and
Praxair Inc. have invested in capacity. Qatar will open the world’s biggest production plant in 2013. Russia may be able to catch up
because its gas reserves hold a higher proportion of helium and the fields are close to Asian markets, where Garvey said demand is
growing faster. ‘Global Demand’ Global demand may rise to about 300 million cubic meters (10.6 billion cubic feet) a year in 2030
from 175 million cubic meters now, Geliymash’s Udut said. Magnetic resonance imaging scanners used in hospitals are the biggest
consumer of the gas. “The U.S. is a significant piece of the global supply and we don’t really know what the government plans to do
with the Bureau of Land Management reserve after 2015 at this point in time,” Garvey said in a phone interview, referring to the
strategic stockpile. “What will replace the BLM supply if it goes away?” The U.S. Bureau of Land Management raised the price for
open market crude helium by almost 16 percent to $75 a thousand cubic feet for this year, after a review of how the policy affected
U.S. interests and the global market. President Dmitry Medvedev’s drive to transform Russia, dependent on energy exports, into a
knowledge-based economy may expand the domestic market for helium. Medvedev has won commitments from international partners
such as Cisco Systems and Nokia Oyj in his push to build the Skolkovo technology hub outside Moscow. ‘Trump Card’ “The
component may encourage the development of high technology,” Udut said. “It may become a political trump card to improve
relations with countries that aren’t rich in the element.” Gazprom will have to make a plan for helium when its starts natural-gas
output at the Chayanda deposit in Russia’s Far East in 2016. The development plan, which Gazprom is preparing in the first half of the
year, will lay out sites for a processing facility and how to extract, transport, store and sell helium. OAO Rosneft, Russia’s biggest oil
company, and other gas producers in the country, are also drafting plans on how to utilize helium as they tap eastern Siberian deposits,
Udut said.
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
57
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
DDI 2011
Russia He3 Now
Russia preparing to mine He3 now
Pravada ‘6 (Newspaper, 3/17/06, Russia to launch industrial mining of helium-3 on the Moon in 2020,
http://news.softpedia.com/news/Russia-Wants-to-Mine-Helium-3-on-the-Moon-17062.shtml)
According to an official statement released in January, the mining of helium-3 on the Moon will be the main purpose of the Russian
space exploration program. “We are planning to set up a permanent station on the Moon by 2015. The industrial mining of helium-3, a
rare isotope, is expected to begin on the Moon in 2020,” said Nikolai Sevastianov, head of the Rocket and Space Corporation Energia.
The lunar mission will involve the use of a Russian space shuttle Kliper and an interplanetary space tug Parom. The National
Aeronautics and Space Administration, NASA, also regards the presence of helium-3 in the lunar crystals as a good reason for kicking
off a lunar exploration program. Meanwhile, NASA is not planning to send any missions to the Moon until 2018. The United States
remains the only country whose astronauts walked the Moon. NASA sent six manned missions to the Moon between 1969 and 1972.
China and Japan also intend to build lunar stations. However, the above countries are likely to commence their lunar exploration
programs in the 2020s. Share Print version Font Size Send to friend Nezavisimaya Gazeta already wrote about the grandiose plans
of Russia’s space agency. We also expressed a couple of doubts whether the lunar exploration program was worthwhile and why
today’s Russia should be concerned with a helium production project, which might have a negative impact on implementation of other
space projects e.g. a mission to Phobos that has long been in the works. (for further reference see NG issue of September 28, 2005 ).
Speaking of helium-3, it is quite noteworthy to point out that one ton of the rare isotope costs $4 billion. The Moon is reported to have
millions of tons of helium-3, which is an essential ingredient for starting up a thermonuclear reaction that is yet to become a reality in
terms of electric power generation.
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
58
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
DDI 2011
***PRESTIGE COMPETITON NB***
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
59
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
DDI 2011
1NC Shell
This year is key to ensure Russia remains competitiveness in the space race
Farivar 7/19/11- Cyrus Farivar, Staff Writer for the AFP (7/19/11, “Russia launches advanced space telescope,” http://www.dwworld.de/dw/article/0,,15250208,00.html) SP
A Soviet legacy The space telescope was initially conceived of decades ago, during the halcyon days of the Soviet space
program, but was perpetually postponed, and was mothballed after the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991. "For 20 years,
it was always five years away," said Ken Kellermann of the National Radio Astronomy Observatory in the United States, in
an interview with the American magazine New Scientist. Rocket launchRussian space authorities said the telescope reached
its target orbit several hours after launchThe telescope, which is also known as RadioAstron, has a 10-meter (32.8-foot)
diameter, a small size when compared to many current terrestrial radio telescopes. However, given that its data will be
combined with signals collected from Earth stations, and the fact that it will have a large 340,000-kilometer (around
211,000-mile) orbit, the telescope is expected to have a resolution 100,000 times better than the American-built Hubble
Space Telescope, which was launched in 1990. Russian space authorities are planning on coordinating the new telescope's
observations with radio telescopes in the United States, Puerto Rico and Germany. This year is significant for the Russian
space program, as it surges ahead during the hiatus of manned American space missions. Earlier this year, Moscow feted
the 50th anniversary of the first manned spaceflight, by Soviet cosmonaut Yuri Gagarin. All international space missions
ferrying humans into space will have to be launched via the Russian Soyuz capsule from the Baikonur Cosmodrome in
Kazakhstan. "The main point is that Russia is returning to scientific programs in space after a long break," said Vladimir
Popovkin, the head of Roscosmos, according to ITAR-TASS.
Russia can solve for space development and exploration, including Mars missions, space debris collection,
GPS, space shuttle systems, and exploration of the Martian moon Phobos
Weird 7/19/11- Fred Weir, Correspondent and Staff Writer for the Christian Science Monitor (7/19/11, “Russian Telescope
Launch Pulls National Space Program Out of Black Hole,” http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Europe/2011/0719/Russian-telescopelaunch-pulls-national-space-program-out-of-black-hole/%28page%29/2) SP
Russia has held advanced positions traditionally, and this is a logical next step for our space program. It's just great."
Scientists from more than 20 countries will participate in RadioAstron's five-year mission, according to the Russian Space
Agency. Skip to next paragraph Russia's space program fell on hard times after the collapse of the USSR 20 years ago, and
even a few years ago appeared to be little more than a "space taxi" to ferry astronauts to and from the International Space
Station. But with increased funding and improving morale, Russian space scientists now have a variety of ambitious
projects on the agenda. They include a manned mission to Mars by 2030, a space plane to rival the US X-37B, and a
nuclear-powered spacepod that could gobble up space junk like an orbiting Pac-Man. Despite some very serious recent
setbacks, Russia's answer to the US Global Positioning System (GPS) navigational network, Glonass, is slated to be fully
operational by the end of this year. In November, Russia will finally launch its long-awaited Phobos-Grunt probe, which
aims to bring home a soil sample from the Martian moon Phobos. And with the end of the US space shuttle program, even
Russia's traditional space niche of powerful rocket launchers and venerable Soyuz space vehicles is set to become the only
game in town.
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
60
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
DDI 2011
1NC
Russia perceives any unilateral space policy by the United States as offensive- the lowered thresholds of
military intervention increase the likelihood of miscalculation
Blank 9- Stephen Blank, Former Professor of Soviet Studies at the Center for Aerospace, B.A. in History from the University of
Pennsylvania and M.A. and Ph.D. in History from the University of Chicago, Researcher for the Strategic Studies Institute (March
2009, “Russia and Arms Control: Are There Opportunities for the Obama Administration?”
http://www.strategicstudiesinstitute.army.mil/pdffiles/pub908.pdf) SP
Furthermore, Russia wants to keep things this way because any unilateral, substantive, or qualitative progress in American
capabilities beyond the confines of what Russia defines as strategic stability will allow America to harvest the full benefits
of the Revolution in Military Affairs (RMA) and give it either a means of attacking Russia’s nuclear arsenal, nullifying it
by missile defenses, bypassing it by high-precision conventional attacks, or combining the three through space
weaponization. Such capabilities need not be used in conflict to be successful, all they need to do is be deployed as
instruments of coercive diplomacy as in a Kosovo-type crisis, one of the many nightmare scenarios of the Russian
leadership. And the nightmare is, as countless Russian statements state openly, that the parity with the United States will
then no longer exist.57 Weapons in space, the use of conventional missiles on nuclear launchers, and missile defenses, are
among such breakout possibilities for America. As Pavel Podvig has observed, One of the consequences of this is that if the
promises held by the revolution in military affairs materialize, even incompletely, they may significantly lower the
threshold of military intervention. And this is exactly the outcome that Russia is worried about, for it believes that the new
capabilities might open the way to a more aggressive interventionist policy of the United States and NATO, that may well
challenge Russia’s interests in various regions and especially in areas close to the Russian borders.58
U.S.-Russian miscalculation is the only scenario for extinction
Bostrom 2- Nick Bostrom, Professor of Philosophy at Oxford University, Journal of Evolution and Technology (March 2002,
“Existential Risks: Analyzing Human Extinction Scenarios and Related Hazards”) SP
A much greater existential risk emerged with the build-up of nuclear arsenals in the US and the USSR. An all-out nuclear
war was a possibility with both a substantial probability and with consequences that might have been persistent enough to
qualify as global and terminal. There was a real worry among those best acquainted with the information available at the
time that a nuclear Armageddon would occur and that it might annihilate our species or permanently destroy human
civilization.[4] Russia and the US retain large nuclear arsenals that could be used in a future confrontation, either
accidentally or deliberately. There is also a risk that other states may one day build up large nuclear arsenals. Note however
that a smaller nuclear exchange, between India and Pakistan for instance, is not an existential risk, since it would not
destroy or thwart humankind’s potential permanently. Such a war might however be a local terminal risk for the cities most
likely to be targeted. Unfortunately, we shall see that nuclear Armageddon and comet or asteroid strikes are mere preludes
to the existential risks that we will encounter in the 21 st century.
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
61
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
DDI 2011
Uniqueness- General Space Race
America has lost prestige regarding space, symbolized by Atlantis’s final touchdown
Krauss 7/21/11- Lawrence Krauss, Foundation Professor and Director of the Origins Project at Arizona State University (7/21/11,
“The Space Shuttle Programme Has Been a Multi-Billion Dollar Failure,” http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2011/jul/21/spaceshuttle-programme) SP
With Atlantis's touchdown on Thursday bringing down the final curtain on the space shuttle programme, there is much
hand-wringing over the end of an era. For the first time in 30 years Nasa has no immediate programme for human space
travel in place. While many are mourning this loss, the last flight of the space shuttle instead provides an opportunity to
rethink space exploration and a time to cut our losses from a failed programme that has been a colossal waste of resources,
time and creative energy. The space shuttle failed to live up to its primary goal of providing relatively cheap and efficient
human space travel. There is a good reason for this. As the engineers made it clear to the physicist Richard Feynman when
he was investigating the cause of the Challenger explosion, human space travel is risky. While Nasa managers had
estimated the odds of a shuttle disaster to be microscopic, engineers estimated the loss rate at about 1 in 100 flights, which
is close to the actual disaster rate. Not only has the shuttle programme been costly, it has been boring. A generation that
grew up with Stanley Kubrick's 2001: A Space Odyssey had hoped that by the dawn of the new millennium we would be
regularly vacationing in space, and routinely sending astronauts to boldly go where no man or woman had gone before.
Instead we were treated to regular images of the shuttle visiting a $100bn boondoggle orbiting in space closer to Earth than
Washington DC is to New York. No one except a billionaire or two has ever vacationed in space, and their "hotel" was a
cramped, stuffy and at times smelly white elephant. Either aboard the shuttle or the International Space Station, astronauts
have explicitly demonstrated that what we learn from sending people into space is not much more than how people can
survive in space. The lion's share of costs associated with sending humans into space is devoted, as it should be, to making
sure they survive the voyage. No other significant science has been learned by a generation's worth of round trips in nearearth orbit. Yes, there have been highlights, such as the Hubble Space Telescope launch and repair missions, which were
not only exciting but useful.
Russia is winning the space race with its Soyuz space capsules
Gregory 7/14/11- Bill Gregory, Piloted the Space Shuttle on mission STS-67, Vice President at Qwaltec, Inc., Staff Writer at the
Houston Chronicle (7/14/11, “US Leadership in Space is No Longer a Sure Thing,”
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/editorial/outlook/7654150.html) SP
This generation of Americans has never known a time we did not lead the world in space. But it has not always been this
way. President Kennedy's announcement of the Apollo program is famous for its bold call to "take longer strides," but it
also included a blunt warning to America that failure was possible because the Soviets were so far ahead. America learned
the lessons of that era well. Once we took the lead in space, we never gave it back. But that could be changing — and
changing fast. When the shuttle program ends with Atlantis' landing, the United States - for the first time in years - will
have no capability to launch astronauts into space. To get our people to and from the orbiting space station, we will have to
rely on Russian launches - at more than $60 million a seat. And it's not just a question of the shuttle. Earlier this year,
America delayed a critical weather satellite launch until 2016, potentially reducing forecast accuracy by 50 percent and
creating the first such coverage gap since the 1960s.
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
62
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
DDI 2011
Uniqueness- General Space Race
America’s shuttle program was a huge symbol of US dominance- now Russia is winning the space race
Axe 7/21/11- David Axe, Military Correspondent for the World Politics Review (7/21/11, “Goodbye, Space Shuttle: Now the Space
Race Can Really Begin,” http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2011/07/goodbye-space-shuttle/all/1) SP
NASA’s 135th space shuttle flight ended this morning when Atlantis touched down at Kennedy Space Center in Cape
Canaveral, Florida, marking the close of a 30-year run for NASA’s ambitious, controversial and troubled orbital vehicle.
America’s space programs will continue, but without their flagship space plane — or any manned vehicle, for now. Over
the next few years at least, U.S. astronauts will hitch rides to the International Space Station in Russian capsules.
Meanwhile, purely robotic systems will take over other space duties. Listening to some critics, you’d think America had
just retreated from space, forever. “We’re basically decimating the NASA human spaceflight program,” former astronaut
Jerry Ross told Reuters. “The only thing we’re going to have left in town is the station and it’s a totally different animal
from the shuttle.” Today many observers consider the Shuttle the ultimate expression of American technological prowess,
and see its demise as a signal of America’s decline. In one sense, they’re right: With its huge size, distinctive shape and
fiery launches, the shuttle has always been an impressive symbol. But as a practical space vehicle, it has long been an
overpriced, dangerous compromise.
Russians are winning the space race
Nathan 7/18/11- Stuart Nathan, Features Editor of The Engineer Magazine (7/18/11, “Commercializing the Moon: The Lunar X
Prize and Beyond,” http://www.theengineer.co.uk/in-depth/the-big-story/commercialising-the-moon-the-lunar-x-prize-andbeyond/1009410.article#ixzz1SZA27k9N) SP
’The X Prize rules allow you to meet the requirement of traversing the surface with a lander that hops,’ he added. ’This
solution we’re working on could hop, or it could deposit a rover.’ Beyond this, mindful of the competitive nature of the X
Prize, Potter was reluctant to divulge technical details. Odyssey Moon has an agreement with Canadian space engineering
specialist MDA Space, which built the ’Canadarm’ robotic arms for the space shuttle and the International Space Station, as
its prime contractor for building its lander, and is in talks to use Baikonur Cosmodrome in Khazakhstan, the primary base
for Russia’s Soyuz rockets, as its launch site. ’As of the end of the shuttle programme, the Russians have won the space
race,’ Potter said. ’We should be respectful of that they’ve got a launch system they’ve been using, reliably, efficiently and
successfully, for the past 50 years. Leadership, efficiency and sustainability are absolutely the key features for a launch
programme.’ The Lunar X contestants aren’t the only groups with their eyes on the Moon commercialisation prize.
Speaking to The Engineer last year, the chairman of Surrey Satellites, Sir Martin Sweeting, outlined his plans to place small
communications satellites in orbit around the Moon to provide communications links for technology on the surface,
whether it be data relays for unmanned landers or voice, video and internet for astronauts (see The Engineer, 1 November
2010). ’We could be the Vodafone around the Moon, basically,’ he said. ’The areas we’ve focused on in the last few years,
robotics and satellites, mean we have the knowledge and expertise to do that.’
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
63
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
DDI 2011
Uniqueness- General Space Race
Russians are winning the space race due to the declining American shuttle system
MSN 7/7/11- (“Russians Win the Space Race,” http://powerwall.msnbc.msn.com/politics/russians-win-the-space-race1694348.story) SP
When the space shuttle Atlantis blasts off from the Kennedy Space Center today on its final mission, it won't just be the 30year history of the world's only reusable space shuttle that is coming to an end—it will be a whole chapter of the space race.
After the shuttle returns to earth in a twelve days' time, the United States will no longer have a manned space flight
program for the first time in five decades. More, for the foreseeable future it will be Russia, the U.S.'s old space rival,
which will be the only country in the world regularly putting men and women into space. “It's in the DNA of our great
country to reach for the stars and explore,” Mark Kelly, commander of the penultimate shuttle mission Endeavour, told
reporters just before he blasted off in May, watched by his wife, Gabrielle Giffords, the congresswoman who was seriously
wounded in a gun attack on Jan. 8 in Tucson, Ariz. “We must not stop.” But the reality is that the shuttle program has been
a costly experiment that ultimately failed in its original intention—to create an easily reusable space vehicle that could
travel into orbit weekly. Faced with mounting costs and criticism, NASA has pulled the plug after 135 missions and $192
billion. The demise of the shuttle leaves Russia's clunkier and more old-fashioned, but ultimately cheaper and more reliable,
space technologies in the driver's seat. Back in its heyday in the 1960s, the space race was “really a proxy war of nuclear
dominance,” says Piers Bizony, coauthor of Starman: The Truth Behind the Legend of Yuri Gagarin. “Russia and America
flaunted their potentially destructive technologies in peaceful camouflage, with every successful mission leading to boasts
of supremacy.” Soviet cosmonaut Yuri Gagarin's manned space flight in 1961 was widely touted as evidence of the
superiority of Soviet science, for instance.
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
64
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
DDI 2011
Uniqueness- U.S. Losing
Cuts in NASA’s funding have decreased U.S. prestige worldwide
Lubman 7/19/11- Jacob Lubman, Staff Writer at the Daily Athenaeum (7/19/11, “Cuts in NASA Funding a Step in the Wrong
Direction for US,” http://www.thedaonline.com/opinion/cuts-in-nasa-funding-a-step-in-the-wrong-direction-for-us-1.2530184) SP
Since the dawn of man, we have looked up to the skies and wondered at the beauty and mystery of space. Who hasn't been
moved by the majesty of the cosmos at some point in their life? The quest for exploration in the "final frontier" has taken a
hit in recent months, due to the cut in federal funding for NASA. This compromise between democrats and republicans
marks what could be the beginning of a slow decline in the prominence and promise of the space program in this country.
The retirement of the space shuttle fleet is a major symbolic step towards a shift in this country from the nature of
exploration to, admittedly, more practical national concerns. However, the need to explore and discover is of paramount
importance. The spirit of humanity is the spirit of hope and wonderment. This, accompanied by a need to explain our place
in the universe, is one of the unique qualities of humanity. While the cut in NASA's funding is slight, it is one of the most
eye-catching and historic divisions of the program that is bearing the bulk of the damage. The loss of the space shuttle fleet
is a body-blow to the image of the program. While the shuttles were quite outdated, they still represented a way to conduct
manned missions to space. Furthermore, the trend in funding for the program and the willingness to cut its budget when
compromises are necessary is a worrying development. We often forget when thinking of NASA about the contributions
made to fields other than space exploration by the program. Most of the time and resources of the program are funneled into
other areas that advance both civilian and defense technology and science. We often consider cuts to programs like these to
be "acceptable losses", without realizing how many applications are found for their research. The ramifications of
continued cuts to NASA and similar science-driven programs cannot be quantified but would surely manifest themselves in
various negative ways in the future. Investment in our country's scientific advancement and technological prowess keeps us
on the cutting edge. We need to keep exploring and increasing our knowledge of the universe. The Hubble telescope is
entering the twilight of its tour of duty, and will soon be deactivated with no plans for repair or a replacement. We will be
losing our window into other galaxies as well as the past. The two images of NASA are soon to be retired – the Hubble and
the space shuttle fleet. Without these two, where will the inspiration for future children come from? This generation does
not have a "space race" to interest the youth of the country, or a national spectacle like the moon landing. There's no fear of
the unknown like the overestimation of the Russian's space capabilities in the 1950s with the hubbub over Sputnik. But this
fear and mania has been replaced by … nothing. NASA and the space program have been pushed to the back of our minds
and continued loss of funds threatens to endanger the future of exploration in this country. When we stop looking to the
stars, we lose a piece of ourselves. We no longer have interest in the romance of the vast expanse of space, the curious
nature of the void that we are merely a blip in. Unless you're an astronomer, you probably hear about NASA only when a
shuttle is launched. Now, there won't even be that. We need to encourage our politicians that this is something worth caring
about, an issue that has fallen out of favor but needs to be discussed. The U.S. has always been a leader in space
exploration, and it would be a shame for that to change. Let's hope NASA is around for many years to come, because there
is only one place for humanity to go after we complete our conquest of this earth.
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
65
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
DDI 2011
Uniqueness- Communication Satellites
The United States depends on Russia to send communication satellites into orbit
Xinhua News 7/13/11- (7/13/11, Russia's Soyuz sends six U.S. satellites to orbit,”
http://news.xinhuanet.com/english2010/sci/2011-07/13/c_13982451.htm) SP
MOSCOW, July 13 (Xinhua) -- A Soyuz space carrier with six U.S. Globalstar-2 F1 communication satellites blasted off
Wednesday from the Baikonur space center in Kazakhstan, a spokesman from Russian Space Agency Roscosmos said. The
launch, initially scheduled for Monday, was postponed twice till Wednesday due to technical reasons during the
preparation. The Globalstar satellite is a low Earth orbit satellite constellation, which provides high quality satellite phone
service and low-speed data communications for over 100 countries worldwide.
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
66
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
DDI 2011
Uniqueness- Manned Missions
Russia leads the ISS program and has the ability to initiate manned missions
Thomason 11- Asela Thomason, Professor at California State University Long Beach, Information System Department (5/11/11,
“Robotics- Military/Defense/Space Exploration,” http://csulb.edu/~tphung/Robotics-Group-Paper.pdf) SP
Since it is an international program, operating the space station is even more complicated and expensive than other space
exploration. Each partner has their primary responsibility to manage and run the hardware it provides. One of the examples
is the Russian segment. Its formation of the International Space Station will be complete by 2016. Russia is currently
playing the leading role in implementing the ISS program. They provide advanced technologies, strong staffs, a unique
production base and ground infrastructure. “NASA is retiring its space shuttle fleet later this year, with just two more
flights scheduled, leaving only Russia's Soyuz space capsules to ferry astronauts to the International Space Station”
(Walters, 2011). Most importantly, only Russia, along with China and the United States, has the technologies and
capabilities for manned missions nowadays. With the completion of the space station assembly, a new era is beginning to
utilize the research. “The United States hopes to jump-start commercial space providers to bring astronauts aloft within the
next several years, freeing the space agency to develop longer range vehicles for trips to Mars and other distant
destinations” (Walters, 2011). The potential benefits of space-based research and development were then demonstrated
during the space station assembly phase. The advancement of scientific knowledge in space, new technologies
developments, and derivation of Earth applications from new understandings are included.
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
67
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
DDI 2011
Uniqueness- Shuttle Program
Russia is winning the space race and accounts for over 40% of global space launches
Keating 7/7/11- Joshua E. Keating, Associate Editor at Foreign Policy (7/7/11, “Houston, We Have a Problem,”
http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2011/07/07/houston_we_have_a_problem?page=full) SP
RUSSIA Budget: $3.8 billion Next steps: The country that began the space race with the launch of Sputnik in 1957 appears
-- at least in terms of manned flight -- to have prevailed. Russia nearly abandoned space altogether following the collapse of
the Soviet Union. It finally shut down its flagship orbital station, Mir, in 2001. But Russia has reinvested in its space
program under the Putin/Medvedev tandem and now accounts for 40 percent of all global space launches. With the end of
the U.S. shuttle program, Russia will have a monopoly on transporting astronauts to the International Space Station, using
its ageing Soyuz rockets, until at least 2016. It's a lucrative business -- the United States is paying Russia about $43.4
million per astronaut -- but Prime Minister Vladimir Putin has said that Russia should not content itself to be a mere
"ferryman" to the stars.
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
68
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
DDI 2011
Uniqueness- Brink
U.S. focus on regaining space shuttle capabilities has turned our focus away from missions to the moon or
other methods of exploring space; now is the key time for Russia to gain dominance
Harwood 7/21/11- William Harwood, Staff Writer for CBS News (7/21/11, “Mission Complete: Atlantis Returns, Ends Shuttle
Era,” http://news.cnet.com/8301-19514_3-20081365-239/mission-complete-atlantis-returns-ends-shuttle-era/) SP
"We've been exploring since early in our country's history. What Fergie and his crew did this time was kind of close out this
era of our exploration. I want everybody who was involved in this to feel incredibly proud...We owe an incredible debt of
gratitude to the tens of thousands, if not hundreds of thousands of folk around the country who made all this possible."
Ferguson spoke briefly for the crew, saying "There was a lot of attention paid to this mission, because it does bring to a
final close 30 years of space shuttle history." "Although we got to take the ride, we sure hope that everybody who's ever
worked or touched or looked at or envied or admired a space shuttle was able to take just a little part of the journey with
us," he said. "We're going to put Atlantis in a museum now, along with the other orbiters, for generations that will come
after us, to admire and appreciate. Landing closed out a voyage spanning 5.3 million miles and 200 complete orbits since
blast-off July 8 from nearby launch pad 39A, a mission duration of 12 days 18 hours 27 minutes and 56 seconds. Over the
course of 33 missions, Atlantis logged an estimated 125,935,769 miles, 4,848 orbits, and 307 days in space. A virtually
trouble-free mission During a virtually trouble-free mission, Ferguson and his crewmates delivered five-and-a-half tons of
supplies and equipment to the International Space Station and helped with a spacewalk to retrieve a failed coolant pump.
The supplies are critical to the space station program. Two companies, Space Exploration Technologies--SpaceX--and
Orbital Sciences, are building unmanned cargo ships to take over from the shuttle after the fleet is retired with initial test
flights expected later this year or early next. Atlantis' mission was added to the shuttle manifest to deliver enough supplies
to keep the station provisioned through 2012 as a hedge against development problems that might delay the commercial
cargo ships. Now, with Atlantis and its crew safely home, the emotional process of remembrance and celebration finally
began in earnest as engineers and technicians marveled anew at the technological grandeur of the winged spaceplane and
struggled to cope with the reality that it will never fly again. "After the wheels have stopped and the displays go blank and
the orbiter is unmpowered for the final time...there will be a rush of emotion when we all finally realize that's it, that it's all
over, the crowning jewel of our space program, the way we got back and forth from low-Earth orbit for 30 years ... we'll
realize that's all over," Ferguson said before launch. "That's going to take a little while to deal with." The landing also
brought into sharp focus the post-Columbia decision by the Bush administration to complete the space station and retire the
shuttle to make way for new rockets and the establishment of moon bases by the early 2020s, a program deemed
unaffordable by the Obama administration. Instead of returning to the moon, NASA was told to oversee development of
new commercial spacecraft to ferry astronauts to and from the space station. The administration believes that will allow
NASA to focus on eventual missions to explore deep space targets ranging from the moon to Mars. In the meantime, until
new commercial spacecraft can be tested and certified for flight--a process expected to take three to five years at best-NASA astronauts will be forced to hitch rides to and from the International Space Station aboard Russian Soyuz rockets.
American space leadership in question That reliance, along with tight budgets, the lack of a firm timetable and targets for
deep space missions lead many to question whether the United States can maintain its leadership on the high frontier. "The
challenge of space is not in building the space systems, it is in building the space team," legendary Apollo 11 Flight
Director Gene Kranz said in an email before Atlantis' launch. "With the termination of shuttle operations the NASA and
contractor work force that took a decade to build and mature is being destroyed. "Now, with inept national and space
leadership, we stand with both feet firmly planted on the ground. Our nation has surrendered the high ground that the
NASA space team captured July 20, 1969." Not surprisingly, Bolden disagrees, saying the Obama administration's push to
develop commercial spacecraft represents a more realistic, sustainable course for the nation's space program in an era of
competing priorities. "This final shuttle flight marks the end of an era, but today, we recommit ourselves to continuing
human spaceflight and taking the necessary--and difficult--steps to ensure America's leadership in human spaceflight for
years to come," Bolden said in a statement.
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
69
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
DDI 2011
Link- Constellation
Keeping Russia in charge of the Constellation program increases prestige
Farrar 08- Lara Farrar- Staff Writer for CNN (8/14/08, “Experts: Reliance on Russia Makes NASA Weak,”
http://edition.cnn.com/2008/TECH/space/08/14/nasa.russia.soyuz/) SP
Observers say the situation is all the more worrying as after NASA announced a delay in the launch of its next-generation
Orion spacecraft. NASA's dependency upon the Russian Soyuz space capsules and rockets to carry astronauts to the station
is the result of a five-year gap between the scheduled retirement of the shuttle in 2010 and the debut of its replacement in
2015. The agency had hoped it could narrow this gap by accelerating the initial launch of the craft to 2013 but announced
Monday that because of inadequate funding and technical issues, the Constellation space program would not be ready for
testing until September 2014. Although the new date is still within the March 2015 absolute deadline, many experts say
NASA's reliance upon Russia to take astronauts into space has placed the agency in an unnecessary position. "It is a
vulnerability," said John Logsdon, director of the space policy institute at George Washington University. "Any time you
are relying on a single system to do a critical task, you are vulnerable if that system has problems. "It is our fault for not
having a replacement for the shuttle much earlier than Orion will be available. It puts Russia in a very powerful position,"
Logsdon said. Although China has launched an astronaut into space in 2003, it still doesn't have the launching capabilities
of the U.S. and Russia. But its space infrastructure is fast developing. According to Howard McCurdy, a space expert at
American University in Washington, Russia will be the only country capable of providing human access to space not only
for the Americans but for the rest of the world in the near future. "It is like a monopoly position where you are at the mercy
of that supplier," McCurdy said. "You don't want to be dependent on a single provider, no matter who it is."
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
70
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
DDI 2011
Link- ISS/ Soyuz
Russia’s space supremacy over the ISS will create hundreds of millions of dollars, but the plan trades off
Leonard 11- Peter Leonard, Staff Writer for the Associated Press (7/19/11, “Russia Relishes Chances Created By End of Shuttle,”
http://www.boston.com/news/world/europe/articles/2011/07/19/russia_relishes_chances_created_by_end_of_shuttle/) SP
The mothballing of the space shuttle will be mourned by many astronauts, but Russia is relishing the prospect of serving as
the only carrier to the International Space Station. That honor will earn Russia hundreds of millions of dollars in fees for
ferrying U.S. and other astronauts to the orbiting laboratory in its Soviet-vintage Soyuz spacecraft. Some experts have
noted, however, that Russia has done little to design a replacement to the Soyuz, which is more than 40 years old, and risks
falling behind the U.S. soon when NASA launches a new generation spacecraft. Some, like veteran U.S. astronaut John
Glenn, are wary of the United States relying too much on the Soyuz and point to some technical problems with the craft in
the past few years.
The Soyuz space capsules allow Russia to maintain its dominance over NASA
Leonard 11- Peter Leonard, Staff Writer for the Associated Press (7/19/11, “Russia Relishes Chances Created By End of Shuttle,”
http://www.boston.com/news/world/europe/articles/2011/07/19/russia_relishes_chances_created_by_end_of_shuttle/) SP
The final flight of the Apollo spacecraft, which took man on the first voyage to the moon in 1969, saw the completion of a
groundbreaking scientific and diplomatic mission in 1975 to dock in space with a Soyuz. Six years later, the shuttle made
its first manned flight. Now, even the shuttle is almost gone, while the hardy Russian craft is still around. A space shuttle
left the International Space Station for the last time Tuesday, heading home in what marks the historic closure of a program
that has become synonymous to many with space travel. The Atlantis was targeting a pre-dawn landing Thursday at Cape
Canaveral, Florida. Sergei Krikalyov, chief of the Russian cosmonaut training center, praised the shuttle program as a
"grandiose achievement." "It has been a big, complex and interesting program that has achieved a lot," said Krikalyov, who
holds the world record for total time spent in space with 803 days on six space missions. He said that the shuttle's ability to
carry bulky cargo was key for building the International Space Station, but now smaller ships are able to ferry supplies and
components. Krikalyov noted that Russia long ago took over the delivery of rotating crews to the station, after the 2003
Columbia disaster.
Russia generates $56 million per astronaut sent to the ISS by the United States
Leonard 11- Peter Leonard, Staff Writer for the Associated Press (7/19/11, “Russia Relishes Chances Created By End of Shuttle,”
http://www.boston.com/news/world/europe/articles/2011/07/19/russia_relishes_chances_created_by_end_of_shuttle/) SP
"Since 2003, crews have been going up and returning on the Soyuz. Shuttles fly there and back, but they haven't left behind
crew," he told The Associated Press after a Soyuz launch last month from the Russian-leased Baikonur facility deep inside
the former Soviet republic of Kazakhstan. Sensing a commercial opportunity, Russia has regularly raised its prices for
berths in what is described derisively by some as a "space cab." The Soyuz's imminent monopoly status has given Russia
even more bargaining leverage. The $56 million price that the Russian Space Agency charges NASA to send up astronauts
is set to go up to $63 million per passenger from 2014. A recent contract extension totals $753 million and covers trips for a
dozen NASA astronauts from 2014 through 2016. If NASA is annoyed, then it is trying not to show it. "When you look at
inflation, when you look at what they are providing with the service and the capability, I look at it as a good investment. It's
necessary," said Patrick Buzzard, NASA's representative to Russia. James Oberg, a NASA veteran and currently a space
consultant who has closely followed the Russian space program, played down concerns about excessive dependence on the
Soyuz, saying the Russians "are equally dependent on us for power and communications at the space station."
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
71
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
DDI 2011
Link- ISS/Soyuz
Future American space exploration efforts trade off with Russian economic revenue from Soyuz
Spinks 7/18/11- Peter Spinks, Staff Writer for the Age, The Education Resource Center (7/18/11, “Goodbye Shuttle, Hello Soyuz,”
http://education.theage.com.au/cmspage.php?intid=142&intversion=99) SP
NASA has been busily — though reluctantly — booking seats for astronauts on the three-seat Soyuz, which will cost
$US63 million a ticket by 2016, about 175 per cent more than in 2005. Still, the race for space is far from over. Spurred by
keen competition from the Russians, Europeans, Chinese, Indians and even Brazilians, the US space agency has ambitious
blueprints for future exploration. Among these are well-advanced plans to develop rocket systems capable of ferrying
astronauts into deep space, while relying to an extent on private companies to service space stations in low earth orbit —
and perhaps one day taking tourists there. Space Exploration Technologies, in California, for instance, has been contracted
to build the experimental Dragon craft, to be launched by Falcon rocket. Sad as it may seem, most of NASA’s plans are
unlikely to involve rocketing astronauts into the firmament. ‘‘The lesson of the past decades is that putting humans into
space is a very costly undertaking,’’ says renowned physicist Paul Davies, the director of the Beyond Centre at Arizona
State University, in the US.
Russians are monopolizing space transport to the ISS
Hotz 7/7/11- Robert Lee Hotz, Staff Writer for the Wall Street Journal (7/7/11, “Shuttle’s Last Flight Leaves Russia With Space
Monopoly,” http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702303982504576428080248680032.html) SP
Circling the Earth every 90 minutes, the International Space Station is the most expensive project ever assembled in space.
Within days, it will hang by a single, costly thread. And Russia, the U.S.'s historic rival in space, is holding it. The last U.S.
space shuttle is scheduled to blast off Friday. After that, the U.S. and other nations will rely on vintage Russian spacecraft
to ferry their astronauts to the $100 billion station. Russia will hold a monopoly over manned spaceflight, and tensions
already are rising. The Russians are in the process of nearly tripling the cost of using their Soyuz crew capsules for
transport to the orbiting base, and other countries have little choice but to pay up. "We are not in a very comfortable
situation, and when I say uncomfortable, that is a euphemism," said Jean-Jacques Dordain, director general of the European
Space Agency, one of five international agencies that jointly manage the orbiting laboratory. "We made a collective
mistake." The Soyuz represents the triumph of a low-cost approach to human space exploration. The Russian capsules are
launched on massive expendable rockets, carrying astronauts in a kind of guided cannonball to and from orbit. By contrast,
the U.S. built its space program around the most complex flying machine ever, the reusable space shuttle.
Soyuz missiles are economical and efficient- Russia will hold space shuttle dominance for at least 5 more
years
Hotz 7/7/11- Robert Lee Hotz, Staff Writer for the Wall Street Journal (7/7/11, “Shuttle’s Last Flight Leaves Russia With Space
Monopoly,” http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702303982504576428080248680032.html) SP
While the U.S. has spent $209.1 billion on the space shuttle since its inception, the entire Russian space program currently
costs just $2 billion a year. "Today, reusable ships are a very expensive pleasure, and economically they're not really
justified," Vladimir Popovkin, the newly appointed head of Roskosmos, the Russian space agency, told a Russian
newspaper last month. Officials at Roskosmos didn't provide comment for this article. The Russian monopoly on manned
spaceflight won't last forever. If all goes as NASA plans, the Russian monopoly will end in 2016 when the agency hopes to
take its pick of several new commercial crew transports currently on the drawing board. NASA is now seeking a
commercial space-taxi service—designed, built and operated by the private sector—to cut costs while speeding the pace of
development. "We are working aggressively to get our own crew capability," said William Gerstenmaier, NASA's associate
administrator for space operations, the chairman of the international board that oversees the space station.
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
72
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
DDI 2011
Link- ISS/Soyuz
Russia has won control of the International Space Station
Antonova 7/2/11- Maria Antonova, Staff Writer for the AFP (7/2/11, “Russia Gains Edge in Space Race as US Shuttle Bows
Out,” http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5hGADnIqGh-ZfhBj6DhJYbEgvQpg?docId=CNG.929e9c254b0a78971b4b58b7a3749ac8.241) SP
MOSCOW — As the United States winds down its shuttle programme in a symbolic twist in a long-running space rivalry,
Russia will gain complete control of access to the International Space Station. The Russian space agency plays down any
triumphalism, but US astronauts will remain dependent on Russia for access to the ISS at least until 2015 and will have to
pay for seats in its Soyuz space capsules. "We cannot say that we have won the space race, but simply that we have reached
the end of a certain stage," the deputy head of the Russian space agency, Vitaly Davydov, said in an interview. On July 8,
four US astronauts will board the Atlantis shuttle for its last flight, wrapping up a three-decade-long programme in which
the United States took turns to ferry supplies and crews to the ISS with Russia's Proton and Soyuz rockets. Henceforth,
Washington will have to pay $51 million per seat in Russia's space capsules until a new crew vehicle can be built by private
companies, which US space agency NASA has estimated could be between 2015 and 2020. Davydov of the space agency
Roskosmos rejected any talk of rivalry, however, emphasizing that the ISS was primarily a story of successful international
cooperation. "I cannot think today of another international space project that is so effective in its scale, its significance and
its results as the ISS," he said.
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
73
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
DDI 2011
Link- Space Telescopes/Observatories
Russia has the capability for using and deploying space telescopes- empirically proven by Spectrum-R
Farivar 7/19/11- Cyrus Farivar, Staff Writer for the AFP (7/19/11, “Russia launches advanced space telescope,” http://www.dwworld.de/dw/article/0,,15250208,00.html) SP
Spectrum-R is the most advanced space radio telescope ever built, experts say. Russia is eager to show its resurgence in
space exploration, particularly as NASA shuts down its shuttle program. A new Russian space telescope has "reached the
targeted orbit," as of Monday morning, Russia time, the Russian space agency Roscosmos said in an English-language
statement on its website. The new observatory, known as Spectrum-R, is designed to study sources of radio waves from
stellar phenomena, including pulsars, quasars, black holes, and neutron stars. The agency added that the space telescope
will have a minimum lifetime of "no less than five years." telescope being loadedRussian scientists say that the telescope is
designed to last for at least five years"We will be able to observe very remote parts of the universe and to receive a highly
accurate data about various galactic phenomena," said Viktor Khartov, the chief of the Lavochkin Research and Production
Association, in an interview with the Russian news agency ITAR-TASS. "The scientists in the whole world are looking
forward for this," he added.
Russia has better technology for space telescopes than the US- empirically proven by Spektr-R
Weir 7/19/11- Fred Weir, Correspondent and Staff Writer for the Christian Science Monitor (7/19/11, “Russian Telescope Launch
Pulls National Space Program Out of Black Hole,” http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Europe/2011/0719/Russian-telescope-launchpulls-national-space-program-out-of-black-hole/%28page%29/2) SP
Russian scientists are jubilant at news that the Spektr-R, a powerful space telescope conceived in the depths of the cold war,
was finally lofted into orbit aboard a Zenit rocket Monday from the Baikonur Cosmodrome in Kazakhstan. Skip to next
paragraph The Zenit - 3F carrier rocket with the Spektr-R radio astronomy observatory aboard takes off from the Bakinour
Cosmodrome. Once it is fully operational, the new radio telescope will sync up with ground-based observatories to form the
biggest telescope ever built. It will be known as RadioAstron, with a "dish" spanning 30 times the Earth's diameter. Experts
say it will be able to deliver images from the remote corners of the universe at 10,000 times the resolution of the US Hubble
Space Telescope. "We've been waiting for this day for such a long time," says Nikolai Podorvanyuk, a researcher at the
official Institute of Astronomy in Moscow. "It's been planned since the 1980s, but has repeatedly fallen through for a
variety of reasons. But now it's here, and we're bracing for all the new information it's going to deliver, especially about
black holes," he says. The space-based component is actually a small radio telescope, with a 10-meter dish that's far smaller
than Earth-based radio telescopes, planted in an elliptical orbit about 340,000 kilometers (more than 212,000 miles) from
Earth. But when its signals are combined with those of ground-based radio telescopes through a process known as
interferometry, it effectively becomes one single telescope with a "dish" as large as the distance between its components,
which will be able to deliver unprecedented pictures of mysterious cosmic phenomenon, such as quasars, pulsars, and
supernovae. According to its co-designer, Russian astrophysicist Nikolai Kardashev, one of RadioAstron's key objectives
will be to seek out the truth about black holes, which are intense concentrations of matter thought to exist in the centers of
most galaxies with gravity so powerful they even swallow up light signals. "Building this telescope was Academician
Kardashev's idea," to enable us to actually see what's happening around the edges of black holes, says Vladimir Fortov,
director of the official Institute of Thermophysics in Moscow. "This is going to open up a whole new era in astronomy and
astrophysics," he says. "It's a huge contribution to world science.
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
74
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
DDI 2011
Link- Space Telescopes/Observatories
Russia has better technology than the US with regards to space telescopes- the US is only minimally
contributing to the Spektr-R observatory
Selding 7/19/11- Peter B. Selding, Staff Writer for Fox News (7/19/11, “Russia Launches Long-Delayed Deep Space Radio
Telescope,” http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2011/07/19/russia-launches-long-delayed-deep-space-radio-telescope/#ixzz1SenzEDc3)
SP
Russia's long-delayed Spektr-R radio telescope successfully launched July 18 aboard a Zenit rocket from the Baikonur
Cosmodrome in Kazakhstan, the country's Federal Space Agency said. There was no immediate word on the operational
status of the new radio observatory beyond the fact that it was placed into the planned elliptical orbit that peaks nearly
207,000 miles (330,000 kilometers) above the Earth, and reaches a low of about 621 miles (1,000 km). Featuring a giant
30-foot (10-meter) wide antenna, the Spektr-R observatory is part of the international Radioastron astronomy project.
Featuring a giant 30-foot (10-meter) wide antenna, the Spektr-R observatory is part of the international Radioastron
astronomy project. "The aim of the mission is to use the space telescope to conduct interferometer observations in
conjunction with the global ground radio telescope network in order to obtain images, coordinates, motions and evolution
of angular structure of different radio emitting objects in the universe," Federal Space Agency officials said in a statement.
"Scientists also expect to obtain more information about pulsars and interstellar plasma, black holes and neutron stars in the
Milky Way." [Strangest Things in Space] Scientists from more than 20 nations, including the United States, are
participating in the project, either through contributions of on-board hardware or access to the terrestrial antennas that,
working with Spektr-R, will permit interferometry measurements during the observatory's planned five years of operations.
Spektr-R was originally scheduled for launch in 2004 or 2005 before encountering multiple delays in its construction. It has
been in development for more than a decade. Most recently, the launch date was put into question following a dispute
between commercial and Russian government satellite missions, notably Spektr-R, on which Zenit customer would receive
the limited supply of Zenit rocket parts. Spektr-R was launched aboard a Russian-Ukrainian Zenit-3M rocket equipped with
a Fregat-SG upper stage. It was built by Lavochkin Association of Moscow. The Radioastron mission is being coordinated
by the Astro Space Center of Moscow, which is part of the Lebedev Physical Institute of the Russian Academy of Sciences.
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
75
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
DDI 2011
Link- Private Companies
Allowing private military contractors to deploy missions in space will trade-off with Russian Soyuz space
capsules efforts
Hanks 7/19/11- Douglas Hanks, Staff Writer for McClatchy Newspapers and Tribune News, “New Space Race: Orbital Will
Outsource,” http://www.nashuatelegraph.com/business/926427-192/new-space-race-orbital-will-outsource.html) SP
She was referring to the lean years at the Kennedy Space Center, as the United States ended its Moon missions on Apollo
rockets while gearing up for the shuttle trips to Earth’s orbit. “There is work to be done,’’ she said. “The space station is
there.’’ Space “tourism” gets much of the attention when it comes to private spaceflight. Richard Branson’s Virgin Galactic
has already collected $57 million in deposits for flights 60 miles into the sky, high enough to experience weightlessness and
see the Earth’s curvature, a spokeswoman said. The spacecraft is going through tests before it can make an inaugural flight;
tickets cost $200,000. But replacing the shuttle has prompted a more high-stakes space race as companies compete to snag
lucrative delivery contracts – cargo and crew. Until private firms are cleared for human space travel, NASA plans to pay
Russia to bring astronauts to the space station. The cost should be about $65 million per seat. SpaceX is testing a vessel it
says can do the job for about $20 million per passenger. Even the space program’s biggest supporters concede private
companies can probably put payloads and astronauts into orbit faster and cheaper than NASA can. Space flight has gotten
routine enough that the margins are squeezable. SpaceX is run by Elon Musk, the founder of PayPal, the leading processor
of online transactions. Among its competitors for NASA contracts for human spaceflight: Blue Origin LLC, a company
based in Washington State and backed by Jeff Bezos, founder of Amazon.com Inc. NASA awarded Blue Origin about $25
million in seed money to help develop a spaceship for the post-shuttle era. Two other companies are in the running to take
over the shuttle’s delivery route to the ISS: Sierra Nevada Corp., of Sparks, Nev., and Boeing Co., long one of NASA’s
primary contractors. “The space shuttle had its job. It was like a big moving truck,’’ said Sierra Nevada Chairman Mark
Sirangelo, referring to the shuttle’s central role in assembling the ISS. “Now you’ve moved into your house. You just want
an SUV to get you around town.’’
Private enterprise trades off with Russia and China regarding future space travel
Boychuk 7/20/11- Associate Editor of the Manhattan Institute’s City Journal (7/20/11, “Is Space Race Over for America?”
http://www.koreatimes.co.kr/www/news/opinon/2011/07/137_91260.html) SP
In an era of multi-trillion-dollar budget deficits and a national debt of $14 trillion and climbing, pouring billions of tax
dollars into manned space travel may not be the wisest use of limited resources. Especially not when the private sector is
stepping up and investing hundreds of millions of perfectly good dollars to advance the space race. Billionaires such as
Microsoft's Paul Allen, Amazon's Jeff Bezos and, of course, Virgin's Richard Branson are clearly committed to making
commercial space travel a viable business. "Governments are not going to be running the future of space travel," Branson
told an audience at Microsoft's Worldwide Partner Conference on Wednesday. "Private enterprise is." He's right. Branson's
Virgin Galactic plans to begin regular launches into low Earth orbit next year. Other companies are looking even beyond
the moon. True, Russia and China remain heavily invested, too. And China's planned lunar mission is bold and exciting ―
and the precise opposite of our federal government's posture toward space exploration for much of the past 30 years. It isn't
difficult to imagine an American team exploring not just the moon but also Mars within the next decade. But why should it
be a crew from NASA? Robert Zubrin, president of Pioneer Astronautics in Colorado, noted in the Wall Street Journal
recently that a company called SpaceX is close to launching a new rocket that could conceivably take people to Mars as
early as 2016, at a fraction of the cost of a government-funded mission. Will there be risks? Oh, yes. But as Zubrin argues:
"For NASA managers to demand that the mission be delayed for decades while hundreds of billions are spent to marginally
reduce the risk to a handful of volunteers, when the same funds spent on other priorities could save the lives of tens of
thousands, is narcissistic in the extreme." Who dares wins.
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
76
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
DDI 2011
Link- Mars
Russia and China are currently working on launching an unmanned Mars probe in late 2011
Keating 7/7/11- Joshua E. Keating, Associate Editor at Foreign Policy (7/7/11, “Houston, We Have a Problem,”
http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2011/07/07/houston_we_have_a_problem?page=full) SP
With the end of the U.S. shuttle program, Russia will have a monopoly on transporting astronauts to the International Space
Station, using its ageing Soyuz rockets, until at least 2016. It's a lucrative business -- the United States is paying Russia
about $43.4 million per astronaut -- but Prime Minister Vladimir Putin has said that Russia should not content itself to be a
mere "ferryman" to the stars. Russia and China will jointly launch an unmanned Mars probe later this year. The Russian
space agency's more ambitious plans include a manned mission to the moon by 2025, potentially followed by an "inhabited
station."
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
77
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
DDI 2011
Internal Link- Perception
If Russia perceives the deployment of “space weapons” it will develop ground-based counterspace
potential and deploy missiles
Blank 9- Stephen Blank, Former Professor of Soviet Studies at the Center for Aerospace, B.A. in History from the University of
Pennsylvania and M.A. and Ph.D. in History from the University of Chicago, Researcher for the Strategic Studies Institute (March
2009, “Russia and Arms Control: Are There Opportunities for the Obama Administration?”
http://www.strategicstudiesinstitute.army.mil/pdffiles/pub908.pdf) SP
Third, Russia has announced its intention to retaliate if other nations deploy space weapons.230 Indeed, since its analysts
have already acknowledged the likely further militarization of space, a process to which it has contributed in the past, it
really has no choice.231 Indeed, it already is building a new Angara space rocket at the Plesetsk site in Arkhangelsk
Oblast.232 Alternatively, if Russia cannot develop its space-based forces sufficiently, some experts believe it can develop
its ground-based counterspace (ASATs?) potential until it can cause the enemy unacceptable damage. This would include
missiles with short active boost phase or maneuverable warheads.233 Unfortunately for Moscow, its efforts to maintain
even its reconnaissance and communications satellites in space, e.g., the Global Navigation system GLONASS, are
faltering or failing to keep up, and it is unlikely that Russia will be able to place weapons in space worthy of being targeted.
This evidently is true even if America does weaponize space because Russia’s experience with ASAT capabilities has been
disappointing. The benefit to Russia is that its forces’ limited dependence upon space assets does not make its military
overly vulnerable to attacks on those assets.
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
78
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
DDI 2011
Impacts- European Stability
Unilateral U.S. space efforts push Russia into modernizing its nuclear weapons, which destabilizes
Europe
Blank 9- Stephen Blank, Former Professor of Soviet Studies at the Center for Aerospace, B.A. in History from the University of
Pennsylvania and M.A. and Ph.D. in History from the University of Chicago, Researcher for the Strategic Studies Institute (March
2009, “Russia and Arms Control: Are There Opportunities for the Obama Administration?”
http://www.strategicstudiesinstitute.army.mil/pdffiles/pub908.pdf) SP
While such statements represent the fantasy world of the Russian military where threats are always rising despite the plain
evidence of Western demilitarization and omit to mention that Georgia neither attacked Russia nor in fact started the war
that was a Russian provocation, his remarks do amply underscore the importance of deterrence and the permanent sense of
being under threat that drives Russian policy. Hence the need for deterrence, primarily, though not exclusively, of the
United States at the price of accepting that Russia, too, is deterred from a nuclear strike on the United States. In return for
accepting that it, too, is similarly deterred, Russia, however, postulates as one of the fundamental corollaries of its policy
and strategy that Moscow must retain a capability to intimidate and destroy Europe with its nuclear and other missiles.
Hence the continuing aforementioned reliance upon TNW no matter the cost. In other words, believing a priori that Europe
is the site of a presumptive enemy action against it, Russia demands as a condition of its security that the rest of Europe be
insecure. Indeed, reports of Russia’s forthcoming defense doctrine openly state that the United States and NATO represent
the main threats to Russian security and that Washington will continue to seek military supremacy and disregard
international law for a generation. Furthermore, unlike the United States, Russia is engaged in a comprehensive
modernization and renewal of all of its nuclear weapons, clearly in the belief that it needs to deter America by military
means, and maybe even fight using such weapons. Likewise, Moscow has consistently said that the deployment of U.S.
missile defenses in Europe and Asia will disrupt existing balances of strategic forces and undermine global and regional
stability.22 There is also conflicting evidence as to whether or not Russia intends to tie completion of a treaty on strategic
missiles reduction with the removal of missile defenses from Central and Eastern Europe.23 In addition, Russia’s leaders
openly contend that one cannot discuss European security without taking into account the missile defense issue or the
Conventional Forces in Europe (CFE) Treaty.24 Certainly Russian officials see the weaponization of space, the integration
of space and terrestrial capabilities, missile defenses, the Reliable Replacement Weapons (RRW), and the U.S. global strike
strategy as a part of a systematic, comprehensive strategy to threaten Russia. So in response Moscow must threaten Europe.
Indeed, Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov recently repeated the now habitual but no less mendacious charge that missile
defenses in Europe, systems that allegedly used to be regulated by bilateral agreements to maintain parity, are now being
introduced close to Russia’s borders, thereby rupturing that parity in Europe and elsewhere.25 During his recent trip to
Poland, Lavrov went even further, saying that, For many decades, the basis for strategic stability and security in the world
was parity between Russia and the United States in the sphere of strategic offensive and defensive arms. However, in recent
years, the U.S. Administration chose a course towards upsetting that parity and gaining a unilateral advantage in the
strategic domain. Essentially it’s not just about global missile defense. We also note that the U.S. has been reluctant to stay
within the treaties on strategic offensive arms, and that it is pursuing the Prompt Global Strike concept, and developing
projects to deploy strike weapons in outer space. This, understandably, will not reinforce the security of Europe or of
Poland itself.26
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
79
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
DDI 2011
Impacts- European Stability
Russia would perceive any new U.S. space policies as weaponization threats and proceed to threaten
Europe
Blank 9- Stephen Blank, Former Professor of Soviet Studies at the Center for Aerospace, B.A. in History from the University of
Pennsylvania and M.A. and Ph.D. in History from the University of Chicago, Researcher for the Strategic Studies Institute (March
2009, “Russia and Arms Control: Are There Opportunities for the Obama Administration?”
http://www.strategicstudiesinstitute.army.mil/pdffiles/pub908.pdf) SP
Indeed Moscow sees its nuclear arsenal as a kind of all-purpose deterrent that has deterred the United States and NATO
from intervening in such conflicts as the Chechen wars. Nevertheless, its military and political leaders argue that threats to
Russia are multiplying. Certainly Russian officials see the weaponization of space, the integration of space and terrestrial
capabilities, missile defenses, the Reliable Replacement Weapons (RRW), and the U.S. global strike strategy as apart of a
systematic, comprehensive strategy to threaten Russia. So in response Moscow must threaten Europe. The perpetuation of
the Cold War’s mutual hostage relationship is, of course, exactly what the United States, at least under the George W. Bush
administration, has striven mightily to leave behind. Russian analysts and officials believe in deterrence and the
accompanying mutual hostage condition of both sides’ nuclear forces as the only way to stop what they see as America’s
constant efforts to find ways in which nuclear weapons can be used for warfighting or to be free to use military force across
the globe without being deterred by anyone. However, U.S. current weapon plans, the development of missile defenses,
reluctance to negotiate verification protocols for a START treaty, NATO enlargement, and weapons in space, all suggest to
Russia that there is “a growing gap between the military capabilities of the two countries. This gap challenges the condition
of strategic parity that Russia still believes to be the underlying principle of its relationship with the United States. This
enduring adversarial condition reflects a mutual failure on the part of both Washington and Moscow.
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
80
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
DDI 2011
Impacts- Space Weaponization
Further integration of U.S. space and terrestrial capabilities could lead to Russian deployment of missile
defense space-strike systems
Blank 9- Stephen Blank, Former Professor of Soviet Studies at the Center for Aerospace, B.A. in History from the University of
Pennsylvania and M.A. and Ph.D. in History from the University of Chicago, Researcher for the Strategic Studies Institute (March
2009, “Russia and Arms Control: Are There Opportunities for the Obama Administration?”
http://www.strategicstudiesinstitute.army.mil/pdffiles/pub908.pdf) SP
Indeed, for all the boasting about asymmetric ripostes to American innovations, Russian leaders know and admit that their
air and space defenses cannot defend against the threats they perceive from the United States, including not just missiles,
but also space-based systems.220 Commander in Chief of the Air Force General Alexander Zelin publicly stated that these
particular threats to Russia are of the greatest significance while its air and space defenses are in critical condition.
Therefore, by 2020 the entire country will be vulnerable to foreign air and space attack.221 So much for the numerous
boasts that Russia has the missiles that can nullify any missile defenses or that its defenses can detect and destroy any
ICBM warheads.222 Thus Baluyevsky, for example, warned that the planned U.S. deployment of missile defenses in
Europe threatens not only Russia’s deterrent, but also could lead to the deployment of missile defense space-strike systems
that pose a special danger to global stability.223 Certainly Russian officials see the weaponization of space, the integration
of space and terrestrial capabilities, missile defenses, and the U.S. global strike strategy as a part of a systematic,
comprehensive strategy to threaten Russia as Lavrov suggested above.224
Prefer the impacts of space militarization over nuclear war scenarios on earth- space warfare is the most
significant sphere of military operations
Blank 9- Stephen Blank, Former Professor of Soviet Studies at the Center for Aerospace, B.A. in History from the University of
Pennsylvania and M.A. and Ph.D. in History from the University of Chicago, Researcher for the Strategic Studies Institute (March
2009, “Russia and Arms Control: Are There Opportunities for the Obama Administration?”
http://www.strategicstudiesinstitute.army.mil/pdffiles/pub908.pdf) SP
The Bush administration’s professed interest in weaponizing space, and in doing so not solely in conjunction with missile
defenses, is profoundly troubling for Russia. Russian writers and officials fear that this program is another way in which the
United States can break free of strategic stability and threaten not only Russia’s nuclear weapons, but its C3I space systems
including satellites and the ground-based infrastructure that supports them. After all, President Bush signed an order in
October 2006 “tacitly asserting the U.S. right to space weapons and opposing the development of treaties or other measures
restricting them.”215 Thus Russian analysts acknowledge the rising possibility that in future conflicts space will not only
be militarized, i.e., used for military purposes, but also weaponized, particularly in a way that allows America to break free
of the shackles Russia wants to fashion through strategic stability.216 As Peter Rainov observes, Russian writings fully
grasp the looming threat of space war. Thus, Space warfare is emerging as the most significant sphere of military
operation[s] in any future major war due to its importance in reconnaissance, electronic, and information warfare. In the
period up to 2020-30 Russian authors see it as an extension of other airspace operations. The expected future introduction
of specific space offensive weaponry in addition to anti-satellite weapons, according to some experts, could transform all of
space into two major theaters of strategic operations: the near space theater and the lunar theater.217 Because terrestrial and
even submarine and space warfare are becoming increasingly integrated operationally, space capabilities to project power
to the earth, sea, and underwater will become a decisive factor of war as well, further challenging backward Russia.218
Consequently, we should not have been surprised that in September 2008 Russia announced that it would build a space
defense system.219
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
81
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
DDI 2011
Impacts- Space Weaponization
Space weaponization is reciprocated by Russia- leads to an arms race of space
Blank 9- Stephen Blank, Former Professor of Soviet Studies at the Center for Aerospace, B.A. in History from the University of
Pennsylvania and M.A. and Ph.D. in History from the University of Chicago, Researcher for the Strategic Studies Institute (March
2009, “Russia and Arms Control: Are There Opportunities for the Obama Administration?”
http://www.strategicstudiesinstitute.army.mil/pdffiles/pub908.pdf) SP
The perpetuation of the Cold War’s mutual hostage relationship is, of course, exactly what the United States, at least under
the George W. Bush administration, has striven mightily to leave behind. Indeed, the Russian views outlined below confirm
Ambassador Linton Brooks’ assertion that “arms control is for adversaries,” and typifies the Bush administration’s
approach to arms control.30 Russian analysts and officials believe in deterrence and the accompanying mutual hostage
condition of both sides’ nuclear forces as the only way to stop what they see as America’s constant efforts to find ways in
which nuclear weapons can be used for warfighting or to be free to use military force across the globe without being
deterred by anyone. Russia also seeks thereby to ensure that it possesses a substantive measure of control over any and all
escalation processes. Therefore any advance—low-yield nuclear weapons, weaponization of space, the RRW, missile
defenses, use of Trident conventional missiles on a nuclear launcher, etc.—that could give Washington ideas of having a
real chance to use such weapons or to have a real first-strike capability that can sufficiently degrade Russia’s nuclear
capabilities to the point of inhibiting a retaliatory strike as called for by deterrence theory must be stopped in its tracks.31
And this is true even though Moscow, as we shall see below, is working on almost all of these issues itself. In addition,
therefore, the primary mission or top military priority of the government is maintenance of its nuclear forces and is a
condition of fighting ability and readiness, i.e., deterrence.32
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
82
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
DDI 2011
Impacts- US-Russo-Sino War
Russia has been working with China against the United States in order to prepare for a retaliatory attack
Blank 9- Stephen Blank, Former Professor of Soviet Studies at the Center for Aerospace, B.A. in History from the University of
Pennsylvania and M.A. and Ph.D. in History from the University of Chicago, Researcher for the Strategic Studies Institute (March
2009, “Russia and Arms Control: Are There Opportunities for the Obama Administration?”
http://www.strategicstudiesinstitute.army.mil/pdffiles/pub908.pdf) SP
Russia has responded in four ways to this threat. First, already by 2000, it was helping China to modernize and extend the
range and precision of its ICBM and SLBM missiles and missile defense capability to threaten the continental United
States, diversify and expand its arsenal, and counter foreign missile attacks in the event of conflict over Taiwan or
elsewhere in Asia. This is only part of a much larger and still ongoing Chinese comprehensive modernization of military
technologies that aims to give China the means to fight for informational and strategic superiority by striking the enemy’s
most critical targets first, even preemptively This strategy and target set could easily mandate space war and/or nuclear
attacks.225 There is no reason to believe that this assistance has been discontinued despite China’s demonstration of an
anti-satellite (ASAT) capability in 2007. Second, along with China, Russia has tabled a draft treaty at the UN Disarmament
conference in Geneva, banning space weapons. It has no chance of going through, as Washington sees it for what it is, an
attempt to impose a ban on its weapons and missile defenses in Europe. Such gambits might have some traction, since
many states are alarmed at the prospect of an arms race in space, given China’s visible capabilities there. But it is not likely
to be anything more than a political and propaganda gesture.226 Moscow and Beijing have been fighting the so-called
“militarization of space” since at least 2002.227 But this draft treaty is particularly interesting. The current regime for space
dates back to the 1967 Outer Space Treaty that forbids the deployment of WMD, military facilities, weapon testing, or
maneuvers on the moon or other celestial bodies. But it does not ban conventional weapons. The Russo-Chinese draft,
however, bans the deployment and testing of space weapons but not research, development, or production. As a recent
assessment observes, even as China is reported to be aggressively developing anti-satellite weapons with the space and
counterspace assets they omitted to ban from their draft treaty. “This huge lacuna runs the risk of allowing, even
encouraging, the development of a potential counter-space ‘breakout’ capability—that is, a clandestine but untested
antisatellite (ASAT) system—while still remaining within the treaty’s limits.”228 Likewise, this draft is silent about
terrestrially based systems, e.g., direct ascent, radio-frequency, and directed energy weapons that are the next wave of
counter-space capabilities, especially for China, which is involved in both kinetic and nonkinetic counterspace
programs.229 There are other thorny issues related to verification of any such treaty. But it is clear from the foregoing that
this draft is a tendentious and one-sided effort to cripple U.S. programs.
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
83
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
DDI 2011
Economy Net Benefit
Space dominance can push the Russian economy forward
Gregory 7/14/11- Bill Gregory, Piloted the Space Shuttle on mission STS-67, Vice President at Qwaltec, Inc., Staff Writer at the
Houston Chronicle (7/14/11, “US Leadership in Space is No Longer a Sure Thing,”
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/editorial/outlook/7654150.html) SP
History shows that the country that leads in space is the country that generates economy-changing innovations like
computer microchips and satellite communications, as well as lifesaving medical advances like CAT scans and kidney
dialysis - more than 1,650 NASA spinoffs since 1976 alone. From satellite forecasting that can increase crop yields by 10
percent to the artificial intelligence that drives some online dating, to the "jaws of life" that save thousands of accident
victims each year, virtually every sector of American life has been touched by space-program technologies. Indeed, because
of all this follow-on activity, for every $1 spent on the space program, the American economy receives roughly $8 in total
benefit, according to noted Stanford professor Scott Hubbard. And all royalties and license payments from NASA patents
go directly into the U.S. treasury to pay down our national debt. Despite the national, military and economic benefits of our
efforts in space, these programs invariably end up in the crosshairs when budgets get tight - not because of economics but
because of politics. In short, because NASA has been responsible and hasn't sprinkled its projects and facilities across a
sufficient number of congressional districts, it often pays the political price on the budget guillotine. But our competitors
don't sleep in the meantime. China seeks the global prestige and technological edge that comes from space success, and
already has dozens of space launches under its belt, including a lunar probe. Next up, it plans to orbit a permanent space
station and send Chinese astronauts to the moon. India plans to send astronauts to both the moon and Mars. Brazil, Russia,
Japan - even our deadly adversary Iran - are challenging us for the jobs, innovation and military advantages of the high
ground of space. Fifty years ago, in spring of 1961, Alan Shepard became the first American in space, blasting off from
Cape Canaveral on a 15-minute suborbital flight. While America rightly celebrated that historic achievement, our joy was
bittersweet as weeks earlier Soviet cosmonaut Yuri Gagarin had orbited the entire planet on a flight that lasted nearly seven
times as long. Fifty years from now, a new generation of explorers will be pushing the frontiers outward, and reaping the
benefits of their effort. They may be Americans; they may not. In Reagan's time, there was no doubt we were "still
pioneers." Whether that will be still be true in our grandchildren's time is for us to decide.
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
84
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
DDI 2011
A2- The Soyuz Needs Replacement
Russia has the ability to create a new spacecraft if needed
Leonard 11- Peter Leonard, Staff Writer for the Associated Press (7/19/11, “Russia Relishes Chances Created By End of Shuttle,”
http://www.boston.com/news/world/europe/articles/2011/07/19/russia_relishes_chances_created_by_end_of_shuttle/) SP
The Soyuz makes for a cramped and uncomfortable two-day ride from Earth to the space station, yet it inspires affection
among international astronauts for its reliability and deceptive simplicity of design. Some crew members have said that
taking off in a Soyuz is actually less physically demanding then blasting off in a shuttle, but admit that landings are often
rough. Two consecutive landings in 2007 and 2008 were steep "ballistic" descents, subjecting the crew to high G-loads and
sending one capsule far off target. The Soyuz has remained largely unchanged in appearance over its long history, but it has
been constantly subjected to modifications. Last year saw the maiden voyage of the all-digital Soyuz, a lighter model that is
able to carry more cargo. Russian Space Agency officials say minor glitches experienced on that flight in October have now
been resolved. Despite the updates, critics complain that little has been done to develop a successor to the Soyuz, leaving
Russia at the risk of scrambling to keep up once a replacement for the shuttle is built and as new space powers such as
China and India emerge. Krikalyov acknowledged that government funding for design work on a Soyuz successor ship has
been insufficient. "The Soyuz has been upgraded, but we need a qualitative leap," he told AP Television News this week at
Star City cosmonaut training center outside Moscow. "It's a matter of priorities. If we consider that important, then funding
priorities need to change. If we think we can accept some average results, then we will eventually get them." Igor Marinin,
editor of leading Russian space magazine Novosti Kosmonavtiki, is less worried. He argues that the Soyuz meets all current
requirements and will only need replacing once more ambitious missions are devised. "If Russia sets itself broader tasks,
such as flights to Mars or to the Moon, flying around the Moon, or the intensive construction of a new space station, then
maybe we will need a new craft," Marinin said. "But to create new technology, you need a purpose for it."
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
85
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
DDI 2011
***PUTIN BAD NB***
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
86
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
DDI 2011
SHELL
The Russian elections will come down to Putin and Medvedev’s popularity
Gregory 5/23 Paul Gregory, research fellow at Stanford University’s Hoover Institute, focusing on the Russian Economy and
Russian politics, 5/23/2011, “A Russian Rift”, The National Review Online, http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/267809/russianrift-paul-gregory?page=3. CJS
The campaign will be decided by power politics. If the electors think that Putin is on his way down, they will support
Medvedev. If they conclude that Medvedev is a paper tiger, despite his massive formal powers as president, they will back
Putin. The electors must also make personal cost-benefit calculations. The beneficiaries of Putin’s corruption will worry
that they will lose everything if there is a regime change. So they might support Putin — or they might offer their support to
Medvedev in return for guarantees. Putin himself would have this concern ten times over. Can he strike a deal with
Medvedev that will preserve his wealth and give him legal immunity?
The electors will be frantically reading the tea leaves. At this point, I imagine no one really knows which way to jump.
The pro-Putin forces, however, see a few things that should alarm them. Putin’s personal popularity has been falling in the
polls. So has Medvedev’s, but Putin is the symbol of the status quo. Both men’s approval ratings remain high, but it is the
direction of change that counts. A growing number of Russians tell pollsters that Russia is moving in the wrong direction.
Many opinion-making celebrities, artists, and journalists are now openly critical of Putin.
Putin’s political party, United Russia, took a beating in the recent municipal elections. Its candidates failed in a number of
cases to win majorities even though they had no real opposition. The failure to win majorities suggests that voters chose
“anybody but Putin’s candidate.”
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
87
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
DDI 2011
SHELL
Space winning key to Medvedev popularity
Daily Beast 11 The Daily Beast, an American news reporting and opinion website, 7/8/2011, “Russians Win the Space Race”,
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2011/07/08/it-s-goodbye-shuttle-hello-soyuz-after-atlantis-last-flight.html. CJS
But perhaps the most striking difference between Russia and America is in their attitudes to their respective space
programs. NASA’s future is uncertain because “it has not so much been fulfilling a new dream as living in the shadow of
an old one,” says Bizony. For most Americans, the space race was won when Neil Armstrong landed on the moon in 1969;
“relative to Russians, their interest has waned in the new century,” Bizony adds. For Russia, by contrast, being a major
player in the space game remains a point of national pride. Massive festivities were held across Russia for the 50th
anniversary of the Gagarin flight last April 12. A Soviet make of space-branded watches called Raketa—worn by Gagarin
himself—has been revived as a luxury brand for Russia’s patriotically minded new rich. And when Russia’s space program
makes a misstep—such as when three Russian navigational satellites ended up in the Pacific Ocean after technicians
overfilled one of the tanks in the rocket’s upper stage last December—the Kremlin very publicly steps in. After the
December debacle, President Dmitry Medvedev personally sacked top managers, and earlier this year called for Russia to
develop its own space-exploration program for “our nation’s scientific ambitions … if we do not do this, we will fall
behind.”
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
88
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
DDI 2011
SHELL
Putin takeover tanks US-Russia relations
Abdullaev and Sardzhyan 7/12 Nabi Abdullaev is the editor of the Moscow Times with the European Union Institute for
Security Studies and presented at Harvard’s Center for Russian Eurasian Studies, and Simon Sardzhyan is a research fellow at
Harvard’s Kennedy School’s Belfer Center and a former editor of the Moscow Times, 7/12/2011, “News Analysis: Vladmir Putin’s
2012 Dilemna”, http://www.themoscowtimes.com/news/article/news-analysis-vladimir-putins-2012-dilemma/440376.html. CJS
The probability of Putin's return to power will increase substantially if any of the following key events occur before
Medvedev's first term expires: Putin comes to believe that Medvedev will fail to either cope with challenges or protect his
interests in 2012-18. A major terrorist attack or meltdown in the North Caucasus materializes.
Ethnic riots escalate.
Frozen conflicts in the former Soviet Union escalate. Should any of these events — or a combination of them — occur this
year or in the first weeks of 2012, Putin will replace Medvedev in the Kremlin to ensure political stability and solidify his
own policies. After waning during Medvedev's term of office, the concept of sovereign democracy will stage a triumphant
return as the core of Russia's national ideology. For opposition groups, it means a further stifling of their legal activities as
the government increases control over NGOs under the pretence of fighting terrorism and extremism. The State Duma
passes a new set of laws further curtailing civil liberties and media freedoms. The influence of the siloviki escalates, but
Putin does not allow any particular group in the clan to dominate. Trying to offset the impact that a more aggressive foreign
policy might have had on international investors, Putin — understanding full well the need to diversify the economy —
decides to liberalize foreign corporations' access to the Russian market. The attempts by Russian companies to acquire
downstream energy transportation infrastructure continue to meet the tacit but formidable resistance of most European
governments. The favorable conditions offered by the Russian government attract quite a few major international
companies, from energy giants to retail firms. While state champions continue to dominate in the so-called strategic
industries — such as Gazprom and Rosneft in the energy sector and Russian Technologies in the defense industry sector —
private companies, both Russian and international, thrive in the retail, construction, agriculture, food, entertainment and
automobile sectors. A new war of words flares up between Moscow and Washington and Brussels over ballistic missile
defense deployment in Europe. However, pragmatic approaches on both sides help gradually relieve tensions as
Washington and Moscow converge on the perception that their common immediate security threat is posed not by each
other but by a new wave of militant Islamism, which galvanizes North Caucasus religious extremists and creates new risks
for the United States and NATO personnel deployed abroad. Russia increases its involvement in Belarus, progressing
toward incorporating the country by solidifying its control over the economy of its neighbor. Belarussian President
Alexander Lukashenko lacks alternatives due to his increasing isolation from the West. Moscow also increases its presence
in Central Asia as the growth of religious extremism there prompts regional leaders to seek a strong and unscrupulous ally
in the fight against Muslim radicals. Although Chinese influence on the economy of these states increases, it is Russia that
remains the center of gravity for the Central Asian republics. The strong authoritarian political model that is being rebuilt
by Putin is increasingly appealing to the Central Asian leaders. Putin also continues to anchor these and other former Soviet
republics to Moscow through integration projects such as the Collective Security Treaty Organization, the Eurasian
Economic Community and the Commonwealth of Independent States. Having cooled Russia's engagement with the West,
Putin pursues a closer alignment with China, further increasing energy exports to this country.
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
89
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
DDI 2011
SHELL
US Russia relations solves extinction
Collins and Rojansky 10 James F. Collins was the former ambassador to Russia, expert in the Soviet Union, director of the
Russia Eurasia Program, recipient of the Secretary of State Award for Distinguished Service, Secretary of State’s Distinguished Honor
Award, DOD Award for Distinguished Public Service, BA from Harvard. Matthew Rojansky is the deputy director of the Russia
Eurasia Program at the Carnegie Endowment, Harvard Undergrad Stanford Law School, former head of the Partnership for a Secure
America which focuses on bipartisan dialogue on US National Security Challenges, 8/18/2010, “Why Russia Matters”, Carnegie
Endowment for International Peace, http://www.carnegieendowment.org/2010/08/18/why-russia-matters/3si CJS
A year and a half after Barack Obama hit the "reset" button with Russia, the reconciliation is still fragile, incomplete, and
politically divisive. Sure, Russia is no easy ally for the United States. Authoritarian yet insecure, economically mighty yet
technologically backward, the country has proven a challenge for U.S. presidents since the end of the Cold War. Recent
news hasn't helped: The arrest in July of a former deputy prime minister and leader of the Solidarity opposition movement,
Boris Nemtsov, provoked some of the harshest criticism of Russia yet from the Obama administration. Then last
[Collins and Rojansky continue…no text deleted]
Wednesday, Russia announced that it had moved anti-aircraft missiles into Abkhazia, the region that broke off from
Georgia during the August 2008 war. The announcement was hardly welcome news for the United States, which has tried
to defuse tensions there for the last 24 months. Yet however challenging this partnership may be, Washington can't afford
not to work with Moscow. Ronald Reagan popularized the phrase, "Trust, but verify" -- a good guiding principle for Cold
War arms negotiators, and still apt for today. Engagement is the only way forward. Here are 10 reasons why: 1. Russia's
nukes are still an existential threat. Twenty years after the fall of the Berlin Wall, Russia has thousands of nuclear weapons
in stockpile and hundreds still on hair-trigger alert aimed at U.S. cities. This threat will not go away on its own; cutting
down the arsenal will require direct, bilateral arms control talks between Russia and the United States. New START, the
strategic nuclear weapons treaty now up for debate in the Senate, is the latest in a long line of bilateral arms control
agreements between the countries dating back to the height of the Cold War. To this day, it remains the only mechanism
granting U.S. inspectors access to secret Russian nuclear sites. The original START agreement was essential for reining in
the runaway Cold War nuclear buildup, and New START promises to cut deployed strategic arsenals by a further 30
percent from a current limit of 2,200 to 1,550 on each side. Even more, President Obama and his Russian counterpart,
Dmitry Medvedev, have agreed to a long-term goal of eliminating nuclear weapons entirely. But they can only do that by
working together. 2. Russia is a swing vote on the international stage. As one of the five permanent members of the U.N.
Security Council, Moscow holds veto power over any resolution that the body might seek to pass -- including recent efforts
to levy tougher sanctions on Iran or, in 2009, against North Korea following that country's second nuclear test. Russian
support for such resolutions can also help persuade China and others not to block them. The post-reset relationship between
Moscow and Washington works like a force multiplier for U.S. diplomacy. Russia plays an equally crucial role in the G-8
and G-20 economic groups, helping to formulate a coordinated approach in response to economic threats. In 2008, for
example, Russia supported a G-20 resolution promising to refrain from protectionism and avoid new barriers to investment
or trade. 3. Russia is big. The country's borders span across Europe, Central and East Asia, and the Arctic -- all regions
where the United States has important interests and where it cannot afford destructive competition. With an ongoing
counterinsurgency campaign in Afghanistan, the United States has a strong interest in Central Asian stability and relies on
Russia not only for direct assistance with logistics and information sharing, but to help manage threats like the recent
political upheaval and sectarian violence in Kyrgyzstan. In the former Soviet space, Moscow's historical ties to newly
independent states are still fresh and powerful. Moscow is the linchpin to resolving "frozen conflicts" that prevent countries
like Moldova, Georgia, and Azerbaijan from prospering economically and moving toward European Union membership.
Recently, for example, Moscow signaled renewed interest in resolving frozen conflicts in Nagorno-Karabakh and
Transnistria. And despite recent troop movements into Abkhazia, a negotiated settlement is still very possible, one that
returns some territory to Georgia but preserves its autonomous status, along with that of its fellow breakaway republic,
South Ossetia. 4. Russia's environment matters. As the catastrophic fires across Western Russia have dramatically
illustrated, Russia is both a victim of global climate change and a steward of natural resources -- including many of the
forests now badly burned -- needed to reverse the global warming trend. With more than one-tenth of the world's total
landmass, vast freshwater and ocean resources, plus deposits of nearly every element on the periodic table, Russia is an
indispensable partner in the responsible stewardship of the global environment. On climate change, there is work to be
done, but progress is evident. Russia today is the world's fourth-largest carbon emitter, but as a signatory to the Copenhagen
Accord, it has pledged to reduce emissions to 20 to 25 percent below 1990 levels. Another black spot is Russia's use of
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
90
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
DDI 2011
1NC Impact
[continued]
"flaring" -- a technique that burns natural gas into the open atmosphere during oil extraction, but Medvedev agreed to capture 95
percent of the gas currently released through flaring. Last year he also signed Russia's first law on energy efficiency, which takes such
steps as requiring goods to be marked according to their energy efficiency and banning incandescent light bulbs after 2014. True,
most of Russia's other commitments are short on deadlines and concrete deliverables. But like China's cleanup for the Beijing
Olympics, Moscow could transform resolve into reality with surprising speed, given the right amount of international engagement.
And in the meantime, Russia's natural climate-cleaning properties are vast; the Siberian provinces alone contain more clean oxygenproducing forests and reserves of freshwater than continental Europe. 5. Russia is rich. As the "R" in the famous BRIC grouping of
emerging economies, Russia is the 12th-largest market in world, with the third-largest foreign currency reserves. And the country's
role in world markets is only growing. Russia is a big player in commodity trading, the country boasts a volatile but increasingly
attractive stock exchange, and it is open to foreign investment -- even in state-owned industries. Russian businesses are increasingly
looking abroad to form strategic partnerships, acquire assets, and sell their products. And as a country that felt the global financial
crisis viscerally -- economic growth fell by almost 8 percent in 2009 -- Russia has a strong interest in making sure there is no repeat.
Despite occasional retrenchments, such as the ban on grain exports after the summer fires, Russia is committed to becoming a freetrading World Trade Organization member, and wants more access to U.S. and European technology and management know-how to
drive its modernization. Excessive bureaucracy and widespread corruption are the biggest challenges to Russia's further economic
growth, but these are already top talking points in Medvedev's modernization drive, and engagement with more transparent Western
countries such as the United States can only help. 6. One word: energy. The American way of life depends on stable and predictable
commodity prices -- gasoline, natural gas, and coal in particular -- and Russia plays a large role in the global production and pricing of
these fossil fuels. Russia alone possesses roughly one-quarter of the world's known gas reserves, and it is currently responsible for
over a fifth of global exports. It is the second largest oil-producing state after Saudi Arabia and has the second-largest coal reserves
after the United States. The even better news for Washington is that Russia is not a member of OPEC, the cartel of oil-producing
countries. This gives the country far more freedom to focus on increasing exports rather than reducing them to keep prices down.
When it comes to bringing supply to market, many will no doubt remember the so-called gas wars between Russia and Ukraine and
Russia and Belarus that left Eastern Europe in the cold several times in recent years. Much of the trouble is attributable to the legacy
of Soviet energy infrastructure in Russia's western neighbors, which put a choke-hold on Russia's gas pipelines. Moscow is currently
working with the United States, China, and Western Europe to find a way around this problem, which will entail building new
pipelines through the Baltic Sea, Black Sea and Siberia. 7. Russia is a staunch ally in the war on terror (and other scourges). Even
during the dark days after the 2008 Russia-Georgia war, Moscow and Washington cooperated effectively on counterterrorism,
counternarcotics, infectious disease prevention and response, and other shared security priorities. Recently, the two have worked
together under the auspices of the Bilateral Presidential Commission to coordinate relief strategies for catastrophes such as the Haiti
earthquake and the violence in Kyrgyzstan. Both Washington and Moscow recognize that swift, well-organized responses to such
crises are key to preventing weaknesses from being exploited -- for example by extremist groups who are happy to fill the vacuum of
government authority. Russia is also a critical partner in U.S. law enforcement efforts to defeat organized crime and terrorism
financing. The two countries are currently working to map smuggling routes in Central Asia. And Russia has shared information with
the United States on the informal financial networks used to fund Taliban and Afghan warlords. 8. The roads to Tehran and
Pyongyang go through Moscow. Russia maintains unique relationships with Iran and North Korea -- both top concerns on
Washington's nuclear nonproliferation radar. In the past, the Kremlin has used its leverage to keep the path open for negotiations,
sending senior diplomats to Tehran and offering carrots such as civilian nuclear assistance and weapons sales (though it has deferred
the sale of advanced S-300 ground-to-air missiles that could be used to blunt a U.S. or Israeli air strike). Now more than ever,
Washington needs allies with that kind of leverage to help punish violators and discourage cascading nuclear proliferation worldwide.
Leading by example on nonproliferation is also a must; as the world's biggest nuclear powers, the United States and Russia are looked
to as the standard-setters. If they fail to ratify their latest modest step forward on bilateral nuclear arms control, it will be difficult to
push other countries to take similar counter-proliferation measures. 9. Russia can be a peacemaker. Moscow has the potential to play a
role in the settlement of key regional conflicts -- or if it chooses, to obstruct progress. Russia is a member of the Middle East
"Quartet," the six-party talks dealing with North Korean denuclearization, and each of the working groups addressing conflicts in the
post-Soviet space, such as the OSCE Minsk group on Nagorno-Karabakh, and the 5+2 group on Transnistria. In such post-Soviet
regions in particular, Russia has a unique capacity to contribute to peaceful resolution of territorial disputes by facilitating trade and
economic engagement with and between former adversaries, and acting as a peacekeeper once a final settlement is reached. In the
Middle East, Russia still controls a network of commercial and intelligence assets and has substantial influence with the Syrians, who
should be pushed to play a more productive role in the Arab-Israeli peace process. 10. Russians buy U.S. goods. As the U.S. economy
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
91
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
DDI 2011
1NC Impact
[Collins and Rojansky continue…no text deleted]
stops and starts its way out of recession, most everyone agrees that boosting exports is a key component in the recovery. And Russia is
a big market. U.S. companies such as Boeing, International Paper, and John Deere have invested billions in Russian subsidiaries and
joint ventures. In all, there are more than 1,000 U.S. companies doing business there today. They are in Russia not only to take
advantage of the country's vast natural resources and highly skilled workers but also to meet the demand for American-branded
goods. The Russian middle class wants consumer goods and the country's firms increasingly seek advanced U.S. equipment and
machinery. Between 2004 and 2008, before the financial crisis hit, U.S.-Russia trade grew by more than 100 percent to over $36
billion annually, and although that figure dropped by a third in 2009, there is potential for an even better, more balanced trade
relationship in the coming decade. In short, Russia is indispensible. As long as the United States participates in the global economy
and has interests beyond its own borders, it will have no choice but to maintain relations with Russia. And good relations would be
even better.
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
92
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
DDI 2011
2NC Uniqueness—Close Race
Putin is ahead in the election campaign now but change in Medvedev popularity can change the
campaign
Loiko 4/28 Sergei Loko, Staff Writer for the LA Times, 4/28/2011, “Putin eclipses Medvedev in run-up to 2012 election”,
http://articles.latimes.com/2011/apr/28/world/la-fg-russia-putin-20110429. CJS
The 2012 Russian presidential elections may be over already.
Vladimir Putin's words and deeds of late have made it eminently clear that he's had enough of being prime minister and
wants the No. 1 job back from President Dmitry Medvedev. And many experts believe it's his for the taking.
Amid what political analysts have identified as a fierce power struggle between the two Russian leaders, the expulsion of a
key Medvedev aide from the Kremlin is being interpreted as a sign that Putin has gained the upper hand.
And Medvedev's own recent comments referring to life after politics have done little to alter that impression.
Two weeks ago, Medvedev's political advisor, Gleb Pavlovsky, discovered he was no longer welcome as a political
strategist in Moscow's halls of power. "I think I lost my position in the Kremlin due to an impulse from Putin's team,"
Pavlovsky said in an interview after news of his firing in mid-April leaked out this week.
"If Putin returns to the Kremlin, this will weaken the institution of the Russian presidency," said Pavlovsky, president of the
Efficient Politics Foundation. He said such a move would "look scandalous even for his own supporters."
But Medvedev already has given indications that he sees a future outside the Kremlin. During a recent tour of an online
television network, he said he would like to teach because "it is simply a must for any politician who has led a state to by all
means talk about some of his experiences, negative or positive."
Medvedev said he would like to lecture not only at the Skolkovo business school — one of the keys to his ambitious
modernization program — "but at other places too."
"It was more than simply a slip of the tongue, it was a white flag on his part," said Andrei Piontkovsky of the Systems
Analysis Institute. "Medvedev must have finally given up hope that Putin will allow him to stay in the Kremlin for another
six years. … The Russian top political alpha male can't afford to wait that long."
Putin, from using his post as prime minister to bring the 2014 Winter Olympics and 2018 World Cup to Russia, to tagging a
polar bear with a transponder, to singing "Blueberry Hill" in English at a benefit concert, has not shirked from taking center
stage.
"Medvedev himself understands that he is no match for Putin," said Dmitry Oreshkin, a senior analyst with the Institute of
Geography. "Even if both men run, Putin, apart from his popularity, controls the central election commission, whose head
is his personal friend and loyal supporter.… In Russia, it doesn't count how people vote, it's how the votes are counted."
Only a short while ago, the winners and losers in Moscow's greatest political game appeared to be reversed.
In March, Medvedev publicly rebuked Putin over his criticism of the NATO-led military operation in Libya.
Putin had compared the alliance's mission to "a medieval crusade" and insisted that the events in Libya "once again prove
that we are right in strengthening the defense capability of Russia."
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
93
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
DDI 2011
2NC Uniqueness—Gridlock
Strong uncertainty over next years elections—both sides wont give in
McLaughlin 4/21 Dan McLaughlin, Writer for the Irish Times, 4/21/2011, “Putin and Protégé at odds on Russia’s Future”,
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/opinion/2011/0421/1224295160848.html. CJS
But as the election nears, neither man seems inclined to give way, competing cliques are ramping up rhetoric in support of
their favoured leader, and Kremlin-watchers are starting to wonder whether Medvedev is enjoying power too much to step
aside for an old boss.
Those who spy a split in the ruling “tandem” note how Medvedev rebuked Putin for likening the West’s intervention in
Libya to a “medieval crusade”, and then ordered several of Putin’s ministers and close allies to leave the boards of some of
Russia’s biggest state companies.
In what sound like attempts to associate himself with the country’s more progressive elements while depicting Putin as
yesterday’s man, Medvedev (45) backs the urgent modernisation of Russia and warns of “stagnation”. Putin’s obsession
with security and stability was appropriate after the chaos of the 1990s but is now holding the country back, he said.
“It is high time for changes. He who does not change remains in the past,” Medvedev said earlier this month. “What was
good 10 years ago isn’t good today. At some point we had to strengthen the foundations of our state and gather the parts of
the destroyed economy together, but we are not going to build state capitalism, this is not our choice.”
Putin has been building something like state capitalism for a decade, by stripping assets from unfriendly oligarchs such as
Mikhail Khodorkovsky and handing them to tame tycoons and state-controlled behemoths such as Gazprom and Rosneft,
while at the same time dramatically boosting the power of the security services in the business world.
The former KGB colonel has not modernised Russia – corruption is worse than ever, bureaucracy is still stifling, the law
courts are not independent and justice is still selective – but his allies have flourished at the expense of many of the people
who thrived under his predecessor, Boris Yeltsin.
Having turned the tables on the 1990s elite, Putin’s clique knows that a shift in Russia’s power balance can cause a swift
reversal of fortune. And the country’s Byzantine system of patronage means that a vast swathe of officials at all levels and
in a myriad agencies and companies have something riding on whether Putin or Medvedev – who has his own complex web
of support – is top dog.
When Medvedev said this month that a decision would be made “fairly soon” on whether he or Putin would run for
president next March, the spasm of reaction suggested a certain nervousness among Russia’s ruling class.
“Of course, this decision should be taken sooner or later. But there is almost a year before the polls, and all this fuss does
not contribute to a normal working structure,” Putin said the day after Medvedev’s remarks. “If we give some improper
signals now, half the [presidential] administration and more than half the government will stop working in anticipation of
some changes.”
The admonishment did not stop a senior member of the ruling United Russia party from saying that it would back Putin for
president, a comment that prompted the premier to order the party leadership directly “not to talk about [the election], not to
get excited about it”.
Putin might love skiing, judo, flying in fighter jets and other adrenaline-fuelled pursuits, but he is allergic to excitement in
politics. He likes to control everything, remove all danger of unpredictability. He likes his democracy, and his economy,
managed by people he can trust.
He anointed Medvedev as his successor because he had been loyal and reliable over many years of co-operation, right back
to the early 1990s in St Petersburg city hall. But is the protege still willing to sacrifice his own ambitions – and perhaps his
own distinct vision of modern Russia – for the man who brought him to Moscow and his now-stale platitudes about
stability and security?
“Putin does not have a political programme. What he has are objections,” said analyst Gleb Pavlovsky, who is close to the
Kremlin. “Putin is being irritated by what he thinks looks like his political funeral . . . It’s obvious that the prime minister is
nervous, since he does not see a clear shape for his future in the president’s comments.”
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
94
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
DDI 2011
2NC Uniqueness—Gridlock
Current internal divide between Putin and Medvedev—either one could be elected
Cohen 3/22 Ariel Cohen, Senior Research Fellow for Russian and Eurasian Studies and International Energy Policy, The Kathryn
and Shelby Cullom Davis Institute for International Studies, 3/22/2011, “Putin and Medvedev Break Up over Libya”, The Heritage
Foundation, http://blog.heritage.org/2011/03/22/putin-and-medvedev-break-up-over-libya/. CJS
The Russian abstention over Libya has already exerted an unexpected impact on the Russian political scene. Prime Minister
Vladimir Putin condemned the resolution, which calls for “an immediate ceasefire in Libya, including an end to the current
attacks against civilians,” saying that this resolution is “deficient” and likened it to a “medieval call to crusade”—an almost
verbatim quote from Qadhafi himself. This elicited a rare and sharp rebuke from President Dmitry Medvedev, revealing a
growing chasm between Putin and his one-time protégé.
Medvedev slammed Putin’s comments as “unacceptable” and reiterated his position on the U.N. resolution: “We have to be
absolutely accurate in our assessments. Under no circumstances is it acceptable to use expressions that essentially lead to a
clash of civilizations such as crusades and so on.” It appears that the disagreements over the future direction of Russia are
becoming more acute the closer it gets to 2012, the presidential election year. The pro-status quo siloviki (“men of force”)
faction around Putin is becoming more vocal in its attacks against the more liberal and pro-Western wing, which supports
Medvedev.
U.S. Secretary of Defense Robert Gates, currently on his visit to Russia, stepped right into this brouhaha. Gates said that
Russian officials repeat Qadhafi’s inflated casualty figures and take them at face value. Gates rejected these assertions as
“outright lies.” Regardless, the Russian public is deeply split over the Libyan war.
Russian youth and nationalist groups Nashi (Ours) and Stal’ (Steel) are holding public demonstrations in front of the U.S.,
French, and British embassies in Moscow to express solidarity with and support of Qadhafi’s regime, apparently against
Medvedev’s stated position in support of Western intervention against Qadhafi. It is ironic that Nashi’s “godfather” and
founder is Medvedev’s own deputy chief of presidential administration, Vladislav Surkov. In Russian politics, however, the
bizarre is often followed by absurd.
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
95
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
DDI 2011
2NC Uniqueness—Gridlock
Standoff inevitable—the Russian economy will be the key factor
The Economist 4/7 The Economist Magazine, Authoritative weekly newspaper focusing on international politics and business
news and opinion, 4/7/2011, “The Putin v Medvedev Tandem”, http://www.economist.com/node/18530041. CJS
IT ALL seemed so clear a year ago. Dmitry Medvedev, Russia’s president, tweeted and blogged about modernisation, while
Vladimir Putin, Russia’s prime minister and the other half of the tandem, pulled the strings, drove anything that moved and
posed for cameras as he prepared to stroll back into the Kremlin in 2012, this time for two six-year terms.
But in recent weeks the picture has become hazier. Mr Putin’s return to the Kremlin is looking less certain, and Russia’s
political system seems even less stable. The differences between the two men are mainly stylistic, but the signs of a
political struggle are real. Even as Mr Putin keeps his cards close to his chest, Mr Medvedev is displaying an urge to stay
on as president. Over the past few weeks he has taken to sporting a khaki rollneck and a bomber jacket emblazoned with the
words “Russia’s Commander-in-Chief”, perhaps to remind people of his status.
He wore this garb on March 21st speaking about Libya. Less than 24 hours after Mr Putin had given his “private” opinion
that UN intervention (which Russia did not veto in the Security Council) was “flawed and inadequate” and reminded him
(and Colonel Muammar Qaddafi) of a “medieval crusade”, Mr Medvedev rebuked him. It was no good, said the president,
“flapping the wings now” and “under no circumstances is it acceptable to use expressions…such as ‘crusades’ and so on.”
Even more significant, Mr Medvedev’s team managed to reverse the coverage of Libya on Channel One, Russia’s main
television channel, which is controlled by Mr Putin’s friends. It apparently took just one telephone call from the Kremlin to
switch the tone from vehemently anti-Western to broadly neutral.
And this was just a start. On March 30th Mr Medvedev ordered government ministers to vacate their seats on the boards of
state firms. He set a deadline of October and even named names. They included Igor Sechin, chairman of Rosneft, Russia’s
state oil company, and one of Mr Putin’s most trusted deputy prime ministers, in charge of energy.
Mr Sechin is seen as the main force behind the attack on Yukos and Mikhail Khodorkovsky. His appointment as Rosneft’s
chairman in 2004 sealed the transfer of Yukos’s assets. Yet it is unclear whether Mr Medvedev’s order marks an offensive
against Mr Putin’s state capitalism or is a cosmetic measure to make it look more civilised. Much will depend on how the
Kremlin now manages state firms and who replaces Mr Sechin and other ministers.
A final, if more indirect, sign of political infighting is a reshuffling of some assets (roads, television, energy) into the hands
of Mr Putin’s friends and acquaintances. The timing of this political and economic activity is almost certainly linked to the
decision about who will rule after the presidential election in 2012.
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
96
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
DDI 2011
2NC Uniqueness—AT: Putin won’t run
Putin is running and will try to takeover from Medvedev
Cimmino 7/11 Marzia Cimmino, research fellow at the Carnegie Moscow Center analyzing Russian foreign policy and Russian
security policy, 7/11/2011, “Preludes to the Russian Presidential Race”, http://www.aspeninstitute.it/aspenia-online/article/preludesrussian-presidential-race. CJS
In less than a year, a new president will come into power in Russia. Observers are already busy guessing who it will be; yet
no prediction will be convincing until the ruling party, United Russia, releases the name of its candidate. In any case, the
decisive moment of the race will be during the December parliamentary elections.
Although according to the Russian Constitution, the country is a presidential, rather than parliamentary, republic, the most
defining moment is the election of the Duma. In other words, the question of who will be president in 2012 – Vladimir
Putin, Dmitry Medvedev or some third person – will be answered in December. The outcomes of the elections are crucial
especially for United Russia. Founded in 2001 and led by Putin since 2007, United Russia needs a solid constitutional
majority in the Duma in order to legitimize the executive decisions of the government, including the choice of the next
president. Yet, United Russia is facing a steady decline in its popularity which, as the ratings show, has dropped to nearly
50%.
Experts claim the negative trend of United Russia is even worse than what the official data report. Alexei Navalny, a
Russian political and social activist, defined United Russia as the party of “crooks and thieves”, and – more importantly –
one third of Russians agree entirely with this statement. Elections, which were once competitive, have become completely
controlled by the authorities. This transition has driven many Russians to be increasingly disillusioned with the current
political paralysis of the country embodied by its ruling elite. Natalia Bubnova, from the Carnegie Moscow Center, writes
that under the slogan of “sovereign democracy”, power in Russia has become non-elective and essentially immutable and
non-competitive. Leaders have also failed to act on larger reforms that even they recognize are needed – such as reducing
the country’s dependence on oil prices and capital inflows.
In contrast, Putin’s popularity, generally speaking, remains unquestioned. And, before his party’s image could get any
worse, Putin began his political campaign in May. His first step was to create a broad social movement, known as the AllRussia People’s Front. The idea was that in order to support Putin one doesn’t need to be a member of United Russia – one
can join the All-Russia People’s Front. Before its manifesto had even been written, hundreds of community-based
organizations and individual citizens rushed to join its ranks. In May it already had 450 organizations on its books and
another 150 had applied for membership.
The survey carried out by the Levada Center between May 13-16, 2011 showed that the majority of Russians (57%) saw in
Putin’s initiative nothing other than an attempt to help United Russia receive more seats in the Duma, and only 16%
believed the official slogan of “bringing together all of society’s positive forces.” Yet, we can clearly state that the main
goal of the All-Russia People’s Front is to boost the role of the ruling elite, distract the voters away from the decline of
United Russia and ensure that the elites favor Putin.
Having said that, still nobody knows what the outcome of the elections will be. Political analysts are wondering whether
this new election vehicle will help United Russia maintain a constitutional majority in the Duma after the December
elections. Doubts are also growing after a series of scandals that shook the All-Russia People’s Front. In any case, it seems
clear that Putin wants to retain power after 2012, or at least, keep open the option of returning to the Kremlin.
The question that inevitably emerges concerns the future of President Medvedev. In a recent analysis, Lilia Shevstova (of
the Carnegie Ednwoment) argues that Putin’s decision to form the All-Russia People’s Front under his leadership is the
clearest sign of Medvedev’s political end. Many experts agree share the assessment that the chances for a second term for
Medvedev are rather slim.
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
97
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
DDI 2011
2NC Uniqueness—AT: Elections Rigged
Even if the votes wont matter, the politicians deciding the president haven’t chosen yet
Gregory 5/23 Paul Gregory, research fellow at Stanford University’s Hoover Institute, focusing on the Russian Economy and
Russian politics, 5/23/2011, “A Russian Rift”, The National Review Online, http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/267809/russianrift-paul-gregory?page=3. CJS
Over the past half year, Medvedev and Prime Minister Putin have “announced” competing platforms for the presidential
“campaign.” It’s a bit different from an American political campaign. Russia’s 2012 presidential election will be resolved
behind closed doors in a byzantine process that no outsider can understand. There will emerge one candidate, who will run
against token opposition, and who will be Russia’s president for the next four years.
Neither Medvedev nor Putin has declared his candidacy or openly presented his political platform. Both instead use
imagery, veiled language, and other indirect communications with the public, their supporters and their opponents alike.
Both Putin and Medvedev transmit symbolic messages. Putin pilots helicopters, treks through rugged terrain, hurls judo
opponents to the floor, and generally shows that he is a tough guy despite his Napoleonic height. Medvedev wears business
suits, travels to Silicon Valley, and speaks in lawyerly tones about the rule of law and increasing foreign investment. In one
respect, though, Medvedev has become rather brazen: He has taken to wearing a bomber jacket emblazoned with the words
“Russia’s Commander-in-Chief.” Among the commander-in-chief’s powers is the power to fire the prime minister.
The two men’s choices of medium reflect their different constituencies. Putin uses (quasi-state-run) television to address
older and less-educated voters. His messages are directed at political appointees, state employees, state security officers,
and even right-wing skinheads. Medvedev tweets on the Internet to a young and educated computer generation. Putin
reminds pensioners that he has increased their pensions. Medvedev tells young and ambitious Russians that he will help
them compete in the world of high tech.
As the day of decision draws closer, the competition between the two is becoming increasingly open and frank. Although
Putin and Medvedev supposedly run Russia as a “tandem” of like minds, the visions of Russia’s future that they have
spelled out are remarkably different. If we think that our 2012 election offers voters a stark choice, the Putin-Medvedev
platforms give Russian voters an even starker choice.
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
98
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
DDI 2011
2NC Uniqueness—AT: 3rd Party
No other parties can run—they’ve been banned
Russell 6/22 Mark Russell, Staff writer for Newser, a web-based news site focusing on providing articles about daily headlines
started by Michael Wolff who is a pioneer of internet news, 6/22/2011, “Russian Opposition Party Barred From Elections”,
http://www.newser.com/story/121644/russian-opposition-party-barred-from-elections.html CJS
Multiparty democracy continues to be a tad elusive in modern Russia, at least according to opposition leaders who had their
application to register a new political party turned down by the Justice Ministry today, effectively banning them from
participating in coming elections, reports the AP. The Justice Ministry provided several procedural explanations for
denying the registration—from having an improper charter to submitting signatures from dead people—but opposition
leaders say the move was just about maintaining political control.
The decision on whether to register the People's Freedom Party was seen as a test of President Dmitry Medvedev's pledges
to increase political competition in Russia; opposition parties were squeezed out of politics under predecessor Vladimir
Putin. "Nothing that has been said or promised by Medvedev during these past three years has materialized," says one of
the opposition leaders. "It has only gotten worse: that is more pressure on political opponents, even more falsification in
regional elections."
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
99
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
DDI 2011
2NC Link—Space Key to Medvedev
Increasing the Russian space program key to Medvedevs popularity
AP 4/12 The Associated Press, an American News Agency with global contributions, 4/12/2011, “Russian president vows to
maintain excellence in space”, http://www.ctv.ca/CTVNews/SciTech/20110412/medvedev-gagarin-110412/. CJS
Russia must preserve its pre-eminence in space, President Dmitry Medvedev declared Tuesday on the 50th anniversary of
the first human spaceflight by cosmonaut Yuri Gagarin.
The statement followed warnings by another cosmonaut that Russia risks losing its edge in space research by relying solely
on Soviet-era achievements and doing little to develop new space technologies.
Gagarin's 108-minute mission on April 12, 1961, remains a source of great national pride, and Russia marked the day with
fanfare resembling Soviet-era celebrations. Schools had special lessons dedicated to Gagarin, billboards carried his smiling
face and national television channels broadcast a flow of movies and documentaries about the flight.
"We were the first to fly to space and have had a great number of achievements, and we mustn't lose our advantage,"
Medvedev said during a visit to Mission Control outside Moscow.
On Monday, Svetlana Savitskaya, who flew space missions in 1982 and 1984 and became the first woman to make a
spacewalk, harshly criticized the Kremlin for paying little attention to space research after the 1991 collapse of the Soviet
Union.
"There's nothing new to be proud of in the last 20 years," said Savitskaya, a member of Russian parliament from the
Communist Party.
Russia has used the Soyuz and Progress spacecraft, whose designs date back to the 1960s, to send an increasing number of
crew and cargo to the International Space Station. Russia's importance will grow even more after the U.S. space shuttle
Atlantis closes out the U.S. program this summer, leaving the Russian spacecraft as the only link to the station.
But Savitskaya and some other cosmonauts have warned that Russia has done little to build a replacement to the Soyuz and
could quickly fall behind America after it builds a new-generation spaceship.
Boris Chertok, the former deputy to Sergei Korolyov, the father of the Soviet space program, says it has become
increasingly difficult for Russia's space industries to hire new personnel.
"Salaries in space industries are much lower than average salaries in banks and commercial companies," Chertok, 99, told
reporters last week. "We need (more) people of Korolyov's calibre."
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
100
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
DDI 2011
2NC Link—Popularity Key to Medvedev
Putin will take over if Medvedev looks like a failure
Abdullaev and Sardzhyan 7/12 Nabi Abdullaev is the editor of the Moscow Times with the European Union Institute for
Security Studies and presented at Harvard’s Center for Russian Eurasian Studies, and Simon Sardzhyan is a research fellow at
Harvard’s Kennedy School’s Belfer Center and a former editor of the Moscow Times, 7/12/2011, “News Analysis: Vladmir Putin’s
2012 Dilemna”, http://www.themoscowtimes.com/news/article/news-analysis-vladimir-putins-2012-dilemma/440376.html. CJS
This article is an abridged version of a research paper published by Simon Saradzhyan, a research fellow at Harvard
Kennedy School's Belfer Center and a former Moscow Times deputy editor, and Moscow Times deputy editor Nabi
Abdullaev with the European Union Institute for Security Studies in May and presented at Harvard University's Davis
Center for Russian and Eurasian Countries The Moscow Times
That said, there are three likely scenarios for the
election: Medvedev stays in power; Putin returns to power; or an as-yet unknown President X comes to power. These
scenarios would have markedly different implications for domestic politics in Russia. However, a certain continuity across
the scenarios can be assumed for the Kremlin's foreign policy.
Key Uncertainties
Putin's final decision on who
will occupy the Kremlin for the next six years will be determined by key uncertainties that may take place over the next six
months. Some of these uncertainties would lead to a serious change in the course of Russia's development.
Here are
the main uncertainties:
Will Putin feel that Medvedev can cope and protect his interests for six years? Putin may
decide to remove Medvedev for several reasons. For instance, he may feel that there is a chance that Medvedev may lose
his grip on power during his second term due to foreign or domestic challenges. Or he may feel that Medvedev will not
guarantee the protection of his allies' business interests during his second term.
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
101
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
DDI 2011
2NC Link—Space Popular
Space key to Medvedevs re-election—the Russian public loves space
Siddiqi 7 Asif Siddiqi, Writer for Air and Space Magazine, 8/1/2007, “Russia’s long love affair with space”,
http://www.airspacemag.com/space-exploration/russian_space_dream.html?c=y&page=1. CJS
The organizers established a narrative of space history that has endured for decades. Visitors to the exhibition would start
their tour with depictions of the fantasies of such writers as Jules Verne and H.G. Wells, and end with displays of finely
made rocket and spaceship models inspired by the ideas of Tsiolkovsky, Goddard, Oberth, and other space pioneers,
including Frenchman Robert Esnault-Pelterie, German Max Valier, and Russian Friedrich Tsander. Open to the public for
two months, the exhibition had an elaborately designed entrance with a human-scale display of an imagined planetary
landscape placed behind a large pane of glass. Part of the display, somewhat incorrectly called “Lunar Panorama,” showed
a hypothetical planet with orange soil and blue vegetation crisscrossed by straight canals. A giant silver rocket descended
from the starry sky while a voyager in a spacesuit (made of plywood) stood at the edge of a crater. The show was a hit with
the Russian public. In two months, nearly 12,000 people, including schoolchildren, workers, service employees, artists,
scientists, and policemen, bought tickets, and some recorded their impressions in a guest book. One artist from a state
cinematographic studio wrote that “it would be desirable that our inventors achieve the first landing on the moon.” One of
the more captivated visitors was S.G. Vortkin, a reporter for the workers’ news daily Working Moscow, who wrote: “I am
going to accompany you on the first flight. I am quite serious about this. Please do not refuse my request.” The space fad
infused the arts. From literature and movies to painting, poetry, and architecture, Soviet artists produced works that
reflected their belief that cosmic travel was an inevitable part of their future. Science fiction was a growing genre in the
Soviet Union, and space travel was a major theme. Novels such as Alexei Tolstoy’s Aelita: Sunset of Mars and Alexander
Bogdanov’s Red Star were immensely popular among space enthusiasts because the stories were grounded in plausible
scientific and technical ideas. The movie version of Aelita, released with great fanfare in late 1924 under the direction of
famed Soviet filmmaker Yakov Protazanov, successfully blended science with art. Probably the most famous space movie
of the Soviet era, the film was about a proletariat revolution that takes place on Mars under the watchful gaze of Aelita, the
planet’s queen. The movie established a new standard for Soviet cinema, if not in quality, then certainly in popularity and
hype. Weeks of intense advertising campaigns preceded its release, with airplanes dropping thousands of promotional fliers
over major Russian cities. Tickets for the early shows sold out, and the size of the crowd on opening night in Moscow
prevented even Protazanov from attending. The movie, which featured fantastic modern sets, romantic intrigue, and
provocatively dressed women, made a deep impression on many young people. Forty-five years later, Soviet rocket
designer Vladimir Chelomei, who was 10 when the movie came out, named his proposed mission to send cosmonauts to
Mars “Aelita.” One of the most important Soviet avant garde art movements of the period, Suprematism, also reflected a
deep interest in space. Although it originally emerged as a variant of Cubism, Suprematism went much further in its
experimentation, dispensing with representations of conventional space and perspective. Such an approach led many
Suprematists, including the movement’s leader Kazimir Malevich, to eulogize first aviation and then the cosmos. In one
artistic manifesto, Malevich proudly proclaimed that “between the Earth and the Moon, a new Suprematist satellite can be
constructed …. Follow me, comrade aviators! Swim into the abyss.” Many of Malevich’s protégés were technological
utopians, captivated by the potential power of science to emancipate society from its ills. Some artists even made the
pilgrimage to Kaluga to visit with Tsiolkovsky, who was only too happy to share his ideas. The Soviet space fad began to
recede once Joseph Stalin tightened his grip on Soviet society. Some enthusiasts perished in the Stalinist purges of the
1930s. In 1939, the Soviet security services shot and killed Morris Leiteizen, who nearly two decades before had served as
one of the leaders of the Society for the Study of Interplanetary Communications. Similarly, Mikhail Lapirov-Skoblo, one
of the earliest promoters of spaceflight, ended up in the Gulag and died in confinement after World War II. Most space
activists, however, were brought down to Earth by the economic realities of the day as the Soviet government invested
heavily in brute force industrialization and military rocket development. Space had no purpose in this vision. Many
enthusiasts also lost interest once they realized that space travel was years, if not decades, away. Society chief Grigory
Kramarov later recalled that the most common question from the audience after each lecture would be “How quickly would
flight to the planets be accomplished?” When it became clear that there was no good answer, many members dropped out,
leaving only a handful of the truly dedicated to pursue the cause. Like many utopians, society members were unable to
sustain a vision beyond the short-term. Yet, ultimately, the space fad left a powerful legacy. It convinced young Soviet
citizens that spaceflight was not only possible but inevitable, and that conviction has been handed down generation by
generation from the 1920s to today, a point that Samburov reminded me as our train pulled into Kaluga and we took a
cramped minivan to the cosmonautics museum named after his great-grandfather. While the rest of the world was shocked
by the successes of Sputnik in 1957 and Yuri Gagarin in 1961, most Soviet citizens fully expected and anticipated that their
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
102
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
DDI 2011
2NC Link—Space Popular
[Siddiqi continues no text deleted]
country would be first in space. After all, they had started their space education long before Sputnik’s launch. Even
Korolev, the Soviet space program’s chief designer, invoked Goddard’s fabled moon rocket of the 1920s in his request in
1958 for government funds to send a probe to the moon. Korolev got his wish, and in September 1959 the Soviet Luna 2
probe hit the moon—one of the great firsts of the Space Age.
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
103
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
DDI 2011
2NC Link—Space Popular
Space is important in Russias political climate
Interfax News 8 Interfax News Agency, a Russian non-governmental news agency based in Moscow, 10/5/2008, “Russia hopes to
continue cooperation with USA in space research” Lexis. CJS
Deputy head of the Russian Federal Space Agency [Roskosmos] Viktor Remishevskiy believes that the cooling of relations
between Russia and the West will not affect Russian-US and Russian-Ukrainian cooperation in space.
"Politics plays a serious part in space but I believe, however, that the universal importance of space research will prevail
over politics. Sensible people in the USA and Ukraine won't allow their governments to damage their own space research,"
Viktor Remishevskiy told journalists on Tuesday [2 September].
To give an example of the sides' mutual interest in cooperation in space he pointed out that the Atlas US rocket uses
engines made by the Russian Energomash company. "If they refuse to buy these engines, this will undoubtedly affect
negatively Energomash's economic situation. However, the negative effect on US space research will be even greater
because they will have to use the Delta rocket which is less efficient," Viktor Remishevskiy said.
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
104
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
DDI 2011
105
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
DDI 2011
2NC US Russia Relations EXT
Putin will continue to ruin relations with the US
Barry 11 Ellen Barry, Staff writer for the New York Times, 4/26/2011, “Putin Criticizes West for Libya Incursion”,
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/27/world/europe/27putin.html. CJS
Prime Minister Vladimir V. Putin on Tuesday delivered his most passionate critique to date of the Western intervention in
Libya, underlining a rare open disagreement between him and his protégé, President Dmitri A. Medvedev.
At a news conference in Copenhagen, Mr. Putin was asked to elaborate on his comment that the United Nations resolution
allowing airstrikes resembled “a medieval call for a crusade.” He launched into an extended, caustic attack on the NATO
campaign, saying it violated the principle of sovereignty and the wishes of the Libyan people.
“Look at the map of this region, there are monarchies all around,” he said, in a joint appearance with his Danish
counterpart. “What do you think they are – Danish-style democracies? No. There are monarchies everywhere, and this
basically corresponds with the mentality of the people, as well as long-standing practice.”
He asked, sarcastically, whether Western allies planned to fire missiles at all the world’s “crooked regimes,” and directed
special contempt to world leaders who have approved attacks on Col. Muammar el-Qaddafi.
“When the so-called civilized community, with all its might, pounces on a small country, and ruins infrastructure that has
been built over generations – well, I don’t know, is this good or bad?” Mr. Putin said. “I do not like it.”
Mr. Putin has made no secret of his distaste for the Libyan operation, leaving the impression that he might have used
Russia’s veto power to block Resolution 1973 – something Mr. Medvedev chose not to do. Then, when Mr. Putin likened
the intervention to a “crusade,” Mr. Medvedev called such language “unacceptable,” in an unusual rebuke of his mentor.
Medvedev key to US relations—START proves
White 10 Greg White, Staff writer for the Wall Street Journal citing Medvedev and others in the Russian parliament, 12/25/2010,
“Medvedev Hails Obama After Treaty’s Ratification”,
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203418804576038971848170728.html CJS
Russian President Dmitry Medvedev Friday hailed his U.S. counterpart Barack Obama as "a leader who fulfills his
promises" after the hard-fought U.S. Senate ratification this week of a major arms-reduction treaty.
"He did a great job, succeeding in his push for the ratification of this very important document, the New START, in quite
difficult conditions," Mr. Medvedev said in his annual year-end interview with Russian television.
Shortly after Mr. Medvedev's comments, the lower house of Russia's parliament, the State Duma, voted overwhelmingly to
give preliminary approval to the treaty. The pro-Kremlin United Russia party dominates the legislature, making ratification
a virtual certainty, though legislators said final approval won't come until early next year.
Speaking in the Duma before the vote, Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said failure to ratify "would be a serious blow to our
reputation."
Defense Minister Anatoly Serdyukov said the treaty limits allow Russia to "expand our forces, rather a lot, while the
American side will have to cut its arms."
The New START treaty would limit each country's strategic nuclear warheads to 1,550, down from the current ceiling of
2,200. It also would re-establish a system for verification, which had lapsed last year with the expiration of a previous arms
control deal.
The nuclear arms pact between the United States and Russia passes a key test in Moscow. Video courtesy of Reuters.
The Obama administration had pushed hard for ratification of the agreement, a centerpiece of its efforts to "reset" relations
with Moscow. A number of Republican senators had criticized the deal as overly restrictive of U.S. capabilities. They
added a number of amendments to the ratification resolution on issues such as missile defense.
In the Duma Friday, Mr. Lavrov dismissed those as nonbinding, saying they "don't change a single letter of the treaty."
He insisted that language in the preamble of the treaty linking limits on offensive weapons to missile defense -- a key
Russian demand that the Senate resolution questioned -- is legally binding. If the U.S. created a "full-scale global" missiledefense system, Russia would view that as grounds to withdraw from the treaty, he said.
In his television interview, Mr. Medvedev said he hoped any threat to the warming trend in U.S.-Russian relations from the
Republican victory in November's midterm elections would be "minimized."
"I hope that American society and the American Establishment will have enough tact and restraint to continue this course
and that it will perhaps be a bit harder for President Obama, but he will be able to deal with these problems," Mr. Medvedev
said.
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
106
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
DDI 2011
2NC US Russia Relations EXT
Putin will kill relations with the West
Cohen 10 Ariel Cohen, Senior Research Fellow for Russian and Eurasian Studies and International Energy Policy, The Kathryn and
Shelby Cullom Davis Institute for International Studies, 10/1/2010, “Putin Blames the West”, The Heritage Foundation
http://blog.heritage.org/2010/09/01/putin-blames-the-west/. CJS
In the latest anti-Western rant, the Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin has blamed the United States and the West for
once again thwarting bilateral relations with Russia by deploying missile defense in Europe and “lying” about NATO
enlargement. However, his statements are clearly political propaganda intended for internal consumption and distort the
reality of events. Yet they raise questions regarding Russia’s commitment to President Barak Obama’s “reset” policy and
broader Russian integration with the West.
For example, Putin has chosen to criticize the current missile defense plan of the Obama Administration. “We had just
come to terms that there would be no missiles [NATO missile defense systems] in Poland…but it was suddenly announced
that the same [missile defense system deployment] was planned for other European countries,” Putin stated.
Putin will kill relations with the West by not joining the WTO—Medvedev will solve them
Gregory 5/23 Paul Gregory, research fellow at Stanford University’s Hoover Institute, focusing on the Russian Economy and
Russian politics, 5/23/2011, “A Russian Rift”, The National Review Online, http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/267809/russianrift-paul-gregory?page=3. CJS
Putin wishes for a strong and independent Russia, surrounded by former members of the Soviet Union, whose demise was
“the greatest tragedy of the twentieth century.” Putin yearns for an “independent and strong” Russian industry protected by
the state. He is ambiguous about greater integration into the world economy as a member of the World Trade Organization.
Putin is deeply suspicious of the West, which is intent on encircling Russia. Russia must protect its interests by making
trouble for its Western competitors, as in its invasion of Georgia, nuclear deals with Iran, and lack of cooperation on
sanctions in the United Nations.
Medvedev has welcomed the reset of Russia’s relations with the West and has persistently promoted Russia’s joining the
WTO. He would like Russia better integrated into world capital and product markets, and he promotes an improvement of
economic and political institutions to make this possible. The Putin-Medvedev campaign is conventional in one respect:
Medvedev has cast himself as the challenger of the status quo. Putin is its defender. The electors are a shadowy group of
officials and oligarchs. There is enough uncertainty that no one really knows what the outcome will be. All want to be on
the winning side, so they will play their cards cautiously.
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
107
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
DDI 2011
2NC Relations Collapse Kills Heg
Strong U.S.-Russian relations are key to effective American leadership
Nixon Center 3 The Nixon Center, Washington DC based think tank founded by President Nixon focusing on global issues,
September 2003, “Advancing American Interests and the U.S.-Russian Relationship: INTERIM REPORT”,
http://www.cdi.org/russia/275-8.cfm. CJS
At the same time, U.S. leaders increasingly recognized the emerging, inter-related threats of terrorism and proliferation.
Though policy makers and experts had devoted some attention to these issues earlier, the tragic events of September 11
rapidly crystallized American thinking about these threats and transformed the struggle to contain them into the principal
aim of American foreign policy. Notwithstanding its diminished status and curtailed ambition, Russia has considerable
influence in its neighborhood and a significant voice elsewhere as well. Moscow can contribute importantly to U.S.
interests if it chooses to do so. Accordingly Russia can markedly decrease, or increase, the costs of exercising American
leadership both directly (by assisting the United States, or not) and indirectly (by abetting those determined to resist, or
not). For this Commission’s purposes it is American interests, not the U.S.-Russian relationship per se, that are paramount.
The relationship should serve U.S. interests—not vice versa. This does not mean that Russian interests are unimportant.
Russian cooperation on specific issues will reflect Russian judgment of how these actions affect its interests. Fortunately,
Russia’s national interests converge with our own interests much more than they diverge. The real interests Russia and
America share—including Russia’s successful integration into the West as a market-oriented democracy—greatly outweigh
the interests that divide us. But since short term interests and narrower political advantage can cloud perceptions, U.S.
policy must have a more ambitious objective than simply demonstrating to Moscow how its cooperation with the U.S.
advances Russian interests. Wise policy will also seek to create significant equities in Russian society and among leading
political forces in cooperative action, which provides the context for managing unavoidable differences on other issues.
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
108
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
DDI 2011
2NC Relations Collapse Kills Heg
U.S. Hegemony solves multiple scenarios for nuclear war.
Zalmay Khalilzad, (Former Assist Prof of Poli Sci @ Columbia), ‘95 Spring, The Washington Quarterly, Vol. 18, No. 2; Pg. 84
Realistically and over the longer term, however, a neo-isolationist approach might well increase the danger of major
conflict, require a greater U.S. defense effort, threaten world peace, and eventually undermine U.S. prosperity. By
withdrawing from Europe and Asia, the United States would deliberately risk kening the institutions and solidarity of the
world's community of democratic powers and so establishing favorable conditions for the spread of disorder and a possible
return to conditions similar to those of the first half of the twentieth century. In the 1920s and 1930s, U.S. isolationism had
disastrous consequences for world peace. At that time, the United States was but one of several major powers. Now that the
United States is the world's preponderant power, the shock of a U.S. withdrawal could be even greater. What might happen
to the world if the United States turned inward? Without the United States and the North Atlantic Treaty Organization
(NATO), rather than cooperating with each other, the West European nations might compete with each other for
domination of East-Central Europe and the Middle East. In Western and Central Europe, Germany -- especially since
unification -- would be the natural leading power. Either in cooperation or competition with Russia, Germany might seek
influence over the territories located between them. German efforts are likely to be aimed at filling the vacuum, stabilizing
the region, and precluding its domination by rival powers. Britain and France fear such a development. Given the strength
of democracy in Germany and its preoccupation with absorbing the former East Germany, European concerns about
Germany appear exaggerated. But it would be a mistake to assume that U.S. withdrawal could not, in the long run, result in
the renationalization of Germany's security policy. The same is also true of Japan. Given a U.S. withdrawal from the world,
Japan would have to look after its own security and build up its military capabilities. China, Korea, and the nations of
Southeast Asia already fear Japanese hegemony. Without U.S. protection, Japan is likely to increase its military capability
dramatically -- to balance the growing Chinese forces and still-significant Russian forces. This could result in arms races,
including the possible acquisition by Japan of nuclear weapons. Given Japanese technological prowess, to say nothing of
the plutonium stockpile Japan has acquired in the development of its nuclear power industry, it could obviously become a
nuclear pon state relatively quickly, if it should so decide. It could also build long-range missiles and carrier task forces.
With the shifting balance of power among Japan, China, Russia, and potential new regional powers such as India,
Indonesia, and a united Korea could come significant risks of preventive or proeruptive war. Similarly, European
competition for regional dominance could lead to major wars in Europe or East Asia. If the United States stayed out of such
a war -- an unlikely prospect -- Europe or East Asia could become dominated by a hostile power. Such a development
would threaten U.S. interests. A power that achieved such dominance would seek to exclude the United States from the area
and threaten its interests-economic and political -- in the region. Besides, with the domination of Europe or East Asia, such
a power might seek global hegemony and the United States would face another global Cold War and the risk of a world war
[Kalizad continues…no text deleted]
even more catastrophic than the last. In the Persian Gulf, U.S. withdrawal is likely to lead to an intensified struggle for
regional domination. Iran and Iraq have, in the past, both sought regional hegemony. Without U.S. protection, the weak oilrich states of the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) would be unlikely to retain their independence. To preclude this
development, the Saudis might seek to acquire, perhaps by purchase, their own nuclear weapons. If either Iraq or Iran
controlled the region that dominates the world supply of oil, it could gain a significant capability to damage the U.S. and
world economies. Any country that gained hegemony would have vast economic resources at its disposal that could be used
to build military capability as well as gain leverage over the United States and other oilimporting nations. Hegemony over
the Persian Gulf by either Iran or Iraq would bring the rest of the Arab Middle East under its influence and domination
because of the shift in the balance of power. Israeli security problems would multiply and the peace process would be
fundamentally undermined, increasing the risk of war between the Arabs and the Israelis. The extension of instability,
conflict, and hostile hegemony in East Asia, Europe, and the Persian Gulf would harm the economy of the United States
even in the unlikely event that it was able to avoid involvement in major wars and conflicts. Higher oil prices would reduce
the U.S. standard of living. Turmoil in Asia and Europe would force major economic readjustment in the United States,
perhaps reducing U.S. exports and imports and jeopardizing U.S. investments in these regions. Given that total imports and
exports are equal to a quarter of U.S. gross domestic product, the cost of necessary adjustments might be high. The higher
level of turmoil in the world would also increase the likelihood of the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction (WMD)
and means for their delivery. Already several rogue states such as North Korea and Iran are seeking nuclear weapons and
long-range missiles. That danger would only increase if the United States withdrew from the world. The result would be a
much more dangerous world in which many states possessed WMD capabilities; the likelihood of their actual use would
increase accordingly. If this happened, the security of every nation in the world, including the United States, would be
harmed.
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
109
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
DDI 2011
Impact—Laundry List
Putin leads to laundry list of impacts
Faulconbridge 11 Guy Faulconbridge, Staff writer for Reuters, 7/13/2011, “Putin must reform or become Russia's Mugabe:
Lebedev”, http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/07/13/us-russia-politics-lebedev-idUSTRE76C22W20110713. CJS
Vladimir Putin could follow the path of Soviet leader Leonid Brezhnev or Zimbabwe's Robert Mugabe unless he can open
up Russia's political system and fight rampant corruption, according to tycoon Alexander Lebedev. Warning of economic
catastrophe and even the prospect of Arab Spring-style unrest in the world's biggest energy producer, Lebedev painted a
grim picture of Russia's future as the Kremlin prepares for the 2012 presidential election. Prime Minister Putin, Russia's
most popular politician, and his protege, President Dmitry Medvedev, have refused to say which of them will run in the
election, though many diplomats believe Putin will return to the Kremlin. Lebedev, a 51-year-old former Russian spy
who made billions trading stocks and bonds after the 1991 collapse of the Soviet Union, said Putin had still not made a final
decision on whether to return or to allow Medvedev another presidential term. But Lebedev warned that popular
discontent at vast corruption and the tightly controlled political system that Putin crafted during his 2000-2008 presidency
was rising. So how does he describe Putin? "Clever. Rational enough to understand that the course he has been leading
has to be changed. And that is the only hope I have," Lebedev told Reuters in almost perfect English. "He is not de
Gaulle, not Churchill, not (Soviet leader Konstantin) Chernenko, not Brezhnev, not Mugabe, not at the moment, but it
might come to that. Give him another 20 years and leave it the way it is, and it will be Zimbabwe," said Lebedev. Putin's
spokesman, Dmitry Peskov, said he did not want to comment on Lebedev's opinions. Brezhnev's 1964-1982 Kremlin rule
has been dubbed the era of 'stagnation', when booming oil production masked the industrial decline that eventually brought
the collapse of communism. Mugabe, once a hero for many Africans, has been criticized by opponents for holding on to
power for more than30 years and leading the country into rampant inflation and decline. Lebedev, one of the only major
Russian businessmen who has risked irony about Putin in public, said it was still too early to say what Putin's true legacy
would be, but that Russia's future hinged on the will of one man. "If you preserve it this way then he will be like
Brezhnev and Mugabe, it will be an interesting sort of combination, if he doesn't change course, change his people," he said
on Tuesday. The billionaire's views contrast also with the rosy image investment bankers sometimes present of a
resurgent and confident Russia with a swiftly growing $1.5 trillion economy that offers vast profits to those willing to take
the risks. Medvedev, a 45-year-old lawyer whom Putin guided into the Kremlin in 2008, has appeared to differ with his
mentor in recent months, warning that Russia faced stagnation and even strife unless reforms were pushed through.
Lebedev said some felt he was either naive, foolish or playing some impenetrable game to voice such criticism in a country
where the Kremlin's chief political strategist once said that Putin had been sent by God to help Russia. "I am trying to
make a very simple thing clear: If the course is not changed, this is a completely doomed economy," said Lebedev. "I like
what he says, but not a lot has been done," said Lebedev, who made his first half a million dollars trading Brady bonds in
the early 1990s. Forbes says he is worth $2.1 billion, though Lebedev says that is too high. SLAVIC SPRING? So does
Russia face a 'Slavic Spring' along the lines of the unrest that has toppled authoritarian rulers in the Arab world? "A
revolution? A demise for sure, an economic catastrophe," he said. "Clearly there are a lot of winds of change in the country,
but it is difficult to say in what ways it blows."
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
110
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
DDI 2011
Impact—Democracy
Putin will kill Russian democracy
Friedman 11 Uri Friedman, Staff writer for The Atlantic Wire, 5/23/2011, “What a Putin Presidential Run Would Mean for
Russia”, http://www.theatlanticwire.com/global/2011/05/what-putin-presidential-run-would-mean-russia/38036/. CJS
Different Domestic Agendas: Medvedev, The Daily Mail notes, "projects himself as a youthful, technologically aware,
economically aware candidate who many credit with helping Russia's financial situation. Putin, meanwhile, is well liked by
the more right-wing and older voters and has portrayed himself as a no-nonsense action man." Paul Gregory at National
Review argues that if Medvedev wins reelection, "Russia will tilt in a slightly more pro-Western, pro-rule-of-law, prodemocracy direction." If Putin becomes Russia's next president, "we can expect more of the same. Russia will be a brutish
bully on the world stage. Political opponents will continue to be beaten. Corruption is likely to grow." Importantly, Gregory
adds, a growing number of Russians believe Russia is moving in the wrong direction, though the winds of public opinion
only mean so much. The election, he writes, will still be "resolved behind closed doors," as Russia's future hangs in the
balance.
Failure of Russian democratization leads to violence and coup
Blank 9 Stephen J. Blank, expert in the Soviet bloc since 1989 at the Strategic Studies Institute, former Associate Professor of
Soviet studies at the Center for Aerospace Doctrine, Research and Education at University of Texas San Antonio and University of
California Riverside, March 2009, “Russia and Arms Control: Are there Opportunities for the Obama Administration?”,
http://www.strategicstudiesinstitute.army.mil/pdffiles/pub908.pdf CJS
Therefore, simultaneously, robust engagement on arms control and pressure for democratization and respect for its neighbors’
sovereignty, integrity, and independence must not only continue, but should grow and be regularly invoked by U.S. leaders precisely
because Russia and other Eurasian governments have signed all these treaties, going back to the Helsinki treaty of 1975. The cornerstone of
our demand for this kind of policy is the basic building block of world order, namely the doctrine of Pacta Sunt Servanda (treaties must
be obeyed). And the conditions that gave rise to those treaties with regard to democratization in Europe have not been fully overcome, as Russian and
Belarusian policy illustrate. Like it or not, Russia or its potential satellites cannot pretend successfully that they are being confronted with double standards
or talk about Russia being a sovereign democracy as it now does. The treaties now in effect clearly outline a diminution of unbridled sovereignty and
arguably any recognized international treaty does so too. That argument should be the cornerstone of our demands to treaty signatories,
coupled with meaningful sanctions, not just economic, for failure to uphold these treaties. Of course, there are also equally good
security or strategic reasons for upholding democratization at every turn even as we seek avenues for negotiation. It is not just
because we believe, with considerable justification, that states who reach democracy are ultimately stronger, even if they have to cross through dangerous
waters to get there, it is also that, as noted above, Russia shows no sign of accepting responsibility for its actions and their
consequences, e.g., in the frozen conflicts in Moldova, Georgia, or in Ukraine, let alone in its support for the repressive regimes of Central Asia or its
arms sales abroad. To the extent that violence, crime, and authoritarian rule flourish in these states, they are all at risk of
upheaval, even sudden upheaval as we have seen in Georgia, Kyrgyzstan, and Ukraine and in the repeated manifestations of internal violence
that shook Uzbekistan in 2004-05 and could easily do so again. Such violence and instability could easily spread to Russia , as the
example of Chechnya and the North Caucasus suggests.
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
111
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
DDI 2011
Impact—Economy
Putin will leave the Russian economy in ruin
Gregory 5/23 Paul Gregory, research fellow at Stanford University’s Hoover Institute, focusing on the Russian Economy and
Russian politics, 5/23/2011, “A Russian Rift”, The National Review Online, http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/267809/russianrift-paul-gregory?page=3. CJS
Putin, who as prime minister is responsible for the economy, expresses pride that Russia “successfully avoided serious
shocks that could have weakened the country and undermined its economic and human potential.” He declares that the huge
drop in output and meager recovery (despite high oil prices) would have been much worse without his steady hand.
Russia’s economic success (or lack of a worse disaster) is the result of his renationalization program, which has produced
successful “public-private partnerships.” Russia’s future lies with giant state companies like Gazprom, Rosneft, and
Transneft. Putin avoids mention of privatization. His contribution was returning to the state private companies that had
fallen into the wrong hands (such as the Yukos oil company and Mikhail Khodorkovsky).
Medvedev describes the Russian economy as weak and atrophied. He warns: “Until we make our country attractive for
business and private initiative, we will not achieve our main goal of improving the quality of life for our people.” The
Russian economy is suffering because there is no rule of law, bureaucratic intervention stifles business, and corruption is
rampant. Medvedev believes that state corporations exert too great an influence on the investment climate. Russia should
have more privatization and private entrepreneurial activity, not more state ownership and control.
Putin avoids mention of corruption, other than obligatory remarks in passing, for good reason: He is personally corrupt.
That he cannot mention corruption, although Russians clearly understand its pervasiveness, is a clear sign of weakness. For
Putin, there is no state corruption. The state must help Russian business, and the government officials who run Russia must
be rewarded. There is nothing wrong with government officials serving as chief executives of the companies they regulate.
It is only natural that they should become rich. After all, they are the ones making this wealth happen. This is not really
corruption but state capitalism.
Medvedev makes corruption a cornerstone of his platform: “Corruption . . . maintains a stranglehold on the entire economy,
and this hold is still as strong as ever. The result is clear for all to see: Money is fleeing our economy. Not as many people
believe in the possibility of doing safe and successful business in Russia.” He makes no bones about what should be done
with corrupt officials: “We will have no choice but to dismiss those who continue to erect various barriers and obstacles,
give preference to their friends, or fail to take the required action on the basis of pretended state interests that have nothing
in common with our people’s interests.” We cannot have “government ministers responsible for regulation in particular
sectors sitting on the boards of directors of companies.”
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
112
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
DDI 2011
Impact—Economy
Russian economic decline causes civil war—escalates and goes nuclear.
David 99 Steven David, Professor of International Relations and Vice Dean for Undergraduate Education at Johns Hopkins
University.[1] He specializes in international politics and security issues, 1999, Foreign Affairs, Lexis.
If internal war does strike Russia, economic deterioration will be a prime cause . From 1989 to the present, the GDP has
fallen by 50 percent. In a society where, ten years ago, unemployment scarcely existed, it reached 9.5 percent in 1997 with
many economists declaring the true figure to be much higher. Twenty- two percent of Russians live below the official
poverty line (earning less than $ 70 a month). Modern Russia can neither collect taxes (it gathers only half the revenue it is
due) nor significantly cut spending. Reformers tout privatization as the country's cure-all, but in a land without well-defined
property rights or contract law and where subsidies remain a way of life, the prospects for transition to an American-style
capitalist economy look remote at best. As the massive devaluation of the ruble and the current political crisis show,
Russia's condition is even worse than most analysts feared. If conditions get worse, even the stoic Russian people will soon
run out of patience. A future conflict would quickly draw in Russia's military. In the Soviet days civilian rule kept the
powerful armed forces in check. But with the Communist Party out of office, what little civilian control remains relies on
an exceedingly fragile foundation -- personal friendships between government leaders and military commanders.
Meanwhile, the morale of Russian soldiers has fallen to a dangerous low. Drastic cuts in spending mean inadequate pay,
housing, and medical care. A new emphasis on domestic missions has created an ideological split between the old and new
guard in the military leadership, increasing the risk that disgruntled generals may enter the political fray and feeding the
resentment of soldiers who dislike being used as a national police force. Newly enhanced ties between military units and
local authorities pose another danger. Soldiers grow ever more dependent on local governments for housing, food, and
wages. Draftees serve closer to home, and new laws have increased local control over the armed forces. Were a conflict to
emerge between a regional power and Moscow, it is not at all clear which side the military would support. Divining the
military's allegiance is crucial, however, since the structure of the Russian Federation makes it virtually certain that regional
conflicts will continue to erupt. Russia's 89 republics,krais, andoblast s grow ever more independent in a system that does
little to keep them together. As the central government finds itself unable to force its will beyond Moscow (if even that far),
power devolves to the periphery. With the economy collapsing, republics feel less and less incentive to pay taxes to
Moscow when they receive so little in return. Three-quarters of them already have their own constitutions, nearly all of
which makes some claim to sovereignty. Strong ethnic bonds promoted by shortsighted Soviet policies may motivate nonRussians to secede from the Federation. Chechnya’s successful revolt against Russian control inspired similar movements
for autonomy and independence throughout the country. If these rebellions spread and Moscow responds with force, civil
war is likely. Should Russia succumb to internal war, the consequences for the United States and Europe will be severe. A
major power like Russia—even though in decline—does not suffer civil war quietly or alone. An embattled Russian
Federation might provoke opportunistic attacks from enemies such as China. Massive flows of refugees would pour into
central and western Europe. Armed struggles in Russia could easily spill into its neighbors. Damage from the fighting,
particularly attacks on nuclear plants, would poison the environment of much of Europe and Asia. Within Russia, the
consequences would be even worse. Just as the sheer brutality of the last Russian civil war laid the basis for the privations
of Soviet communism, a second civil war might produce another horrific regime. Most alarming is the real possibility that
the violent disintegration of Russia could lead to a loss of control over its nuclear arsenal. No nuclear state has ever fallen
victim to civil war, but even without a clear precedent the grim consequences can be foreseen. Russia retain some 20,000
nuclear weapons and the raw material for tens of thousands more, in scores of sites scattered throughout the country. So
far, the government has managed to prevent the loss of any weapons or much material. If war erupts, however, Moscow’s
already weak grip on nuclear sites will be slacken, making weapons and supplies available to a wide range of antiAmerican groups and states. Such dispersal of nuclear weapons represents the greatest physical threat America now faces.
And it is hard to think of anything that would increase this threat more than the chaos that would follow a Russian civil war.
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
113
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
DDI 2011
Impact—Economy
Russian economic collapse kills US relations—war
McFaul 1 Michael McFaul, senior fellow at the Hoover Institution, professor of political science at Stanford, expert in international
relations, Russian politics, political and economic reform in post-communist countries, and US foreign policy, director at the Center
on Democracy Development and the Rule of Law at the Freeman Spogli Institute where he is the deputy director, 2001, “Pull Russia
West”, http://www.hoover.org/publications/hoover-digest/article/6265 CJS
But to end the Cold War totally will require Bush to advance new thinking on the other major legacy of that era—the divide
between rich and poor, democratic and autocratic, NATO and non-NATO—that still separates Europe into East and West.
This final remnant of the Cold War will disappear only when Russia becomes a democracy, fully integrated into Western
institutions. Unfortunately, the promotion of Russian democracy has taken a back seat to arms control. In the long run, this
is a bad trade for American security interests.
Bush is our first truly post–Cold War president. Before becoming president, even Bill Clinton worried about multiple
warheads on Soviet ICBMs, pondered communist expansion in Asia, and was curious enough about the Soviet Union to
travel there. Bush was doing other things during the Cold War. My guess is that he never met a "Soviet" citizen. Unlike
most of his foreign-policy advisers, who made their careers fighting the Cold War, Bush’s thinking is unencumbered by a
past era.
For many, this lack of experience is frightening. Yet Bush’s lack of baggage also presents opportunities.
Twelve years after the fall of the Berlin Wall, and 10 years after the Soviet Union broke up, it is striking how many Cold
War practices continue. Tens of thousands of U.S. troops remain in Germany, Pentagon war plans still aim to destroy with
nuclear missiles Russian military plants (many of which are long out of business), and U.S. and Russian heads of state still
meet to discuss arms control.
Bush’s willingness to think beyond the Cold War must be applauded. Already, he has compelled everyone to rethink the
strategic equation between offensive and defensive weapons systems. Although still unwilling to discuss concrete numbers,
Bush has reiterated his campaign promise to reduce—unilaterally, if necessary—the number of nuclear warheads in the
U.S. arsenal. In agreeing with Putin this past July to link the discussion of these reductions with consultations about defense
systems, Bush has moved closer to convincing the Russians that his plans for missile defense need not threaten their
security.
But getting Russian acquiescence on this new equation is the easy part of dismantling Cold War legacies. After all,
Presidents Yeltsin and Clinton agreed years ago that nuclear arsenals should be reduced far below levels agreed to in Start
II. And despite all the posturing, Putin and his security officials don’t really believe that the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty is
the "cornerstone" of strategic stability between the United States and Russia. They rightly have calculated that even the
most robust U.S. missile defense system will not make nuclear deterrence obsolete. Most important, Russian government
officials know that a U.S. missile defense system is a tool of limited utility in most foreign and security policy issues.
And that’s the problem with Bush’s current policy toward Russia. By focusing almost exclusively on securing Russian
acquiescence to missile defense and U.S. withdrawal from the ABM treaty, Bush has devoted almost no attention to the
most important issue in U.S.-Russian relations—Russian democracy and Russian integration into the West.
If Russia becomes a full-blown dictatorship in the next 10 years, a U.S. missile defense system will be a rather useless
weapon in the arsenal for dealing with an enemy Russia. If, in this worst-case scenario, autocratic Russia decides to invade
NATO member Latvia, destabilize the Georgian government, or trade nuclear weapons with Iran, Iraq, or China, our
missile defense system will do little to deter these hostile acts against U.S. national interests.
"If Bush can nudge Putin in a more democratic direction, then he will be remembered as the president who dispelled the last
lingering elements of the Cold War."
The best defense against these potential hostile acts is to promote Russian democracy and integration into the West now. If
Russia becomes a full-blown democracy in the next 10 years, then the prospects for conflict between the United States and
Russia, be it over the Latvian border or the balance of nuclear weapons, will be reduced dramatically. A democratic Russia
moving toward entry into the European Union and even NATO will also make possible the unification of Europe and the
final disappearance of East-West walls (be it through visa regimes or military alliances) that still divide Europe.
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
114
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
DDI 2011
2NC AT: Medvedev bad
Medvedev will promote reform in Russia
Pronina 11 Lyubov Pronina, Staff writer for Bloomberg, 7/12/2011, “Medvedev Promises More Election Change to Boost Political
System”, http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-07-12/medvedev-promises-more-election-change-to-boost-political-system.html.
CJS
President Dmitry Medvedev said he will continue changing electoral law to ensure more parties join parliament, part of
efforts to decentralize the power structure created by his predecessor Vladimir Putin.
”Our political system requires further improvement,” Medvedev said outside Moscow today. Proposals probably ”won’t be
limited” to a bill to cut the threshold for parties to win seats in the State Duma to 5 percent, he told the leaders of parties
represented in parliament, without providing details of additional initiatives.
Putin, now prime minister, centralized power and sidelined opposition in his eight years as president and remains at the
center of decision-making after making way for Medvedev in 2008. Medvedev has vowed to loosen federal control and
grant more economic freedom to regions and municipalities.
Medvedev key to democracy promotion
Twickel 11 Nikolaus Von Twickel, Staff writer for the St. Petersburg Times, 6/22/2011, “Medvedev Inspires Investors”,
http://www.sptimes.ru/index_bp.php?action_id=2&story_id=34192&section=70 CJS
The president’s repudiation of what is seen as Putin’s style was perhaps the most striking moment in his 35-minute address.
“This is not my choice — my choice is something else,” he said slowly, adding that private entrepreneurs and investors
should play the dominant role, while the state should protect them.
Medvedev also suggested harsher punishment for corrupt officials, saying they could be fired for “loss of confidence” when
evidence of bribery does not allow pressing criminal charges. Medvedev fired Moscow Mayor Yury Luzhkov after 18 years
for “loss of confidence” last September and has never elaborated on the reason.
The president also told his audience, which included scores of governors, that his sacking of long-serving regional bosses
often resulted in improved local business climates. He picked Moscow as an example, saying that under Mayor Sergei
Sobyanin the amount of documents necessary to start construction projects has decreased.
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
115
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
DDI 2011
Impact—Russia Econ
Putin hates the dollar—might ban it collapsing the economy
Durden 11 Tyler Durden, staff writer at Zero Hedge, an American Financial website that uncovered the Goldman Sachs mortgage
scandal in 2009, 7/13/2011, “Vladmir Putin calls Bernanke a Hooligan”, http://real-agenda.com/2011/07/13/vladimir-putin-callsbernanke-a-hooligan/. CJS
Who would have thought that Ron Paul’s ideological ally in his quest to take down the Chairsatan would be none other than
the Russian dictator-in-waiting (or rather, in actuality), Vladimir Putin. In a speech before the of economic experts at the
Russian Academy of Sciences, the Russian prime minister had the following to say: “Thank God, or unfortunately, we do
not print a reserve currency but what are they doing? They are behaving like hooligans, switching on the printing press and
tossing them around the whole world, forgetting their main obligations.” What appears to have angered the former KGB
spy is the end of QE2. According to RIAN: “Putin’s comments came in the wake of the completion of the US’ quantitative
easing (QE) 2 program on June 30, in which the Federal Reserve bought $600 billion worth of its Treasury bonds. The
Fed’s first round of QE, which ended in March last year, amounted to less than half the size of QE2.” We can’t wait to hear
what expletive Putin will usher once Bernanke launches QE3.
What are the next steps: “The Russian authorities have said they would like to see a basket of currencies including the ruble
replacing the dollar as the main reserve currency, although most analysts have said a more realistic target for Russia would
be if the ruble became a regional reserve currency for the CIS.” Too bad most analysts are right 9 out of -7 times. And last
time we checked Russia was the largest oil producer in the world, which means it can do pretty much whatever it wants.
Which, assuming Russia forms a 21st century axis with China and Germany, as many have suggested, means that while
analysts can downplay the impact of what Russian ambitions in the monetary arena mean, pretty soon the only reserve
currency in the world will be the one backed not with Tomahawk missiles or printing presses, but actual, hard assets.
Russian economic collapse leads to nuclear disaster and global conflict
Filger 9 Sheldon Filger, founder of GlobalEconomicCrisis.com, author of multiple books about the recession, nuclear terrorism, and
US politics, Staff writer for the Huffington Post, 5/10/2009, “Russian Economy Faces Disastrous Free Fall Contraction”,
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/sheldon-filger/russian-economy-faces-dis_b_201147.html CJS
In Russia, historically, economic health and political stability are intertwined to a degree that is rarely encountered in other
major industrialized economies. It was the economic stagnation of the former Soviet Union that led to its political downfall.
Similarly, Medvedev and Putin, both intimately acquainted with their nation's history, are unquestionably alarmed at the
prospect that Russia's economic crisis will endanger the nation's political stability, achieved at great cost after years of
chaos following the demise of the Soviet Union. Already, strikes and protests are occurring among rank and file workers
facing unemployment or non-payment of their salaries. Recent polling demonstrates that the once supreme popularity
ratings of Putin and Medvedev are eroding rapidly. Beyond the political elites are the financial oligarchs, who have been
forced to deleverage, even unloading their yachts and executive jets in a desperate attempt to raise cash. Should the Russian
economy deteriorate to the point where economic collapse is not out of the question, the impact will go far beyond the
obvious accelerant such an outcome would be for the Global Economic Crisis. There is a geopolitical dimension that is
even more relevant then the economic context. Despite its economic vulnerabilities and perceived decline from superpower
status, Russia remains one of only two nations on earth with a nuclear arsenal of sufficient scope and capability to destroy
the world as we know it. For that reason, it is not only President Medvedev and Prime Minister Putin who will be lying
awake at nights over the prospect that a national economic crisis can transform itself into a virulent and destabilizing social
and political upheaval. It just may be possible that U.S. President Barack Obama's national security team has already
briefed him about the consequences of a major economic meltdown in Russia for the peace of the world. After all, the most
recent national intelligence estimates put out by the U.S. intelligence community have already concluded that the Global
Economic Crisis represents the greatest national security threat to the United States, due to its facilitating political
instability in the world. During the years Boris Yeltsin ruled Russia, security forces responsible for guarding the nation's
nuclear arsenal went without pay for months at a time, leading to fears that desperate personnel would illicitly sell nuclear
weapons to terrorist organizations. If the current economic crisis in Russia were to deteriorate much further, how secure
would the Russian nuclear arsenal remain? It may be that the financial impact of the Global Economic Crisis is its least
dangerous consequence.
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
116
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
DDI 2011
2NC Putin Kills Econ EXT
Putin hates the dollar—might ban it collapsing the economy
Durden 11 Tyler Durden, staff writer at Zero Hedge, an American Financial website that uncovered the Goldman Sachs mortgage
scandal in 2009, 7/13/2011, “Vladmir Putin calls Bernanke a Hooligan”, http://real-agenda.com/2011/07/13/vladimir-putin-callsbernanke-a-hooligan/. CJS
Who would have thought that Ron Paul’s ideological ally in his quest to take down the Chairsatan would be none other than
the Russian dictator-in-waiting (or rather, in actuality), Vladimir Putin. In a speech before the of economic experts at the
Russian Academy of Sciences, the Russian prime minister had the following to say: “Thank God, or unfortunately, we do
not print a reserve currency but what are they doing? They are behaving like hooligans, switching on the printing press and
tossing them around the whole world, forgetting their main obligations.” What appears to have angered the former KGB
spy is the end of QE2. According to RIAN: “Putin’s comments came in the wake of the completion of the US’ quantitative
easing (QE) 2 program on June 30, in which the Federal Reserve bought $600 billion worth of its Treasury bonds. The
Fed’s first round of QE, which ended in March last year, amounted to less than half the size of QE2.” We can’t wait to hear
what expletive Putin will usher once Bernanke launches QE3.
What are the next steps: “The Russian authorities have said they would like to see a basket of currencies including the ruble
replacing the dollar as the main reserve currency, although most analysts have said a more realistic target for Russia would
be if the ruble became a regional reserve currency for the CIS.” Too bad most analysts are right 9 out of -7 times. And last
time we checked Russia was the largest oil producer in the world, which means it can do pretty much whatever it wants.
Which, assuming Russia forms a 21st century axis with China and Germany, as many have suggested, means that while
analysts can downplay the impact of what Russian ambitions in the monetary arena mean, pretty soon the only reserve
currency in the world will be the one backed not with Tomahawk missiles or printing presses, but actual, hard assets
Putin will kill the Russian economy—empirics
Zaks 11 Dmitry Zaks, Staff writer for the AFP News Organization, 6/8/2011, “Russia lost edge during Putin era: World Bank”,
http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5g29jUuqjmTg4Z3zHqvONiIObb3w?docId=CNG.7fd9c61e74f3dce09f63e2b0a79e888e.6d1 CJS
The World Bank warned Wednesday that Russia had lost its competitive drive in the era of Vladimir Putin and was now the
poor relation within the BRICS group of fast-growing emerging economies.
The bank also backed the "innovation" policies pushed by Putin's Kremlin successor Dmitry Medvedev as he sets himself
up for a presidential race next year in which both men could feasibly run.
The World Bank's latest survey was unusual for its criticism of the policies pursued during a 2000-2008 span in which exKGB man Putin helped the state take over huge parts of various industries.
It said the period's ballooning dependence on basic exports -- mainly oil and gas -- was partly explained by an unproductive
labour force that worked in an uncompetitive market, producing little of interest to ship to nations with more advanced
economies.
The World Bank identified a "decomposition of export growth over 2000-08 period" that showed "no contribution of the
increase of exports of new products to either new or old geographic markets to ... overall export performance."
The timeframe specifically covers the Putin era when other BRICS countries such as Brazil and India -- along with exportdriven China and the group's latest addition South Africa -- made huge strides on the global stage.
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
117
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
DDI 2011
2NC AT: Medvedev kills Econ
Medvedev key to Russian foreign investment
Twickel 11 Nikolaus Von Twickel, Staff writer for the St. Petersburg Times, 6/22/2011, “Medvedev Inspires Investors”,
http://www.sptimes.ru/index_bp.php?action_id=2&story_id=34192&section=70 CJS
A bullish Dmitry Medvedev left investors so enthusiastic at last weekend’s St. Petersburg forum that even his biggest
shortcoming could not spoil the mood: He refused to say whether he would address the forum as president again next year.
After the St. Petersburg International Economic Forum proceeded from highlight to highlight for three days, Medvedev was
forced to admit at the very end of Saturday’s closing session that he still could not promise to stand for re-election. “Can I
ask one puckish question? … Are you going to run for president next year?” asked an awkwardly chortling Wall Street
Journal editor, Robert Thomson, adding that this might be “the perfect moment” for Medvedev to make public his thoughts.
The president, however, jovially crushed all hopes that he would solve the country’s most pressing political puzzle. “When
I believe the moment is right to say directly whether I will or will not run, I will do so,” he said. “But this forum is not the
best venue for that.” With a wink, he added that it would not be long until he announced his decision, but “every story
should have its own intrigue, otherwise life would be boring, so let’s enjoy it a little longer.” Medvedev fueled talk of a rift
in the tandem that has governed the country since 2008 when he lit a blaze of liberal policies in his keynote speech Friday.
As a central theme, he touted an end to government intervention in the economy, which he described both as state
capitalism and “manual control” — a definition closely associated with Putin’s habit of personally intervening in industry
decision making.
Medvedev key to the Russian economy
Rapoza 11 Kenneth Rapoza, staff writer for Forbes, citing Ed Cuzma who is a senior emerging markets analyst at Van Eck,
7/18/2011, “In Emerging Markets, Van Eck Chooses Russia”, http://blogs.forbes.com/kenrapoza/2011/07/18/in-emerging-marketsvan-eck-chooses-russia/ CJS
“We prefer Medvedev of the two. He is more interested in modernizing Russia’s capital markets. If he is nominated, the
market will build their long position on Russia,” Kuczma says. “Investors see him wanting to get Russia to be more
investor friendly, at least in line with Brazil and China, whereas Putin is more interested in old-school Russian politics. I
think that the tandem will be in place regardless who wins in 2012, and that you can expect to see Putin and Medvedev in
Moscow for the next 10 years,” he says.
Right now, Russia’s stock index is trading around 7 times forward earnings, with emerging markets trading at 10 times by
comparison. Those multiples are also discounted from average price-to-earnings for the big emerging markets, which are
normally closer to 12 in a strong market and as high as 14 during an emerging market bull run.
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
118
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
DDI 2011
Impact—Terrorism
Medvedev key to solve terror
UPI 11 United Press International, 7/6/2011, “Medvedev Urges New Anti-Terror Approaches”,
http://www.upi.com/Top_News/World-News/2011/07/06/Medvedev-urges-new-anti-terror-approaches/UPI-78671309959615/. CJS
Russian President Dmitry Medvedev called Wednesday for international cooperation and new methods to fight terrorism.
Speaking to representatives of security services from 63 nations gathered in St. Petersburg, Medvedev said, "Terrorism is
the most terrible threat of modern times. Today, we should search for new, more effective methods of preventing terror."
Law enforcement should "react harshly to the igniting of inter-ethnic and inter-religious hatred and propaganda of violence
and extremism, particularly in the global information sphere," RIA Novosti reported the president said.
Alexander Bortnikov, chief of Russia's Federal Security Service, proposed an international task force to head off terrorist
threats to the 2014 Winter Olympics in the Black Sea resort of Sochi.
Russian nuclear terrorism leads to extinction
Speice 6 Patrick F. Spiece, JD Candidate at the Marshall-Whythe School of Law, BA from the College of William and Mary, Wake
Forest University, February 2006, “Negligence and Nuclear Nonproliferation: Eliminating the Current Liability Barrier to Bilateral
U.S.- Russian Nonproliferation Assistance Programs”, http://scholarship.law.wm.edu/wmlr/vol47/iss4/10/ CJS
I. The History of U.S.-Russian Nonproliferation Agreements and Their Liability Provisions A. The Collapse of the Soviet
Union, the Threat of "Loose Nukes," and the Risk of "Brain Drain" Although a major armed conflict never occurred
between the United States and the Soviet Union during the Cold War, both states devoted significant economic and human
resources to preparing for a full-scale nuclear conflict. n24 Accordingly, the Soviet Union developed an extensive militaryindustrial complex, which was intended to mirror and surpass the United States' efforts to amass and develop nuclear
weapons, allowing the Soviet Union to acquire a vast arsenal of strategic and tactical nuclear weapons for waging war. n25
Entire cities were constructed to serve this goal, and thousands of nuclear physicists and other scientists that were employed
by the Soviet government for the sole purpose of develop- [*1435] ing a nuclear arsenal occupied these "nuclear cities."
n26 Vast sums of money were invested in development of nuclear weapons, resulting in the production and stockpiling of
40,000 assembled warheads and more than 1150 metric tons of weapons-grade fissile material. n27 With the end of the
Cold War in 1991, the states of the former Soviet Union were thrown into economic and political disarray. n28 Perhaps the
greatest risk that accompanied this collapse was the threat of "loose nuclear weapons." n29 The end of the Cold War largely
eliminated the risk of global nuclear conflict between states, but the threat of terrorist attacks became the primary challenge
to the United States' national security, as demonstrated by a number of incidents during the last decade. n30 Although no
terrorist acts [*1436] directed against the population or interests of the United States or other states have been launched
with nuclear weapons yet, this failure "must be assumed to be due to lack of means rather than lack of motivation." n31
Attempts by al-Qaeda to acquire nuclear material are well documented, n32 and several other attempted thefts of nuclear
material indicates that there is a demand for nuclear material among terrorist groups, many of which are hostile to the
United States. n33 The collapse of the Soviet Union dramatically increased the risk that terrorist organizations will succeed
in acquiring fissile material from Russia for several reasons. First, the end of the Soviet state marked the end of state
control over every aspect of life in the Soviet Union. n34 One by-product of stringent centralized control was heavy
regulation and intense security measures for military facilities and nuclear installations. n35 Second, the economic decline
that accompanied the transition to a market economy n36 exacerbated the problem, as the fiscal situation in the former
Soviet states, most notably [*1437] Russia, made security programs impossible to fund. n37 Graham Allison summarizes
the implications of post-Soviet disorder in Russia: The dramatic changes ... have produced political uncertainty, economic
distress, and social dislocation. For tens of millions of Russians, hardship and deprivation are inescapable facts of life...
[H]arsh economic conditions can create incentives for nuclear theft and smuggling. For people who are poorly housed,
poorly fed, and poorly paid (when paid at all), there will be a temptation to do what they can to improve their lives and
secure their futures. Russia's nuclear custodians face these pressures as they preside over weapons and materials that are
immensely valuable to any state or group that covets nuclear weapons. It is not hard to imagine that people leading bleak,
uncertain, and difficult lives might find irresistible the prospect of wealth and security via the nuclear black
market...Organizations such as the Russian military and Minatom are now operating in circumstances of great stress.
Money is in short supply, paychecks are irregular, living conditions unpleasant ... [D]isorder within Russia and the resulting
strains within the military could easily cause a lapse or a breakdown in the Russian military's guardianship of nuclear
weapons. n38 Accordingly, there is a significant and ever-present risk that terrorists could acquire a nuclear device or fissile
[Speice continues…no text deleted]
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
119
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
DDI 2011
Impact—Terrorism
[Speice continues…no text deleted]
material from Russia as a result of the confluence of Russian economic decline and the end of stringent Soviet-era nuclear security
measures. n39 Terrorist groups could acquire a nuclear weapon by a number of methods, including "steal[ing] one intact from the
stockpile of a country possessing such weapons, or ... [being] sold or given one by [*1438] such a country,
or [buying or stealing] one from another subnational group that had obtained it in one of these ways." n40 Equally
threatening, however, is the risk that terrorists will steal or purchase fissile material and construct a nuclear device on their
own. Very little material is necessary to construct a highly destructive nuclear weapon. n41 Although nuclear devices are
extraordinarily complex, the technical barriers to constructing a workable weapon are not significant. n42 Moreover, the
sheer number of methods that could be used to deliver a nuclear device into the United States makes it incredibly likely that
terrorists could successfully employ a nuclear weapon once it was built. n43 Accordingly, supply-side controls that are
aimed at preventing terrorists from acquiring nuclear material in the first place are the most effective means of countering
the risk of nuclear terrorism. n44 Moreover, the end of the Cold War eliminated the rationale for maintaining a large
military-industrial complex in Russia, and the nuclear cities were closed. n45 This resulted in at least 35,000 nuclear
scientists becoming unemployed in an economy that was collapsing. n46 Although the economy has stabilized somewhat,
there [*1439] are still at least 20,000 former scientists who are unemployed or underpaid and who are too young to retire,
n47 raising the chilling prospect that these scientists will be tempted to sell their nuclear knowledge, or steal nuclear
material to sell, to states or terrorist organizations with nuclear ambitions. n48 The potential consequences of the unchecked
spread of nuclear knowledge and material to terrorist groups that seek to cause mass destruction in the United States are
truly horrifying. A terrorist attack with a nuclear weapon would be devastating in terms of immediate human and economic
losses. n49 Moreover, there would be immense political pressure in the United States to discover the perpetrators and
retaliate with nuclear weapons, massively increasing the number of casualties and potentially triggering a full-scale nuclear
conflict. n50 In addition to the threat posed by terrorists, leakage of nuclear knowledge and material from Russia will
reduce the barriers that states with nuclear ambitions face and may trigger widespread proliferation of nuclear weapons. n51
This proliferation will increase the risk of nuclear attacks against the United States [*1440] or its allies by hostile states,
n52 as well as increase the likelihood that regional conflicts will draw in the United States and escalate to the use of nuclear
weapons. n53 B. U.S.-Russian Nonproliferation Agreements: Cooperative Threat Reduction Recognizing the risks that
accompanied Russia's economic decline and the concomitant inability to adequately secure assembled nuclear weapons and
fissile material, the United States deemed it desirable to establish cooperative programs to control the emerging nuclear
threat. In December 1991, the U.S. Congress approved, and President George H.W. Bush signed into law, the Soviet
Nuclear Threat Reduction Act of 1991, commonly referred to as the Nunn-Lugar Act. n54 The Act created a framework
through which the United States negotiates subsequent CTR agreements with the former Soviet states to provide bilateral
assistance through the Department of Defense (DOD) n55 for coping with specific issues related to demilitarization in the
post-Cold War world. n56 The United States has signed a number of CTR agreements with several former Soviet [*1441]
states, n57 and the success of these programs in reducing the national security risks of the crumbling former Soviet nuclear
infrastructure is universally acknowledged. n58 Given the hazards that accompany activities involving nuclear material,
n59 there has been an intense focus on the liability provisions that govern CTR assistance programs. n60
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
120
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
DDI 2011
***AT PERM***
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
121
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
DDI 2011
Co-op fails
Us-russian space cooperation fails
Pravda, As the leading Soviet state newspaper and organ of information and education, Pravda offered its readers well-written
articles and analyses on science, economics, cultural topics, and literature. There were letters from readers and officially sponsored
and approved materials to indoctrinate and inform its readers on Communist theory and programs, 20/5/ 10, Pravda,
http://english.pravda.ru/science/tech/20-05-2010/113443-space_cooperation-0/
According to the official space exploration program of the Russian Federation, the nation’s space agency, Roskosmos, does not see
activities outside Earth’s orbit without cooperation with other countries. In the past, space exploration programs were based on
national ambitions of the states which conducted those programs. The ambition to show the power of its science and technology made
the Kremlin launch the world’s first-ever satellite and then first man in space. The White House stunned the world with its Apollo
program. The defeat of the USSR in the lunar race made Soviet scientists develop orbital stations Salyut and Mir. The success of the
Soviet Union at this point was so impressive that it made the United States proceed in the same direction. In 1984, Ronald Reagan
announced the start of works to develop Space Station Freedom with the participation of America’s friends and allies. Tom Moser, the
director of the program, clearly stated in 1987, when he tried to convince the Congress to fund the orbital complex, that Space Station
Freedom would be developed to leave the Russians behind. The construction of the station with the participation of international
partners was supposed to show that “free nations” could cooperate in space as successfully as communist ones (the Soviet Union was
working on the Interkosmos program in cooperation with its political allies during those years). The end of the cold war and the space
race deprived the USA of its goals. Moreover, it turned out that coordinating efforts of different countries in one space project was a
very complicated objective. Space Station Freedom was supposed to enter orbit at the end of the 1980s. However, the designers of the
complex, who had already spent $8 billion on engineering works, could only present a pile of documents to the president and the
Congress. The program was eventually scrapped in the beginning of the 1990s. However, NASA suggested the White House should
invite Russia in the project to celebrate the start of the new era in US-Russian relations and to build the complex faster, better and
cheaper. NASA believed that Russia’s participation in the construction of the station, which was called the ISS, marked an obvious
achievement both from the political, technological and economic point of view. US specialists thought that Russia would help save
one year and $2 billion. In total, the construction of the ISS was evaluated at $17.4 billion. Russia helped in the solution of two vital
problems in the program. It provided the service module (SM) known as Zvezda (Star) and Soyuz spaceships. The module, which
provided some of the station’s life support systems, was launched to the station four years later that planned. US congressmen
calculated that the delay resulted in the losses of $5 billion. Russia was primarily responsible for the delay in the start of the
exploitation of the complex, not to mention the increased spending. US congressmen repeatedly offered to either exclude Russia from
the ISS program or simply purchase its service module. Now it is obvious that if Russia had been deprived of its membership in the
program, the space station would have stopped operating after the crash of Shuttle Columbia in 2003. Russia’s Soyuz and Progress
booster rockets remained the only option to deliver cargoes and astronauts to the space station before NASA resumed shuttle launches.
The fate of the ISS will solely depend on the Russian rockets after 2010, when the shuttle program is shut down completely. If
Columbia had not crashed, astronauts would have continued flying to the ISS and back on board NASA’s shuttles, whereas Russia’s
role would have been much less important. The problems connected with international cooperation between the members of the ISS
project and their dependence on Russia and the USA made NASA’s John Logsdon come to conclusion that the ISS program
experience was negative for its members. As for the international cooperation in post-ISS projects, Barack Obama traditionally sees
his major objective at this point in preserving America’s leadership in the organization of international efforts to explore the Moon,
Mars, etc. Unlike Russia, the USA has no official document related to the space exploration program that would stipulate the nation’s
future dependence on cooperation with other countries. The possible consequences of such dependence can be seen in the canceled
program of another manned flight to the moon. If the USA had accepted Roskosmos’s request to include Russia in the project, the
results would have led to lamentable consequences for Russia. Michael Griffin, a former head of NASA, said in 2006 that cooperation
works best only if it is based on you-pay-for-yourself principle. Russia would have ended up with nothing if it had been accepted. A
look back at the history of space exploration clearly shows that most significant and technological progress was achieved at the time
when it was connected with the solution of strictly national, not international problems of space exploration. Superpowers used space
technologies to demonstrate their scientific and technological strength. This competition gave a powerful incentive to the development
of space industries in Russia and the United States. International cooperation in space nowadays is impossible.
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
122
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
DDI 2011
Coop fails
Co-op can only work IF Russia is dominant – it’s a NET BENEFIT not a PERM
Pravda, As the leading Soviet state newspaper and organ of information and education, Pravda offered its readers well-written
articles and analyses on science, economics, cultural topics, and literature. There were letters from readers and officially sponsored
and approved materials to indoctrinate and inform its readers on Communist theory and programs, 20/5/ 10, Pravda,
http://english.pravda.ru/science/tech/20-05-2010/113443-space_cooperation-0/
The 2005 NASA budget of $16.2 billion approved by the US Congress means the country seriously plans to carry out Moon and
Martian expeditions independently. Other departments, except for the Pentagon, will have curtailed budgets while the NASA budget
will be 6 per cent bigger. Will Russia be allowed to participate in NASA's new projects now when the Russian space exploration
depends upon the American one? It is an open secret that Russia seriously benefits by international space cooperation, especially its
cooperation with the US. The joint flight of Soyuz and Apollo in 1975 demonstrated that the USSR and the USA could rescue space
crews if necessary. Thanks to the program the USSR developed new docking systems and tested docking procedures in orbit. The
program also added to the US's experience in rescue operations and maintained its manned flights. But for the program, America
would have had a 7-year interval between the 1974 Skylab program and the year of 1981 when shuttles were launched for the first
time. The breakup of the USSR and the devaluation of the scientific and political importance of space reduced the number of Russia's
manned flights to the minimum. In 1992, Russia and the USA concluded an agreement on shuttle flights to Mir. Deputy Chief
Designer of the Energia missile complex Valery Ryumin says the program helped the Russian manned cosmonautics survive in 19951998. The USA in its turn gained experience in flights to orbital complexes; astronauts learnt how to work at the space station.
Starting with 1993, Russia has been working at the International Space Station together with the USA, Europe, Canada and Japan. In
fact, joint projects result in political benefits as well. The victory of George W. Bush at the recent presidential election in the USA
means that America will be heading for the space objectives the president outlined in January 2004. In other words, the US plan to
develop a new CEV manned spaceship by 2014 to substitute shuttles; to accomplish another Moon expedition by 2020 and to start
manned flights to Mars after 2030. America will focus on development of the space industry under Bush. These are rather good
prospects for Russia from the point of view of short-term outlook. It may happen that George W. Bush will agree to use Russian
Soyuz spaceships for flights to the International Space Station between 2010 (when shuttles are supposed to be given up) and 20142017 when CEV starts its flights or the International Space Station deorbits. Will Russia be able to accomplish joint flights to Moon
and Mars? Bush devoted just few minutes to international cooperation in his hours-long speech on space issues on January 14, 2004.
The US president mentioned that America would invite other nations to share the challenges and the opportunities of a new era of
discoveries. America relies just upon itself in its prospective Moon and Martian expeditions. These projects stimulate US's scientific
and industrial resources; create breakthrough technologies that will make the USA competitive in the 21st century. The American
Physical Society has criticized the Martian and Moon projects for too abundant engineering and insufficient science. To protect the
national concerns, the USA will not involve rivals into development of advanced technologies. America will probably cooperate with
other countries, but it will still develop key technologies independently. In other words, America is the only country that will gain
political benefits by accomplishment of the inter-planetary projects. As for Russia, it is unlikely to cooperate with the USA in the
projects for several reasons. First, the USA would not like to stimulate Russia into creation of advanced technologies for production of
new arms. Second, Russia cannot now develop breakthrough space technologies. The Mir station was Russia's last serious
achievement; previous achievements can be used for near-earth flights only. Third, American politicians state that the US spent $5
billion more and the assembly was delayed for four years (Russia insists the delay made up 2.5 years) as a result of the cooperation
with Russia in the International Space Station program. Director of the Space Policy Institute at George Washington University's
Elliott School of International Affairs John Logsdon believes that the USA can let Russia participate in prospective projects only as a
producer of incidental parts. In other words, valuable cooperation with the USA is possible only when Russia and America act as
equals. Today, equality between Russia and the USA may be achieved only when America understands that Russia can reach Mars
independently. Then, America may agree to cooperate with Russia not to be in the rear guard in Mars exploration or to achieve its
goals quicker.
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
123
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
DDI 2011
Co-op fails
US – Russian co-operation withers the Russian program
Reuters, Thomson Reuters Corporation is a provider of information for the world's businesses and professionals, 4/10/ 11, Reuters,
http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/04/10/us-russia-space-gagarin-idUSTRE73910C20110410
Fifty years after Yuri Gagarin blasted into orbit, descendants of the Soviet craft that carried him still generate pride and profit for
Russia, but critics say the nation's space program has slid into stagnation. As it celebrates the pioneering flight on April 12, 1961 that
made Gagarin the first man in space, Russia nears another milestone: with the retirement of the U.S. shuttle program this year, it will
be the only nation fit to provide rides to the International Space Station. It is a distinction for a country with a history of space firsts,
beginning with the 1957 launch of the satellite Sputnik. U.S. space agency NASA pays a newly raised price of nearly $63 million each
time it sends an astronaut to the orbital station aboard a Russian Soyuz craft from Russia's Baikonur Cosmodrome in Kazakhstan -- the
launch pad for Gagarin's flight. But half a century after Gagarin's 108-minute voyage put the Soviet Union ahead in the Cold War
space race, critics charge that reliance on Soviet designs as cash cows has stunted innovation, and that Russia has irretrievably lost its
edge. "While we bask in the glory of having the only operating spacecraft, we are only making money off old rockets," said Vladimir
Gubarev, the Soviet spokesman for the 1975 Apollo-Soyuz program, which achieved the first docking of U.S. and Russian spacecraft.
MAN IN A BALLThat Soyuz craft was modeled on the generation of ships that catapulted the first Soviet spacemen into orbit, such
as Gagarin's Vostok-1. "You know why we beat America? For a really simple reason: We had the genius idea of making a sphere.
Vostok was a ball and we found a man small enough to fit in it," said Gubarev, who covered some 50 of the earliest launches as a
space journalist. Encumbered by a space suit, Gagarin, who was 5 feet 2 inches tall, had to hunker down in a capsule just 2 meters (6
feet 7 inches) in diameter for his single orbit of Earth. The single-use Soyuz owes its reputation for dependability to the long-secret
mastermind of the Soviet space programme, Sergei Korolyov, experts said. "The Soyuz runs like clockwork," Sergei Shamsutdinov,
space expert at Novosti Kosmonavtiki magazine. "Our Soviet engineers, from the get-go, built the craft very well, and today still it is
outfitted with 70s-era equipment, which runs beautifully." SPACE 'STAGNATION' In the 1960s, Gagarin's flight seemed to leap off
the pages of fantasy novels, inspiring dreams of Martian colonies and imminent deep-space travel. But much of that initial rapture has
now faded, leaving nostalgia among many in Russia for the days when the struggle between the two nuclear-armed superpowers
fueled and financed the pursuit of new horizons in science. U.S. astronauts and Russian cosmonauts "were never enemies in space, but
when we began cooperating on the ground they cut the funding," said veteran cosmonaut Georgy Grechko, 79. "Even the Americans
would call us and say 'launch something new, so they'll give us money.'"With competition eclipsed by cooperation, Russia's space
agency has survived over the past two decades by hiring out the third seat aboard the Soyuz to foreigners. "Cooperation is good, but as
the example of the international space station shows, it also leads to stagnation," Russian space policy analyst Yuri Karash said,
according to state-run news agency RIA. Gubarev said Russia had fallen so far behind it could achieve little better than a supporting
role today in the most cutting-edge projects. "In the meantime, America will take its time out and build an entirely new spacecraft, so
that five or six years down the line our Soyuz will be entirely redundant," he said. "No serious money is spent on breakthrough
projects. Experts say China could soon challenge both Russia and the United States in space. "The most important role will be played
by our Russian Soyuz craft now. But we cannot discount the Chinese, who are following their own path and doing all this
independently," Shamsutdinov told Reuters. NASA officials have voiced worries that the current budget financing will not be enough
to fund a new rocket and capsule system for deep space travel. NASA's proposed budget for fiscal 2011 is $18.7 billion, some five
times higher than Russia's. Russian industry insiders say President Barack Obama's decision to halt work on NASA's next-generation
Orion capsule threatens to take the wind out of a parallel Russian effort to design a replacement for the Soyuz that can fly beyond the
International Space Station's low 354-km (220 mile) orbit. "A little residual competition is a good thing," Sergei Krikalev, 52, who
heads Russia's cosmonaut training center after chalking up a record 803 days in space, told Reuters. WHAT NEXT? Addressing
concerns about Russia's role, Prime Minister Vladimir Putin said on Thursday the country could take pride in handling over 40 percent
of global space launches but must not be confined to the role of a "ferryman." "Now Russia is returning to researching the planets of
the solar system," he said. Russia's space agency will receive $753 million to ferry 12 U.S. astronauts to the space station from 20142016, NASA announced last month. Russia raked in some $2.5 billion from NASA and partner agencies for 42 seats on Soyuz craft
from 2007. Russia has increased space spending by some 40 percent per year during the last five years, according to Euroconsult, a
consulting body that tracks the industry. It has earmarked 200 billion roubles ($7 billion) for space programmes from 2010-2011.
Some of the money will fund a new launch facility in Vostochny in far eastern Russia, where the first launches are anticipated in 2015
and the first manned launch in 2018. "Gagarin's flight set the bar. We were always the leaders in space exploration and we must
uphold this status," the current commander of the International Space Station, Dmitry Kondratyev, said in a pre-launch interview.
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
124
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
DDI 2011
Perm Links to Politics
LINKS TO POLITICS - Republican don’t like US Russian Cooperation, want NASA to lead instead
Keith Laing, Reporter for the Hill, 7/7/11, The Hill, The Hill is a congressional newspaper that publishes daily when Congress is in
session, with a special focus on business and lobbying, political campaigns, http://thehill.com/blogs/transportation-report/1093nasa/170259-sen-rubio-asks-whats-next-for-nasa-after-final-shuttle-flight
Americans need to know what the next steps for NASA will be after the launch of the final space shuttle flight, Florida Sen. Marco
Rubio (R) said in a speech on the Senate floor Thursday. Atlantis is set to embark on its final mission Friday. Rubio, a freshman many
Republicans hope will be the party's vice presidential nominee in 2012, lauded the space program but said its future must be clarified.
"When this final shuttle mission draws to a close, many Americans will be startled by the realization that we don't have an answer to
the question: What's next for NASA?," Rubio said. "NASA has no answer, the administration has no answer, and as we transition to
the next generation of space exploration, Florida's aerospace workers are left with only questions about their future." Rubio and other
Florida Republicans have criticized the Obama administration for the end of the space program, though the decision to retire the space
shuttles was originally made under former President George W. Bush in 2004. Without it, Rubio said the U.S. will be reliant on
foreign countries for space travel. "We know that for the next few years, we'll have to rely on the Russians to get us to space. Just a
few weeks ago, that only cost $50 million an astronaut. Now the price tag is up to $63 million per astronaut. We can only imagine it
will go higher. "Whereas America once led the way to the moon, we now face the unacceptable prospect of limited options to simply
get a human into orbit," he continued. "We know that our commercial space partners are working to fill some of the gap in our human
space flight capabilities, and that is a promising development that we should encourage. But we need NASA to lead." It is important
because "space exploration speaks volumes about America, who we are as a people and as a nation," Rubio also said. "When America
was born 235 years ago, surely our founding fathers could not fathom that one day our people would fly amongst the stars," he said.
"But the truth is it has always been our destiny. In the 19th century, it became our manifest destiny to explore and push westward until
the American land stretched from sea to shining sea. And once we reached as far west as we could, Americans had no choice but to
gaze up to the sky and settle on the stars as our next frontier." The space shuttle Atlantis is scheduled to take off Friday morning at
11:26 a.m., though weather forecasts of rain are threatening the launch. After its flight, to the International Space Station, Atlantis will
be retired at the Kennedy Space Center in Cape Canaveral, Fla. The Space Shuttle Atlantis is scheduled to return to earth on
Wednesday. When it does, it will mark not only the end of the space shuttle program, but also the end of an era of U.S. leadership in
space exploration. Two generations of Americans have come of age since President John F. Kennedy set the nation's sights on the
moon. First came the Mercury, Gemini, and Apollo programs. For the last 30 years, the space shuttle has been the vehicle of American
ingenuity and manned space exploration. Despite the dedication of the engineers and the bravery of the astronauts who made the space
shuttle fly, the program never lived up to its expectation of providing a low-cost, reliable way to ferry people and equipment into
space. Beyond the administrative and budget problems were the heartbreaking Challenger and Columbia disasters. Even with this
troubled history, Texas Sen. John Cornyn summed up the feelings of many Americans when he said, “The last shuttle launch means
that we are now going to be dependent on the tender mercies of Russia and other countries to buy room on a shuttle or rocket that will
actually get us to the International Space Station.” The nation is engaged in a discussion about what the priorities of government
should be, about what government should do and at what cost. Manned space travel is not a topic of conversation. At some point, it
needs to be. For the moment, the focus is appropriately on the bottom line of the federal budget. But our leaders should not lose sight
of lofty goals that have inspired the nation and the world. President Barack Obama has outlined a plan to send astronauts to Mars.
That, however, would be far into the future. A more modest and feasible goal is needed in the near term to keep the United States at
the forefront of humanity's exploration of space. When the wheels of Atlantis touch down, it will mark the end of another phase in the
effort to push the boundaries of human imagination. The effort itself and America's role in it cannot — must not — end.
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
125
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
DDI 2011
Perm Links to Politics
Republicans agree Russia not to be trusted
Tom Ramstack, AHN News Legal Correspondent, 7/7/11, AHN, AHN delivers Latest News from All Headline News and
briefs on the latest top news stories, celebrity gossip, business, entertainment. http://gantdaily.com/2011/07/07/congressconsiders-resetting-russian-relations/
Washington, D.C., United States (AHN) – It might be time to rethink the Obama administration’s “reset” toward greater
cooperation between the United States and Russia, witnesses told a congressional panel Thursday. The hearing before the
House Foreign Affairs Committee responded to accusations by some members of Congress that President Obama has gone
too far in trying to please the Russians, but received little in return. To foster warmer relations, the Obama administration has
overlooked the Russians’ authoritarian human rights policies, assistance to Iran’s nuclear development program and interference with
NATO’s European missile defense plans, according to his critics in Congress. “The Obama administration has offered one
concession after another, but the concrete results have been meager at best,” said Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, chairwoman of the House
Foreign Affairs Committee. Some of her harshest criticism was directed at the Russian interpretation of last year’s New
START treaty that seeks to limit nuclear weapons of both countries. President Obama says the treaty does not restrict
U.S. efforts to set up a missile defense network in Europe. The Russian government interprets the New START treaty to
mean the missile system should be banned in Europe. “Russia’s true motive is a political one,” said Ros-Lehtinen, a Florida
Republican. “Namely, to divide NATO and to demonstrate to the countries of Central and Eastern Europe that, despite their close
alliance with the U.S., Moscow intends to retain a dominant influence over their affairs.” Examples she mentioned included a cyber
attack against Estonia for its removal of a Soviet memorial in its capital and the 2008 Soviet invasion of the former Soviet republic
of Georgia.“The tepid U.S. response has set a dangerous precedent and convinced Moscow that it has little to worry about,” RosLehtinen said. The term “reset” of relations between the United States and Russia resulted from a joint statement of
President Barack Obama and Russian President Dmitry Medvedev during the 2009 G20 summit in London. The
statement promised a “fresh start” in relations and called on Iran to abandon its nuclear development program. Months
later, on March 24, 2010, the United States and Russia reached the New START agreement that limits long-range nuclear
weapons each side can hold to 1,500. It places additional restrictions on missile launchers and other weapons systems.
Since then, the Russian national security establishment has resisted any cooperation with NATO, which it distrusts, said
Stephen R. Sestanovich, former State Department advisor on the Soviet Union and now a college professor of international
relations.“Here the influence of old thinking is undoubted,” Sestanovich said. “The Russian military was for years untouched by
reform and new ideas and many of its arguments against missile defense and cooperation are absurd.” Nevertheless, the alternative
to cooperation with the Russians is a return to mutually destructive hostilities, he said.“We need to carry forward the reset
without pretending that Russia and the United States have attained a greater degree of mutual trust and respect than they have,”
Sestanovich said. Ariel Cohen, a senior fellow on Russian affairs at the conservative public policy group Heritage
Foundation, suggested the U.S. government pressure the Russians to cooperate more fully in the “reset” toward better
foreign relations. “Congress and the administration should not tolerate Russian mischief, either domestic or geopolitical,” Cohen
said. Among the challenges faced by the United States is widespread corruption among Russian government officials and
businessmen. “Congress should enable the U.S. to deny visas to corrupt Russian businessmen, examine their banking practices and
acquisitions, and target Russian police and prosecutors who fabricate evidence and judges who rubber stamp convictions,” he said.
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
126
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
DDI 2011
***AFF***
Perm – coop Solves Relations
Cooperation key to invigorating US- Russian relations
Alexander Savelyev 04, Head of Sector Geopolitics of Strategic Analysis IMEMO Vice-President of the Institute of National
Security and Strategic Studies (INBSI), “ Prospects for US-Russian Cooperation in Ballistic Missile Defense and Outer Space
Activities” Journal of Slavic Military Studies 17: 99–109, 2004, http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13518040490440674, TJ
After quite an optimistic stage of space cooperation between 1993 and 2000, when such projects as the international orbit
station, the sea-launch system and others took place, the current situation in US-Russian non-military cooperation in outer space
could be described, if not as stagnation, as uncertainty. One can say that the optimism of the 1990s was not realized. Moreover,
beginning with the new millennium the US obviously lost interest in cooperation in space with Russia, having shifted its attention to
the military aspects of space exploration. It is symbolic that, for the first time, in May 2002, issues of US-Russian cooperation in
outer space received practically no reflection in the final documents of the summit of the two presidents (G. Bush and V.
Putin). After the ‘Discovery’ tragedy, the US began to pay more attention to the prospects for US-Russian cooperation in
this sphere. Thus, according to the US Deputy Secretary of State for Arms Control, S. Red1maker, the US is critically
dependent on Russian launchers.5 Nevertheless the real prospects for such cooperation remain unclear. A number of
factors play a negative role in this situation. The Russian-American Commission on Economic and Technical Cooperation,
established in April 1993 (at a summit in Vancouver), has ceased to exist. Issues of the US-Russian partnership in outer
space occupied a very serious place in the agenda of this commission. 6 Throughout the 1990s this commission played
the role of the main coordinating body for US-Russian cooperation in outer space. Another negative factor is the passivity
of the Special Committee on Prevention of An Arms Race in Outer Space – PAROS.7 This committee was established
back in 1985 within the framework of the Conference on Disarmament. The activity of this committee is all but blocked,
since the participants still cannot reach a consensus on the format of the negotiations. Finally, the most important factor
preventing further development of the US-Russian cooperation in this sphere is the position of the US. The US still does not
express much interest in this issue and attempts to solve the main problems unilaterally.8 It is absolutely clear that the US has
great superiority in space technology and possesses the most modern scientific, technical and industrial base in this area.
Nevertheless, one should not consider this superiority a constant factor. Technical changes under circumstances of rapid scientific
progress, accompanied by political and military factors, as well as the increasing importance of space systems for all aspects of the
development of other countries (many of which try to obtain independent capabilities for space exploration), can lead to a
situation in which the US not only changes its position on these issues, but also loses its number-one place in this area.
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
127
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
DDI 2011
Perm do both Solvency
Doing both solves better – competition not created that way and redundancy is necessary
Alan Boyle 05, Science editor for msnbc.com, “Russia Thriving Again on the Final Frontier,” September 29 2005,
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9509254/ns/technology_and_science-space/t/russia-thriving-again-final-frontier/, TJ
Although Russia and the United States have the same targets in mind — the moon, Mars and beyond — there's virtually no chance of a new
international space race breaking out. Instead, the Russians seem to be positioning themselves for a place in an internationalized space
exploration initiative. "If there would be such a concept adopted by the international community, certainly with an appropriate decision on the U.S. side,
there would be redundancy achieved, which is necessary anyway for a program of such complexity," Krasnov said. It's happened before —
with the international space station, as a matter of fact. Back in the 1990s, NASA determined that it would be just too expensive to go it alone on the Space Station
Freedom project, and invited Russia to join in the venture. Russia, meanwhile, decided it was too expensive to keep up the aging Mir space station. Compromises were made,
and a deal was struck. The
United States and Russia are likely to forge a similar compromise this time around. "At some point we could
combine the two exploration programs," Karash said. "This would be the most effective division of labor between the countries ."
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
128
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
DDI 2011
No solve – Russia is Terrible at space
Russian Space Program Fatally Flawed—Aging Workforce and Limited Budget Prevents Success.
Englund, Will 11, Staff Writer for the Washington Post. 7-5-11. Washington Post. “As U.S. halts space shuttle, others continue
with launches and exploration.” http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/as-us-halts-space-shuttle-others-continuewith-launches-and-exploration/2011/06/27/gHQAmKe2yH_story.html, HN
Russia — or, to be exact, the Soviet Union — was the first country into space, and it doesn’t intend to forget that. Its Soyuz spacecraft
will now be the only means for Russians, Americans or anyone else to reach the international space station. The Russian space
program, which suffered in the 1990s — remember the Mir space station, which was killed off in 2001 and allowed to fall into the
sea? — is more robust today. But with a budget of about $3 billion, it still suffers from an aging workforce and struggles to hire
talented staff. An ambitious plan to build a new launch center in eastern Siberia (Russia currently uses the Baikonur site, in
Kazakhstan) and introduce a new line of rockets and a new spacecraft by 2018 looks as though it may be delayed. Russia is also
working on developing a reusable rocket, which it believes would make it the leader in space for the next 50 years. Some Russian
scientists believe that spaceflight can’t advance much further without new means of propulsion, most likely from nuclear-powered
engines. Russia has always emphasized manned flight but is currently putting a satellite system in place to rival the GPS system. That
effort has been hampered by the country’s failure to launch three satellites into orbit last year. After years of complaints about
nepotism and inefficiency, the head of the Russian program, Anatoly Perminov, was recently pushed into retirement, just before the
50th anniversary of Yuri Gagarin’s flight as the first human in space.
Russia’s space program can’t match the US
Yahoo News 11, “Does the Russian Space Program Have a Future 50 Years After Gagarin?” April 7 2011,
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ac/20110407/sc_ac/8234823_does_the_russian_space_program_have_a_future_50_years_after_gagarin_1,
TJ
Whether anything will come of it remains to be seen. The Russian economy, thanks to increased oil prices, has recovered
somewhat. Spending for space has almost matched the level of the height of the Soviet Union. But Russia's approach to space
seems to be primarily state-centric. There is no equivalent to an Elon Musk or Richard Branson trying out innovation and building
rockets for both a government and commercial market. The American approach to space commercialization may not be perfect, but
this may be the Achilles heel of Russian space aspirations.
low productivity and lack of technical discipline hinders the neg’s solvency
Weird 7/19/11- Fred Weir, Correspondent and Staff Writer for the Christian Science Monitor (7/19/11, “Russian Telescope
Launch Pulls National Space Program Out of Black Hole,” http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Europe/2011/0719/Russian-telescopelaunch-pulls-national-space-program-out-of-black-hole/%28page%29/2) SP
"Russia is returning to scientific programs in space after a long break," Vladimir Popovkin, chief of the Russian space
agency Roskosmos, was quoted as saying by the official Itar-TASS agency Monday. But despite all this good news, some
space experts strike a cautionary note. "The old problems of Russian space industries are still with us: low productivity and
lack of technical discipline," says independent expert Andrei Ionin. "There could be lots of problems in future. "Still, this is
a great moment. Our people can raise their heads and be proud," he adds.
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
129
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
DDI 2011
No solve – Russia is Terrible at space
Russia’s space program inefficient
RIA Novosti 2008 “Russia Could Learn from US Space Program,” June 10,
http://www.spacedaily.com/reports/Russia_Could_Learn_From_US_Space_Program_999.html, TJ
NASA will lack manned spacecraft for reaching the ISS after U.S. space shuttles are grounded in 2010, pending the
introduction of a new transport system in 2013. But it would be an exaggeration to say that top NASA managers are seriously
worried about this. In August 2006, President George W. Bush said interplanetary missions were becoming the main
aspect of the U.S. space program. Washington, which has already spent $100 billion on the ISS project, continues to
support it only through sheer inertia. However, the Russian space program revolves almost completely around the ISS. According
to Vitaly Lopota, CEO of the Rocket and Space Corporation Energia, the project annually receives $600 million, or 50% of the
national space budget. Russian analysts believe that the ISS project requires at least $1.2 billion a year until 2015. This is
why Moscow has to sign the Soyuz contract with the United States, no matter what. The ISS project leaves a lot to be
desired. The station's Russian segment has not been completed: only three out of 10 modules are in service today. Due to acute power
shortages, the modules operate below their ability. Moreover, the ISS telecommunications network, the pillar of any space mission, is
not very good. Much has been said about the ISS's inadequate scientific program. Certainly, ISS experiments have not yet
improved living standards on Earth. Paradoxically, the ineffective ISS probably saved the Russian space program in the
"cash-strapped" 1990s, when the country's space industry managed to stay afloat by building manned Soyuz spacecraft
and Progress automatic cargo craft. Nevertheless, virtually all of the Russian space program's state funding is spent on
manned missions. On June 4, Yury Osipov, president of the Russian Academy of Sciences, said the country was rapidly losing its
leadership in the sphere of scientific space projects, and that it had orbited only two space probes after the abortive launch of
the Mars-96 spacecraft in 1996. "Many projects are being postponed each year, and foreign partners are withdrawing from them.
The United States invested $100 million into the absolutely unique Radioastron project but eventually decided to call it
quits because Moscow repeatedly put off the launch for the lack of funding. Failure to abide by project deadlines is a major
problem," Osipov said. Apart from international scientific programs, Russia lacks its own automatic probes. Weather-satellite and
remote-sensing satellite projects are still in their early stages. In an article published on the official Roscosmos site on June 4,
Lopota said 95% of the U.S. space budget was being spent on near-Earth projects, and that long-range missions still
received only 3-5%. In effect, President Bush's politically motivated statements differ completely from U.S. economic
requirements. Despite appearances, NASA, which receives 14-fold greater state funding than Roscosmos, is still in no hurry to
finance manned and interplanetary missions, preferring to implement cost-effective projects instead. Consequently, we
could learn something from the experience of our U.S. partner.
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
130
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
DDI 2011
131
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
DDI 2011
Russian Space kills their econ
Russian space exploration kills their economy
Maria Antonova. Staff writer for Agence France Press. 7-2-11. Agence France Press. “Russia gains edge in space race as US
shuttle bows out.” http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5hGADnIqGh-ZfhBj6DhJYbEgvQpg?docId=CNG.929e9c254b0a78971b4b58b7a3749ac8.241
While Russia gains a symbolic victory, it will be a costly one, with the obligation to build more space ships to go back and
forth to the ISS eating up a budget that could be spent on other projects. Unlike the reusable NASA shuttles, the Russian
Soyuz space capsules are single-use, except for the section in which spacemen return to Earth. The situation is "not very
convenient because it lays a heavy burden on Roskosmos's production capacities," space industry expert Igor Marinin told
AFP. Roskosmos this year declared its budget as $3 billion, a fraction of NASA's massive $18.5 billion budget. And it has
faced embarrassing setbacks, including the failure of several satellite launches that led to the sacking of the long-serving
space chief Anatoly Perminov in April. The country's space industry has also drawn smirks with a clunky experiment
simulating a trip to Mars, in which volunteers are spending more than a year confined at a Moscow research institute and
"landed" in a specially designed sand pit. To recoup its costs, Roskosmos hopes to build a stronger presence in the
commercial space market, such as satellite launches, its newly appointed chief Vladimir Popovkin said at the Saint
Petersburg Economic Forum last month.
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
132
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
DDI 2011
Econ alt causes
Multiple other factors trump
ERIC PFANNER 1/26/11 (Writer for the Deal Book section of NYT, NYT, http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2011/01/26/medvedevdefends-russias-modernization-efforts/)
DAVOS, Switzerland — President Dmitri A. Medvedev of Russia on Wednesday defended his efforts to modernize the country, in a
speech intended to reassure foreign investors after a deadly attack at a Moscow airport renewed concerns about social unrest. “Major
changes have taken place in Russian society and the Russian economy,” Mr. Medvedev said at the annual meeting of the World
Economic Forum in this Swiss ski resort. “We are developing and we are moving ahead.” After several years in which the forum was
dominated by the global financial and economic crisis, security issues have moved back up the list of global concerns this year, with
corporate leaders and policy makers focusing on the Moscow bombing and turmoil in North Africa, among other places. Mr.
Medvedev shortened his stay in Davos after the airport attack, which killed 35 people. Originally set to last several days, the visit was
cut to a few hours. Video: What some Davos attendees thought of Medvedev's speech » The attack put a damper on Mr. Medvedev’s
plan to present Russia as a modern, stable country that welcomed foreign investment. The Russian delegation has organized a
prominent presence in Davos: Sberbank, a Russian bank, has bought up some of the prime billboard sites along the Promenade, the
main street in Davos, with the tag line “great country, great partner.” Mr. Medvedev’s visit was aimed at attracting foreign capital to
Russia, after the country’s budget deficit rose and financial reserves that piled up during the boom years, largely from exports of oil,
dwindled. The government has announced plans to privatize a number of state assets, including the bank VTB, shares in oil
companies, hydroelectric dams and shipping lines. It also plans to sell new ruble-denominated bonds, and is wooing foreign investors
for projects that even include ski area developments in the volatile Northern Caucasus region. Analysts said investors were likely to
look beyond terrorist attacks like the airport bombing, which, according to the government, has the hallmarks of militants from the
Northern Caucasus. “I don’t think this plays into perceptions of Russia,” said Roland Rechtsteiner, managing partner of corporate risk
practice at Oliver Wyman, a consulting firm. “The threat exists in the United States. It exists in the U.K. It exists in Germany. It exists
everywhere.” Investors are more concerned about issues like corruption, bureaucracy and legal certainty, Mr. Rechtsteiner said, as
well as the “social development” of the country. “It has to be attractive for people to live and work in Russia ,” he said. In his speech,
Mr. Medvedev acknowledged these criticisms, but insisted that progress had been made. “Today we are the way we are,” he said.
“And let me tell you that Russia indeed faces many difficulties in creating the rule of law and building a modern economy. Russia has
many social problems, although in recent years we have solved many. “We are willing to receive friendly advice,” he said. “What we
don’t need is lecturing. We should be working together.” As Mr. Medvedev traveled to Davos, he got some not-so-friendly advice,
from a major opponent of the government, the jailed tycoon Mikhail Khodorkovsky. In comments provided to several European
newspapers, including The International Herald Tribune, Mr. Khodorkovsky, who is serving a prison sentence on fraud and tax
evasion convictions that he says are politically motivated, renewed his criticism of the Russian legal system.
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
133
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
DDI 2011
Econ alt causes
Modernization will fail – lack of focus on political transformation makes other factors irrelevant
Alexander Kliment 10/29/10 (is an analyst in Eurasia Group's Europe and Eurasia practice. Foreign Policy,
http://eurasia.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2010/10/29/can_russia_make_modernization_work_in_the_21st_century)
The idea of "modernization" is hardly new to Russian politics. From Peter the Great to Stalin to Putin, Russia's leaders have always
been obsessed with "catching up" to a more modernized Europe. But over the past two years, the word has become a kind of magical
catch-all term in the Russian political lexicon. The word is on the lips of just about every mayor, governor, minister and businessman
in the country. A flurry of high level governmental commissions has been formed to address the issue. Moscow has even contracted a
New York PR firm to gin up a website that shows -- depending on your point of view -- how "modern" Russia is or how far the
country has to go. The trouble with all this is that it's still very hard to understand what modernization really means for the people
who use it and what it would actually take to "modernize" Russia. Most Russian officials agree that their economy is far too
vulnerable to price fluctuations in international commodities markets and that Russia's industrial base is in sorry Soviet shape. Beyond
that, however, agreement breaks down. Each of the country's various political and economic interest groups has its own conceptions of
what the modernization of Russia means and how best to go about achieving it. And as with interest groups everywhere, the
definitions are often self-serving. Some officials, like Medvedev, articulate a liberal idea of modernization. Liberal modernizers -who draw support from some of the president's closest economic advisors and the country's cosmopolitan elite -- want to do three
things: upgrade Russia's dilapidated infrastructure and rusting industrial base; diversify Russia's economy away from over-reliance on
oil and gas exports via state-funded development of various high tech industries; and, crucially, to undertake political reforms at some
medium-term point. This version of modernization depends in large part on the cultivation of closer ties with the developed
economies of Europe and the Americas to help with investment and access to latest technologies. You can find a fuller description of
this model in Medvedev's famous "Go, Russia!" manifesto, which appeared in September 2009. The essay drew largely on ideas laid
out by Putin a decade earlier , but the focus on modernization of Russian politics and society was bold, lucid, and -- in today's Russia - almost totally impracticable. Then there's the modernization that Putin talks about today. That version, which, not surprisingly, has
much more political support behind it, shares the liberal modernizers' plan to upgrade infrastructure and diversify the economy. But
you won't find anything in this version that includes serious consideration of political reform, especially of the kind that might allow
for genuine pluralism. For Putin and his circle, you can't undertake serous economic reform without the centralized authority
guaranteed by Russia's current quasi-authoritarian political system. To attempt both at once is to invite the chaos of perestroika. (In a
way, Putin, like Pyotr Stolypin, Russia's great, pre-revolutionary modernizer, wants "twenty years of peace and quiet" before genuine
political reform can be attempted. Stolypin only got 11 years before he was assassinated.) Then there are those Russian officials who
use the word modernization to promote any major state spending projects that will line their pockets. This is the kind of modernization
favored by many of Russia's state capitalists, those who see modernization as an opportunity to win government contracts from
commercial partnerships with particular state-run companies. These guys have no more interest in political reform than Putin does,
and they have almost nothing to say on the subject of economic diversification. Within the dinosaur-era industries, those kept alive
only by state subsidy granted to prevent a surge of unemployment and the resulting political unrest, these are the last of the mastodons.
This is the opposite of modernization -- by anyone's definition. What does all this mean for Russia's future? Does modernization
simply mean application of a new coat of paint and construction of some new pipelines? Or is there a credible and clearly demarcated
path toward construction of a 21st century economy? Not yet. The Skolkovo Innovation Center, which aims to create a "Russian
Silicon Valley" just outside of Moscow, will move forward haphazardly, and Medvedev will continue to talk up plans to transform
Moscow into an international financial center, though few informed analysts believe it can extend its influence much beyond the
former borders of the Soviet Union anytime soon. But political reform, the kind that might enable innovation from below instead of
endlessly subsidizing it from above, is not really on the table -- and won't be for the foreseeable future. It's hard to think of any
developing state that has succeeded in implementing reforms on this scale without strong central planning. But for states to modernize
economies, they also need to modernize themselves. The real modernization challenge facing Russia today, in contrast with the
campaigns of previous centuries, is not one of mobilizing massive numbers of bodies to build things. It's about cultivating, unleashing,
enabling and then protecting the innovative potential of the Russian people. That's where bloated bureaucracy, weak rule of law, and
weak democratic accountability slam on the brakes. When it comes to modernization, Russia's current system can certainly plant
many of the seeds. But without substantive political reform, it will ultimately have little chance of harvesting them.
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
134
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
DDI 2011
Econ alt causes
A laundry-list of factors mean the CP can’t solve the net benefit
Mark Kopinski 1/19/11 (Chief Investment Officer, International Equity of American Century Investments Blog, ACIB,
http://americancenturyblog.com/2011/01/russia%E2%80%99s-push-for-economic-diversificationand-modernization/)
One of the biggest problems facing Russia, however, is its lack of economic diversification and overreliance on revenues from oil and
gas exports.” Since the collapse of the Soviet Union two decades ago, Russia has transformed itself from a centrally planned to a
market-based economy. Along the way, however, the country’s push for economic diversification and modernization hasn’t been easy.
Russia is contending with a host of issues, including a crumbling infrastructure, an aging workforce and inadequate pension system,
and the development of new gas and oil fields to replace depleting current ones. Property rights remain weak and state interference in
the private sector is also problematic. One of the biggest problems facing Russia, however, is its lack of economic diversification and
overreliance on revenues from oil and gas exports.
Corruption of lack of rule of law means businesses don’t want to invest
The Institute of Modern Russia 4/12/11 (Russian policy think group, The Institute of Modern Russia,
http://imrussia.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=76:lack-of-rule-of-law-in-russia-brings-downmodernization&catid=40:events&Itemid=58&lang=en)
In his keynote speech Lev Ponomarev pointed out that the duplicity of Russia’s leaders, perpetuates Russia’s human rights issues,
despite wide coverage and discussion of these issues within the country. He explained that the first key to the improvement of legal
conditions within Russia is a repair of the country’s broken judiciary, which delivers guilty verdicts at an astoundingly higher rate than
the world average. Trial by jury, he said, could be the locomotive of change within this system. Additionally, Ponomarev singled out
Russia’s corrupted law enforcement organizations and overlooked prison system. Ariel Cohen diagnosed Russia’s problems enforcing
the basic rule of law, an issue often subjugated to the realm of defense issues. He elucidated the confusing and often farcical situation
by explaining the phenomenon of retroactive criminalization by which corrupt Russian officials target businesses, such as casinos, for
legal action, often with the help of law enforcement agencies. It is the “symbiosis of law enforcement and legal activity,” Mr. Cohen
explained, “that undermines the very notion of the rule of law.”
Political challenges trump attempts at tech modernization – empirics prove
Georgian Institute for Russian Studies February 23, 2011 (Russian studies policy group, “Russia: the Current State and
Modernization Plans – Impact on the Region” – held
http://www.facebook.com/note.php?note_id=10150096862062523)
by
the
Georgian
Institute
for
Russian
Studies”,
When discussing the current state of affairs in Russia, hence the trends of modernization, one of the Speakers noted that, while
premature to talk in detail about the trends of the post-crisis world, it could be mentioned that general challenge that Russia has to
address lied in the fact that Russia’s current political, economic and social system (with its own ways of distribution of economic
benefits and wealth and relationship between the state and the society layers) that was formed during the opulence of resources
following the collapse of the early 90’s is faced again with the scarcity of resources, brought about by the world economic crisis.
Therefore, in mid-term perspective Russia’s sustainable development cannot be based on energy exports only. Hence the need for
modernization of the economy, its liberalization and attraction of foreign direct investments. Parallels had been drawn with
Gorbachev’s attempt for Perestroyka and a similarity noted, namely that Perestroyka then and Modernization now were both dictated
by the necessity to bridge the gap between Russia’s growing (economic) needs and its technological backwardness, noting that in both
cases ‘modernization’ meant technological innovation, perhaps with a degree of changes in the economic model but not a change to
the polity. The Speakers mentioned that while there seems to be an understanding within the country’s political leadership and elites in
general that a modernization is needed, there also seems to be an internal conflict of perceptions, and that the very same elites being
part of the system that is to be modernized as a result may lose their elite positions. Therefore, the absence of a strong economic group
or elite interested in liberalization of economy limits the ‘modernization spirit’ to just technological innovations. Perennial problem of
corruption within the state bureaucracy that has become a ‘way of life’ and a ‘method of distribution of wealth’ was singled out among
the obstacles for modernization (and/or technological innovation)
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
135
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
DDI 2011
Space Not key to economy
Space investments not sufficient
Georgian Institute for Russian Studies February 23, 2011 (Russian studies policy group, “Russia: the Current State and
Modernization Plans – Impact on the Region” – held
http://www.facebook.com/note.php?note_id=10150096862062523)
by
the
Georgian
Institute
for
Russian
Studies”,
It was also noted that the current efforts for technological modernization also have its limitations as they are focused on creation of
‘islands of successes’ (such as Skolkovo), while overlooking the mainstream economy. Nevertheless, the Speakers also mentioned that
there is a tendency from mono-centrism to polycentrism, with regions becoming politically more diverse (growth of political pluralism
and opposition). It was underscored that gradually, due to globalization trends, Russia is becoming more integrated, as well as
dependant on the world economy. The Russian political and economic elites are also becoming more integrated with the rest of the
world elites, and particularly the West (economic ties, joint businesses, personal factors – bank accounts and properties in
western/European countries).
Space is not part of the modernization strategy
Doug Messier 3/9/11 (Writer for Space Parabolic, a space industry and tourism news site,
http://www.parabolicarc.com/2011/03/09/russian-space-research-gasping-breath/)
As Moscow gears up for the 50th anniversary of Yuri Gagarin’s historic spaceflight on April 12 amid a number of ambitious
new space initiatives, some in the space research community are feeling left out: The modernisation pushed by President
Dmitry Medvedev has prompted a flurry of investment into the Skolkovo Innovation Centre, and cutting-edge industries such as
nanotechnology are benefiting from high level backing. But efforts to recreate the commercial successes of Silicon Valley in Russia
risk leaving many space programmes earthbound due to lack of funding. It’s a seemingly strange conflict of priorities since,
as Professor Vadim Gushin of Russia’s Institute of Biomedical Problems points out, space technology is by definition
innovative. But his involvement in multi-national efforts to improve the physical and emotional well-being of cosmonauts
has shown that space research does not feature prominently on Medvedev’s much-touted innovation agenda. He’s right. Space
research is not a big priority. Russia is focused on other areas, including two new rocket boosters, a successor for the Soyuz
spacecraft, a new spaceport in the Far East, and its first interplanetary probe in 15 years. The new boosters and
spaceport are, in part, to eliminate the country’s dependence upon foreign countries for space capabilities, a situation that
resulted from the breakup of the Soviet Union in 1991.
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
136
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
DDI 2011
Non-Unique- US Winning
Retiring the old space shuttles helps the U.S. win the space race- increases innovation and pushes the
frontiers of space exploration
Klotz 7/15/11- Irene Klotz, Reuters Staff Writer (7/15/11, “UPDATE 1-Astronaut welcomes China to space brotherhood,”
http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/07/15/space-shuttle-idUSN1E76E1GU20110715) SP
"It's going to be sad to retire the shuttle," said Atlantis commander Chris Ferguson. "That said, it's had a very long and
storied career. It's done tremendous things." The shuttle's legacy includes launching and servicing the Hubble Space
Telescope, dispatching planetary probes and Earth-orbiting satellites and building the space station, which is as big as fivebedroom house. In a telephone call with U.S. President Barack Obama, Ferguson said Atlantis' crew will leave an American
flag carried on the first U.S. shuttle mission behind on the station when it undocks on July 19. That flag will be a prize for
the first commercial space craft to reach the station from U.S. soil. "Good luck to whoever grabs that flag," Obama said.
Obama said that after the shuttle program ends NASA will set its sights on other destinations, including Mars. "While this
mission marks the final flight of the space shuttle program it also ushers in an exciting new era to push the frontiers of
space exploration and human space flight," Obama said. Back at Mission Control in Houston, NASA was trouble-shooting
a problem with one of the shuttle's main computers, which shut down Thursday night. NASA flies five computers on the
shuttle so the loss of one will not affect the mission, officials said. The problem is believed to be unrelated to another
computer glitch earlier in the mission.
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
137
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
DDI 2011
138
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
DDI 2011
Perm do both NB for telescopes
Russia’s RadioAstron operates on radio, whereas the Hubble telescope is an optical telescope- the two
complement each other rather than replacing each other
Moskvitch 7/19/11- Katia Moskovitch, Staff Writer and Technology Reporter for the BBC News (7/19/11, “Gian tspaec Scope
Radioastron Reaches Orbit,” http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-14200971) SP
"On the fifth day [after the launch] the telescope's mirror will open, and in the three following months we will prepare the
observatory for practical work," he added. Although RadioAstron is expected to deliver more precise data than the US
space veteran Hubble, the Russian Federal space agency Roscosmos said the apparatus was not meant to replace it. "Hubble
is an optical telescope and RadioAstron is radio," Aleksei Kuznetsov, Roscosmos' spokesperson, told BBC News. "I would
say that the two will complement each other." Once RadioAstron's 27 carbon fibre petals open up to form a dish, the
telescope will start to collect data, then combine it with observations captured by radio telescopes on Earth. This technique
of combining images from a network of telescopes to form a single image is called interferometry. The result is expected to
have an incredibly high resolution - as if taken by a telescope with a dish as wide as the maximum distance between the
antennas - from the Earth to the Moon. One of the telescope's primary goals is to zoom in to the neighbouring galaxy M-87,
some 59 million light years from Earth. Baikonur, Kazakhstan The telescope was delivered into orbit by a rocket that
launched from Baikonur Cosmodrome Scientists believe that there is a black hole there, and RadioAstron's mission is to
confirm this hypothesis. Researchers are also after some detailed data about pulsars, interstellar plasma and neutron stars in
the Milky Way. Soviet legacy The Soviets first started building the telescope back in the 1980s, but the project was shelved
when the USSR collapsed in 1991. "In the 1990s, financial hurdles prevented us from completing the observatory, but in
recent years Russia has come back to it," said Mr Kuznetsov.
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
139
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
DDI 2011
A2- Privates tradeoff
Nonunique - Commercial companies will put cargo on ISS by 2012
Sheridan 7/20/11- Kerry Sheridan, Staff Writer for the AFP (7/20/11, “NASA Fends Off Tears with Shuttle’s End in Sight,”
http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5jY348ma7RrPZF7RbTh1_xyVSWxA?docId=CNG.4bea07f2d1bea1226be3abfc28759ac1.b51) SP
WASHINGTON — NASA astronauts and engineers fended off tears Wednesday as Atlantis made its final approach toward
Earth, bringing an end to the 30-year shuttle program and closing a chapter in human spaceflight. The shuttle was set to roll
to a stop Thursday, exactly 42 years after US astronaut Neil Armstrong became the first human to step foot on the Moon as
part of the Apollo 11 mission. Atlantis's landing will end an era of US dominance in human space exploration, leaving
Russia as the sole taxi to the International Space Station until a replacement US capsule can be built by private industry in
the coming years. But NASA administrator Charles Bolden insisted that once the shuttle eases onto the runway at Kennedy
Space Center at 5:56 am (0956 GMT) Thursday, any tears on the faces of NASA employees will reflect both sadness and
joy. "My number one job right now is to ensure that we safely get Atlantis and her crew on the runway tomorrow," Bolden,
a former astronaut, said on CNN. "I will have tears of joy and tears of sadness at that time, but the tears of joy will be
because we are already working with commercial companies to put cargo on the International Space Station as early as next
year," he said. "We are working with other commercial companies to put American astronauts and our partner astronauts on
the International Space Station in four or five years." Bolden has repeatedly brushed off critics who say the US space
agency is in disarray, facing thousands of layoffs, an astronauts corps half the size it had 10 years ago and no human
spaceflight program to replace the shuttle. "We have just not done a good job of telling our story. NASA is very busy,"
Bolden said. "The president said to us, 2025 for an asteroid and 2030 to Mars. We have a lot of work to do ahead."
Meanwhile, the crew of four US astronauts aboard Atlantis savored their final day in orbit and NASA TV ran live images
of the shuttle's view of Earth after a successful mission to restock the ISS for a year with several tons of supplies and food.
"The space shuttle has been with us at the heart and soul of the human spaceflight program for about 30 years, and it's a
little sad to see it go away," commander Chris Ferguson said as the crew sat for a series of TV interviews. "It's going to be
an emotional moment for a lot of people that dedicated their lives to the shuttle program for 30 years. But we're going to try
to keep it upbeat... We're going to try to make it a celebration of the tremendous crowning achievements that have
occurred." Over the course of the program, five NASA space shuttles -- Atlantis, Challenger, Columbia, Discovery and
Endeavour -- have comprised a fleet designed as the world's first reusable space vehicles. Besides the prototype Enterprise
that never flew in space, only three have survived after Columbia and Challenger were destroyed in accidents that killed
their crews. At a time of US budget austerity, President Barack Obama has opted to end the program that has averaged
about $450-500 million for each of its 135 missions. He also canceled Constellation, a project that aimed to put US
astronauts back on the Moon by 2020 at a cost of $97 billion. Mission specialist Rex Walheim said he was optimistic about
the future of the US space program, but acknowledged "we're in a kind of a transition period, which is a little bit
uncomfortable." NASA aims to turn over low-orbit space travel and space station servicing to commercial ventures, with a
commercial launcher and capsule built by a private corporation in partnership with NASA ready to fly sometime after 2015.
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
140
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
DDI 2011
A2- Private Companies Link
Private companies allow NASA to focus on more important missions, such as Mars or asteroids- US Key
Sheridan 7/20/11- Kerry Sheridan, Staff Writer for the AFP (7/20/11, “NASA Fends Off Tears with Shuttle’s End in Sight,”
http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5jY348ma7RrPZF7RbTh1_xyVSWxA?docId=CNG.4bea07f2d1bea1226be3abfc28759ac1.b51) SP
Mission specialist Rex Walheim said he was optimistic about the future of the US space program, but acknowledged "we're
in a kind of a transition period, which is a little bit uncomfortable." NASA aims to turn over low-orbit space travel and
space station servicing to commercial ventures, with a commercial launcher and capsule built by a private corporation in
partnership with NASA ready to fly sometime after 2015. "That'll free up NASA to do the heavy lifting of the beyond lowEarth orbit flights," to what Walheim described as "harder destinations" like an asteroid, or Mars. "It'll be hard, but we'll get
there, going farther and farther, and we'll get to new places real soon," he said. Until the private sector fills the void, the
world's astronauts will rely on Russian Soyuz rockets for rides to the ISS. NASA flight director Tony Ceccacci said his
team was trying to stay focused on getting the shuttle home safely. "Every time you feel something you have to remember
that this thing is not over yet," he told reporters. "We have a motto in the mission control center that flight controllers don't
cry, so we are going to make sure that we keep to that."
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
141
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
DDI 2011
Soyuz Bad- Russian Economy
Maintaining the Soyuz space capsules actually hurts the Russian economy- the single-use shuttles are
eating up the Ros Kosmos budget
Antonova 7/2/11- Maria Antonova, Staff Writer for the AFP (7/2/11, “Russia Gains Edge in Space Race as US Shuttle Bows
Out,” http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5hGADnIqGh-ZfhBj6DhJYbEgvQpg?docId=CNG.929e9c254b0a78971b4b58b7a3749ac8.241) SP
"I cannot think today of another international space project that is so effective in its scale, its significance and its results as
the ISS," he said. While Russia gains a symbolic victory, it will be a costly one, with the obligation to build more space
ships to go back and forth to the ISS eating up a budget that could be spent on other projects. Unlike the reusable NASA
shuttles, the Russian Soyuz space capsules are single-use, except for the section in which spacemen return to Earth. The
situation is "not very convenient because it lays a heavy burden on Roskosmos's production capacities," space industry
expert Igor Marinin told AFP. Roskosmos this year declared its budget as $3 billion, a fraction of NASA's massive $18.5
billion budget. And it has faced embarrassing setbacks, including the failure of several satellite launches that led to the
sacking of the long-serving space chief Anatoly Perminov in April. The country's space industry has also drawn smirks
with a clunky experiment simulating a trip to Mars, in which volunteers are spending more than a year confined at a
Moscow research institute and "landed" in a specially designed sand pit.
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
142
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
DDI 2011
143
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
DDI 2011
Leadership/Competitiveness Add-On
Maintaining our commitment to spaceflight is vital to our national security and competitiveness
Cunningham 7/22/11- Col. Walter Cunningham, Served as the NASA Lunar Module Pilot for Apollo 7, Former Ranking
Member for the House Sicence Committtee, Space and Aeronautics Subcommittee (7/22/11, “NASA at a Turning Point,”
http://dyn.politico.com/printstory.cfm?uuid=A8953C17-2A2A-41F5-8459-C515C5D548B3) SP
Atlantis, the last mission of the space shuttle program, touched down Thursday. Even before she becomes a permanent
museum display, it is imperative that we recommit to the U.S. role as the leader in human space flight. Just 50 years ago, a
young politician had the vision and courage to challenge our nation to aspire to a great adventure. President John F.
Kennedy knew that the benefit was not landing men on the moon, but what it would take to get there — the technology, the
initiative and the will to do it. In two extraordinary speeches, Kennedy challenged Americans to go to the moon in nine
years, spelling out the resources and commitment it would take, then explaining that space exploration was a scientific and
national security priority — whose benefits to Americans, and all humanity, transcended mere tangible terms. However,
last year President Barack Obama shifted NASA policy away from human spaceflight. His budget cancelled the nextgeneration Constellation human flight system rather than modifying any deficiencies — wasting a $9 billiontaxpayer
investment. Instead, NASA was directed to pursue a riskier course, diverting billions of dollars to a group of companies –
most devoid of experience in manned space vehicles – to take over operations to low-earth orbit and the transport of
astronauts to the International Space Station. The goal was to generate a private marketplace to support the cost of these
manned missions. Meanwhile, NASA’s plan for deep space exploration, requiring development of new heavy lift rockets
and crew vehicles, leaves them without a specific destination and timetable. Really, without a mission. We don’t believe
that a private market capable of supporting a low-earth orbit system, independent of government, exists in the near-term. If
it did, it wouldn’t need government support. Space exploration is likely to continue to be a government-sponsored mission
for the foreseeable future — if the U.S. is to retain its preeminence in space. This investment is vital to national security and
our ability to remain competitive in science, engineering and technology. China, Russia, India and Japan continue to pursue
their human space programs at breakneck speeds, and are likely to surpass us if we stop. NASA has been subjected to the
whims of changing budget and policy priorities for several decades, fostering bureaucratic inefficiency in an organization
that had prided itself on original thinking and team-driven, can-do attitude. With last year’s NASA Authorization law,
Congress placed a roadblock in front of much of the administration’s plan. But even if we had a clear direction, we will be
reliant on the Russians for transportation to space for a number of years – at a cost of more than $60 million per seat. We
are at the crossroads. The direction we choose will affect not only foreign perceptions of the U.S., but our economy and
national security. In coming weeks we, with others committed to the HSF program, will offer a more detailed plan to return
to flight. Not as passengers on Russian rockets, but as explorers in U.S.-made vehicles able to blaze new trails in the starfilled sky. By establishing a long-term strategy, with specific policies, led and endorsed by Congress, we can again make
NASA and the human space program credible and beneficial. To this end, we must: • Spell out a coherent HSF mission,
goal and timeline for the next 20 years. Manned missions to the Moon, and then Mars, should be part of this timeline •
Return to the earlier NASA model of success: Adopt best practices to reform contracting, foster better communication
between centers, eliminate activities not essential for space exploration and clear away bureaucracy. • Assess the near-term
potential and costs for commercial space companies to support both cargo and manned LEO missions to better understand
the potential investment required by private investors, and the degree it may free NASA resources to focus on the deepspace mission • Make a quick decision on a heavy launch system and the necessary related technologies; In their new
homes, Atlantis and her sister orbiters are likely to inspire little in the next generation of Americans if there is nothing for
our children to aspire to. Let us hope that Atlantas’ return to Earth will be the harbinger of a new era of U.S. human space
flight and American exceptionalism.
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
144
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
DDI 2011
US Dominance Good- Security/Economy
Maintaining space dominance supports American national security and economy
Gregory 7/14/11- Bill Gregory, Piloted the Space Shuttle on mission STS-67, Vice President at Qwaltec, Inc., Staff Writer at the
Houston Chronicle (7/14/11, “US Leadership in Space is No Longer a Sure Thing,”
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/editorial/outlook/7654150.html) SP
While budgets are tight in an era of deadly tsunamis, tornados and extreme weather, the word "myopic" - literally and
figuratively - comes to mind. Space exploration has never been easy. But for the last 50 years the United States has refused
to accept second place because the stakes have been too high for anything less. Partly this has been a function of our history
- the nation of the Wright brothers and the Manhattan Project cannot sit by and leave the next round of great discoveries to
others. Partly this has been necessary to preserve our national security - the high ground must always be defended; and
space is the new high ground on which battlefield communications, precision targeting and lifesaving missile defense all
depend. And partly, it is fiscal common sense.
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
145
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
DDI 2011
CP links to politics
Turn- Russian space leadership causes public backlash
Brown 7/22/11- Tom Brown, Staff Writer for Reuters (7/22/11, “Most Americans still want U.S. dominance in space,”
http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/07/22/uk-space-shuttle-poll-idUSLNE76L00620110722) SP
CAPE CANAVERAL, Florida (Reuters) - Most Americans still think their country should play a dominant role in space
exploration, a new poll showed on Thursday as the 30-year U.S. space shuttle program came to an end. The national survey
released by CNN confirmed, however, that enthusiasm about the space race had declined considerably since the early 1960s
and the glorious run-up to the Apollo Moon landings. The poll was made public hours after Thursday's landing of space
shuttle Atlantis, which drew a line under the end of the American shuttle program. This has raised widespread doubts about
future U.S. dominance in space. According to the poll, half of all Americans believe the end of the shuttle program was bad
for the United States, since it left the superpower with no immediate program to push ahead with human spaceflight. Sixtyfour percent of respondents said it was important for the United States to be ahead of Russia and other countries in space
exploration. But only 38 percent ranked space leadership as "very important," down from 51 percent in a similar poll
conducted in 1961, CNN said. The latest poll was carried out by CNN/ORC International. China, among other countries, is
making major investments in space. With the retirement of the American shuttles, the United States will now depend on
Russia to ferry its astronauts to the International Space Station. Three-quarters of participants in the telephone poll said they
wanted the United States to develop a new spacecraft capable of carrying U.S. astronauts back into space. But at a time of
dwindling government resources and concern about a permanent decline in the U.S. economy, most of those polled said
they would prefer that private enterprise rather than a government program develop the new spacecraft. Critics of the U.S.
space shuttle program have often described it as a colossal waste of resources. (Writing by Tom Brown; Editing by Pascal
Fletcher and Paul Simao)
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
146
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
DDI 2011
***RUSSIAN SPENDING DISAD TO CP***
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
147
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
DDI 2011
Russian Spending Shell
Fiscal Discipline Now
ITAR-TASS. 7-11-11. ITAR-TASS. http://www.itar-tass.com/c154/182955.html
“We have additional opportunities to address long-term, strategic objectives, and in this respect, the draft is a development
budget, called to stimulate qualitative growth and modernization of the economy,” said the prime minister. “At the same
time this is a socially-oriented budget with a clear focus on improving the quality of life, the implementation of large-scale
programs in demography, health, education and pensions,” said Putin. However, he pointed out that the government “does
not deviate from the principles of strict fiscal discipline.” “The spending and revenues should be as balanced as possible
and realistically planned, which, in turn, should serve as a basis for maintaining macroeconomic stability,” Putin said.
Gazprom, Renova agree on merger of assets in electric power industry.
Sticking to the Budget Key—Any Deviations in Fiscally Disciplined Budget Risk Economic Stagnation.
Siletsky, Igor. Staff Writer for the Moscow Time. 6-29-11. The Moscow Times. “President’s address: fine-tuning the economy.”
http://english.ruvr.ru/2011/06/29/52564671.html
Russia’s economy needs a new growth model, which will soon emerge. Today, not all elements of fiscal policy are up to
scratch as regards the modernization of the country, Dmitry Medvedev noted. On Wednesday June 29, he delivered his
Budget Address for 2012-2014 to the government and parliament, and defined priority areas of government spending.
Russia’s fiscal system did quite well to restore the economy after the crisis, says Dmitry Medvedev. "Growth in 2010
stabilized at around 4 percent. We expect roughly the same rate this year, maybe a bit higher. We have been able to
significantly reduce the federal budget deficit. And, most importantly, we have fulfilled all of the government’s social
obligations. The key tasks for our fiscal policy are the modernization of our country and its economy, and creating an
environment that improves its competitiveness and its stable long-term development." Many of Russia’s policies, including
those related to government spending and revenues, are not fully aligned to providing stimuli for the innovation-driven
development of the country, Dmitry Medvedev notes. He also says that the government needs to draw up a schedule for the
privatization of major stakes in government-controlled companies. The only exception will be infrastructure companies or
those enterprises that are directly involved in providing national security. The president also called for an improvement in
the efficiency of government spending, by forming a sensible network of state agencies. There is also a need to better the
types of services they offer, as well as their quality. The social sphere remains a priority area for the government. The
Russian head of state stresses that improvements in this field must not boil down to a mechanical growth of expenses.
"People who work in public services should earn a competitive salary. This goes for teachers and medical workers first and
foremost, and their pay should significantly increase thanks to the aforementioned programs. Starting from 2012, there will
be a reform of the financial support system for servicemen and their equivalents." The president named the decentralization
of power an important stimulus for economic growth. Medvedev believes that regions need to have more influence on the
investment climate and greater scope to resolve social issues. Moreover, the Address emphasizes that issues of economic
growth and modernization, and the provision of targeted social assistance to people require the involvement of subjects of
the Federation and municipal bodies. To this end, proposals for decentralization at all levels of power, including when it
comes to fiscal issues, need to be drawn up by December 1, 2011. All up, Dmitry Medvedev identified 12 key tasks in his
Budget Address. In his comments, Finance Minister Alexei Kudrin added that they need to be completed in the next three
years. "They concern major strategic, fundamental issues and current middle-term tasks for the next three years. Strategic
planning is the key one here and everything should start here, so that government funds are matched to these goals. These
should always be balanced tasks with a resource backing and we still have a lot to do here." Kudrin says that implementing
all of these measures will facilitate the achievement of the number one task of Russia’s fiscal policy – modernizing the
economy and boosting its competitiveness, providing for stable long-term development.
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
148
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
DDI 2011
Spending Shell
fiscal discipline is key to the Russian economy
Nezavisimaya Gazeta 3/31/11 (Writer for Russian newspaper Rianovosti, Rianovosti,
http://en.rian.ru/papers/20110331/163305296.html)
The past thee years have seen the number of Russian regions with budget deficits rise: from 37 in 2008 to 63 in 2010, Fitch
Ratings reported on Wednesday. At the same time, industrial production surpassed pre-crisis levels in only half the regions.
Experts believe recovery has been slow and unsteady in most regions, and that numerous problems persist in regional
economies. However, looking into the effects of the global financial crisis on European countries, Fernando Mayorga, Fitch
Ratings managing director for international regional finance, concluded that Russia’s standing looks good. At least, ratings
forecasts for its regions are likely to be positive. He warns, however, that Russia needs more stringent fiscal discipline to
keep up its achievements.
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
149
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
DDI 2011
Spending Shell
Russian econ collapse triggers internal collapse that goes global and nuclear
David 99 (Steven, Proffesor of Political Science at Johns Hopkins University, “Internal War: Causes and Cures”, July,
https://muse.jhu.edu/journals/world_politics/related/v049/49.4er_brown.html)
If internal war does strike Russia, economic deterioration will be a prime cause. From 1989 to the present, the GDP has
fallen by 50 percent. In a society where, ten years ago, unemployment scarcely existed, it reached 9.5 percent in 1997 with
many economists declaring the true figure to be much higher. Twenty-two percent of Russians live below the official
poverty line (earning less than $ 70 a month). Modern Russia can neither collect taxes (it gathers only half the revenue it is
due) nor significantly cut spending. Reformers tout privatization as the country's cure-all, but in a land without well-defined
property rights or contract law and where subsidies remain a way of life, the prospects for transition to an American-style
capitalist economy look remote at best. As the massive devaluation of the ruble and the current political crisis show,
Russia's condition is even worse than most analysts feared. If conditions get worse, even the stoic Russian people will soon
run out of patience. A future conflict would quickly draw in Russia's military. In the Soviet days civilian rule kept the
powerful armed forces in check. But with the Communist Party out of office, what little civilian control remains relies on
an exceedingly fragile foundation -- personal friendships between government leaders and military commanders.
Meanwhile, the morale of Russian soldiers has fallen to a dangerous low. Drastic cuts in spending mean inadequate pay,
housing, and medical care. A new emphasis on domestic missions has created an ideological split between the old and new
guard in the military leadership, increasing the risk that disgruntled generals may enter the political fray and feeding the
resentment of soldiers who dislike being used as a national police force. Newly enhanced ties between military units and
local authorities pose another danger. Soldiers grow ever more dependent on local governments for housing, food, and
wages. Draftees serve closer to home, and new laws have increased local control over the armed forces. Were a conflict to
emerge between a regional power and Moscow, it is not at all clear which side the military would support. Divining the
military's allegiance is crucial, however, since the structure of the Russian Federation makes it virtually certain that regional
conflicts will continue to erupt. Russia's 89 republics, krais, and oblasts grow ever more independent in a system that does
little to keep them together. As the central government finds itself unable to force its will beyond Moscow (if even that far),
power devolves to the periphery. With the economy collapsing, republics feel less and less incentive to pay taxes to
Moscow when they receive so little in return. Three-quarters of them already have their own constitutions, nearly all of
which make some claim to sovereignty. Strong ethnic bonds promoted by shortsighted Soviet policies may motivate nonRussians to secede from the Federation. Chechnya's successful revolt against Russian control inspired similar movements
for autonomy and independence throughout the country. If these rebellions spread and Moscow responds with force, civil
war is likely. Should Russia succumb to internal war, the consequences for the United States and Europe will be severe. A
major power like Russia -- even though in decline -- does not suffer civil war quietly or alone. An embattled Russian
Federation might provoke opportunistic attacks from enemies such as China. Massive flows of refugees would pour into
central and western Europe. Armed struggles in Russia could easily spill into its neighbors. Damage from the fighting,
particularly attacks on nuclear plants, would poison the environment of much of Europe and Asia. Within Russia, the
consequences would be even worse. Just as the sheer brutality of the last Russian civil war laid the basis for the privations
of Soviet communism, a second civil war might produce another horrific regime. Most alarming is the real possibility that
the violent disintegration of Russia could lead to loss of control over its nuclear arsenal. Nonuclear state has ever fallen
victim to civil war, but even without a clear precedent the grim consequences can be foreseen. Russia retains some 20,000
nuclear weapons and the raw material for tens of thousands more, in scores of sites scattered throughout the country. So far,
the government has managed to prevent the loss of any weapons or much material. If war erupts, however, Moscow's
already weak grip on nuclear sites will slacken, making weapons and supplies available to a wide range of anti-American
groups and states. Such dispersal of nuclear weapons represents the greatest physical threat America now faces. And it is
hard to think of anything that would increase this threat more than the chaos that would follow a Russian civil war.
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
150
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
DDI 2011
Uniqueness—Inflation
The Russian economy is on the brink now due to inflation- additional government spending will push us
over the edge
Adelaja 6/23/11- Tai Adelaja, Staff Writer for the Moscow News (6/23/11, “Runaway Inflation Hits Russia’s Poor,”
http://themoscownews.com/economics/20110623/188781367.html) SP
Russia’s economy is showing signs of strength, but most Russians who have been earning more are getting poorer. Average
monthly nominal wages in the country rose 12.5 percent to 22,520 rubles ($803) year-on-year in May, but Russia's
stubbornly high inflation eroded most of the gains in people's purchasing power, the Federal State Statistics Service
(Rosstat) reported on Wednesday. Personal disposable income went up 3.2 percent to 18,183 rubles ($648) in May,
compared to the same period in 2010, even as average incomes fell 9.1 percent compared to the previous month, the agency
said in its latest report on the socio-economic situation in Russia. Despite a healthier increase in take-home pay, real
disposable income (after taking inflation into account) fell 3.7 percent between January and May, Rosstat said. While
Russia still ranks world's number five in the number of its super-rich families, experts say public sector employees and
pensioners continue to bear the brunt of the cost of living pressures. Around 40 percent of respondents said they have cut
back on purchases on non-essential items like home appliances, and 35 percent said they have stopped buying new clothes.
About 32 percent said they have cut back on groceries as a way to better absorb the shock of rising prices. The price of
wheat – the main ingredient in bread, which is a staple food in Russia – was up four percent in May alone, according to
Rosstat. The agency also recorded price increases in a number of food products and beverages including buckwheat,
oatmeal, bagels, coffee, ice cream, beer and soft drinks. The consumer price index went up 6.6 percent from the beginning
of the year to reach 9,200 rubles ($328) in May. Russia's consumer basket – the recommended minimum set of food
products – rose 6.9 percent from the beginning of the year to 2,807 rubles ($100) in May. In Moscow, average salaries rose
by 12.4 percent in the first four months of this year to reach 39,700 rubles ($1,414), Marina Ogloblina, the head of the
city’s Economic Policy Department, told journalists on Wednesday. Economists are attributing the present upswing in
consumption to a sharp and unexpected spike in consumer credit. Russian consumers are borrowing and spending more
while saving less – a development that can boost economic growth but also fuel inflation, the Central Bank said in May.
Credit growth, the bank said, is a “new monetary risk to inflation.” Russia's annual inflation reached an 18-month high of
9.7 percent as of May 23, figures from the Central Bank show. Consumer prices will rise 9 percent in 2011, according to
the median estimate of 16 economists surveyed by Bloomberg. The rising inflation figures, expert say, also put Prime
Minister Vladimir Putin government’s dilemma in stark terms. While the government remains under pressure to enforce
fiscal discipline even as global crude prices go up, increased government spending before parliamentary elections at the end
of the year and a presidential vote in early 2012 is expected to boost inflation. The cabinet approved about 420 billion
rubles ($15 billion) of additional spending late April, most of which will be spent on social programs such as raising oldage pensions, baby bonuses and family incentive programs, as well as raising salaries for government employees by 6.5
percent in October.
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
151
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
DDI 2011
Uniqueness—Fiscal Discipline
Russia’s economy has its swagger back
Julian Evans 4/10/11 (Writer for Financial News, http://www.efinancialnews.com/story/2011-05-10/russian-corporate-bondmarkets-regain-swagger)
Two years ago, Russia’s economy was shrinking by 9% a year, its stock markets had lost more than 50% in value and the
government had gone from a $500bn surplus to a deficit within 12 months, after bailing out banks and major companies.
Russia’s RTS index is up 15% this year, commodity prices are soaring and the government’s self-confidence seems to have
returned. Andrew Cornthwaite, head of investment banking at Renaissance Capital in Moscow, said: “There’s no question
that the swagger has come back to Moscow. The government doesn’t need foreign capital that much anymore.” That could
mean fewer deals than bankers had expected, as both the government and big corporates have a lot of liquidity from the
commodities boom. However, it also means Russian companies can get very good terms, especially on the international
debt markets, which still account for more investment banking fees than the equity markets. Although debt issuance is
down on last year, the deals that have come have done well. Jonathan Brown, head of European syndicate at Barclays
Capital, said: “Russian corporates are back to pre-crisis levels in terms of spreads and ratings.” Recent successes on the
bond markets include last month’s $1bn 10-year bond from Alfa-Bank, the first 10-year issue in the US’s 144A market by a
Russian bank; VimpelCom’s $1.5bn dual-tranche five and 10-year bond; the $950m eurorouble deal by Russian
Agricultural Bank; Russian Railways’ £350m sterling bond; and the sovereign’s own $1.4bn eurorouble bond, nonchalantly
launched in the middle of the Arab Spring revolts. Douglas Kennedy, head of Russia, CIS and Turkey at RBS in Moscow,
said: “The best testament of the maturity of Russian debt markets is the diversification of currencies achieved by issuers.”
Russia’s equity capital markets began the year with a surge of optimism among investment bankers, who hoped the
government’s privatisation drive would lead to a string of large initial public offerings. The year has not panned out that
way so far, although there has been at least one successful privatisation – the sale of 10% of VTB, the second-biggest bank
in Russia, which raised $3.3bn for the government. The VTB equity offering, managed by Deutsche Bank, Bank of
America Merrill Lynch and VTB Capital, was not without its complications. The banks initially suggested doing a private
placement, but then decided to sell the deal publicly, bringing in Generali as an anchor investor. It turned out to be a good
call. “VTB is up 10-12% since launch”, says Igor Lojevsky, chief country officer for Russia and the CIS for Deutsche Bank
in Moscow. “I believe it’s just about the only Russian deal this year that has traded up since placement.” Igor Lojevsky,
chief country officer for Russia and the Commonwealth of Independent States for Deutsche Bank in Moscow, said: “VTB
is up 10%-12% since launch. I believe it’s just about the only Russian deal this year that has traded up since placement.”
Finance minister supports fiscal D
Kim Iskyan 4/11, (Writer for Global Finance, http://www.gfmag.com/archives/137-april-2011/11170-emerging-markets-rounduprussia.html#axzz1SwOlGMCA)
Finance minister Alexei Kudrin in late February, in a rare and forceful political statement, sharply criticized Russia’s
political system, contending that it limits economic reform, hampers growth and hurts the investment environment. The
highly respected—and generally apolitical—Kudrin was probably aiming to reinforce his continuing efforts to impose
fiscal discipline through spending restraint, as well as trying to highlight the relationship between economic reform and
modest political change. Putin the following week politely endorsed Kudrin’s words, although there are no signs that the
rhetoric about political change will translate into action.
Fiscal Discipline Inevitable
RIA Novosti, Russian National News Source. 6-27-11. RIA Novosti. http://en.rian.ru/russia/20110627/164861321.html
Russia will continue the same course of economic policy and give additional impetus to economic reform after the
elections, Deputy Prime Minister and Finance Minister Alexei Kudrin said on Monday. “I’m sure that [after] the elections
will happen, all that remains is the necessity for continuity of policy and an addition to the existing drive in the conduct of
economic reform,” Kudrin said at a finance conference. One of the main challenges for the government is improving the
investment climate, he said. “Now, either the political parties or the government, which will be formed in May, absolutely
must address this question,” Kudrin said. Elections to the State Duma, Russia’s lower house of parliament, will take place
in December, followed by presidential elections in March 2012.
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
152
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
DDI 2011
Uniqueness—Fiscal Discipline
Economic Reform Coming Now—Fiscal Discipline Inevitable
George H. Wittman writes a weekly column on international affairs for The American Spectator online. He was the founding
chairman of the National Institute for Public Policy. 7-1-11. The American Spectator. http://spectator.org/archives/2011/07/01/vladand-dimi-play-nice
There indeed are liberals in the Moscow government as there still are siloviki. Whether they work in balance or in
competition usually is a matter of the issue at hand. Certainly one can expect that a return of Vladimir Putin to the
presidency will reinforce the security cadre's role. But a return to the prime ministry by Medvedev does not necessarily
mean that his economic reform concepts will be abandoned. Foreign investment still will be a clear necessity, and little
Dmitri is the one most capable in that area. Dmitri Medvedev has stated publicly that he and Putin will decide between
them who will run for what office in 2012. Putin has given every sign he agrees with his former aide on that point. What is
now under discussion is not merely the job title but the job itself. Dmitri Medvedev is openly committed to reducing state
interference in the economy. He considers this old path to lead to "stagnation" [his term]. Vladimir Putin's inclination
toward centralization is based on his not-unwarranted fear of the exploitive results of privatization he witnessed during the
Yeltsin period. But this is now a different era and the two men well understand each other's fears and urgings. It's not quite
as complicated as it appears, but it certainly is arcane. Very Russian!
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
153
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
DDI 2011
Uniqueness—Investment
Russian Economy on the Brink—Gas Prices Key
Sergei Aleksashenko, former deputy minister of finance of the Russian Federation and former deputy governor of the Russian central
bank, is a scholar-in-residence in the Carnegie Moscow Center’s Economic Policy Program. 7-21-11. Carnegie Endowment for
International Peace. http://www.carnegieendowment.org/2011/07/21/russia-stable-but-critical/419w
As Russia’s presidential elections next March approach, gauging the state of the Russian economy is not an easy task. On
the one hand, the economy is growing; the budget is balanced; government debt is well below 10 percent of GDP; the ruble
is stable; and inflation has started to fall. On the other hand, GDP growth is slower than before the global financial crisis
and depends on inventory accumulation and taxes on imports; capital continues to flow out of the country; and the strong
budgetary and balance of payments positions rely on a high oil price. While few things look likely to slow growth in the
short run, risks abound in the medium term. Declining investment poses the biggest worry, but the government’s
dependence on a rising oil price and its persistently weak bank supervision also threaten growth and stability. The country’s
next president—the first to serve a six-year term—must mitigate these risks and position Russia for a stronger economic
future.
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
154
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
DDI 2011
Uniqueness—Recovery
Positive Economic Forecast Based on Inaccurate Predictions of Oil Prices—Only Fiscal Discipline Solves
Deficit.
Busvine, Douglas. Staff Writer for Reuters. 6-20-11. Reuters. “Analysis: Russia’s biggest contingent liability: oil.”
http://uk.reuters.com/article/2011/07/20/us-russia-risks-idUKTRE76J2KY20110720
With a sovereign debt of just 10 percent of GDP and half a trillion dollars in reserves, Russia has a balance sheet that the
United States and Europe can only envy as they battle their debt crises. But a closer look at Finance Minister Alexei
Kudrin's latest fiscal plans reveals two concerns: he is betting that oil prices will stay high for years; and even if he is right,
the pace of budget consolidation will slow significantly. By his own reckoning, the books would only balance with oil at
$125 per barrel next year, reflecting the impact on the public finances of the global slump that put an end to years of
surpluses generated at much lower oil prices. Kudrin has only managed to keep the projected deficit below 3 percent of
gross domestic product (GDP) over the three-year budget horizon by hiking his oil price forecast to the mid-$90s from the
high $70s previously. Even then, the fiscal strategy abandons a previous goal of balancing the budget by 2015. After
stripping out energy revenues -- which account for nearly half of the tax take -- the deficit will stay over 10 percent of GDP.
"Given the very high oil price forecast, the slow fiscal consolidation is disappointing," said Ivan Tchakarov, chief
economist at Renaissance Capital. "The oil sensitivity of the budget has increased dramatically." "It's a retrograde step,"
agreed Edward Parker, sovereign analyst at Fitch Ratings in London. The biggest risk for Russia remains "a sharp and
sustained" drop in oil prices.
Russian economy rebounding
Rose and Lovass. Bloomberg staff writers. 7/19/11. Bloomberg News. http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-07-19/russianunemployment-unexpectedly-declines-as-spending-recovers.html
Russian unemployment fell to the lowest level in almost three years in June and retail sales grew for an 18th month, helping
to bolster an economic expansion in the world’s biggest energy exporter. The jobless rate dropped to 6.1 percent in June,
the lowest since August 2008, from 6.4 percent a month earlier, the Federal Statistics Service said today by e-mail. The
median estimate of 15 economists in a Bloomberg survey was 6.3 percent. Accelerating job growth is helping sustain
household spending, benefitting retailers such as X5 Retail Group NV and OAO Magnit. Slower inflation, led by an easing
in food prices, is boosting incomes and supporting consumer confidence. “The economy has finally come to the phase of
the cycle where it is more self-driven,” Aurelija Augulyte, an emerging- market analyst at Nordea Bank AB in Copenhagen,
wrote in an e- mail. “Consumers will remain supported going forward by better labor market conditions.” Real
disposable incomes unexpectedly grew in June for the first time since February, rising 0.7 percent, and real wages advanced
4.2 percent. Retail sales rose 5.6 percent from a year ago and 1.2 percent from May.
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
155
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
DDI 2011
Uniqueness—Recovery
Russia’s economy is improving due to demand-driven investment and agricultural output
Shatalova and Rose 7/21/11- Ekaterina Shatalova and Scott Rose, Staff Writers for Bloomberg (7/21/11, “Russia’s Economy to
Accelerate After Second-Quarter Slowdown,” http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-07-21/russia-s-economic-growth-slowed-to-37-in-second-quarter.html) SP
Russia’s economy slowed in the second quarter, according to Deputy Economy Minister Andrei Klepach, who expects
growth to accelerate in the final six months of 2011. Gross domestic product expanded 3.7 percent from a year earlier in the
April-June period, less than the 4.1 percent growth in the first three months of 2011, Klepach told reporters today in
Moscow, without giving an explanation for the slowdown. “We expect a pickup in growth in the second half, in part thanks
to demand-driven investment,” Klepach said. Agricultural output will also help growth accelerate after the worst drought in
at least half a century in 2010 destroyed harvests. Russia, the world’s largest energy exporter, is lagging behind growth in
emerging-market peers Brazil, India and China, even as prices for its commodity exports rise. Policymakers should target
growth of at least 8 percent within 5 years to keep pace with the other so-called BRIC countries, President Dmitry
Medvedev said in January. GDP expanded 4 percent last year after a record 7.8 percent contraction in 2009. The ruble
advanced 0.9 percent against the dollar, the most since July 13, to 27.7400 at the 7 p.m. close of trading in Moscow. The
Micex Index of 30 stocks advanced 1.6 percent to 1729.00, the biggest daily gain since July 7. Oil Prices, Harvest “We
remain bullish on economic acceleration in the second half on the back of higher oil prices,” which may reach $125 a barrel
by year-end, said Julia Tsepliaeva, head of research at BNP Paribas SA in Moscow. A good harvest should also provide a
“strong rebound” in the agricultural sector, Tsepliaeva wrote today in an e-mailed note to clients The grain crop may reach
90 million metric tons in 2011, allowing Russia to “regain our position in the global grain market,” Agriculture Minister
Yelena Skrynnik said today in Moscow. The grain harvest fell to 60.9 million tons last year. The Agriculture Ministry
raised its export forecast for the year beginning July 1 to 18 million tons from 15 million to 17 million tons, Skrynnik said.
Russia halted grain exports last year to stem food-price inflation. It lifted the ban from July 1. Retail Sales Retail sales are
exceeding estimates as a slowdown in inflation bolsters household spending power, according to Klepach, who oversees
macroeconomic forecasting. Sales are also benefiting from increased consumer credit, a lower savings rate and higher
disposable incomes, he added. Real disposable incomes rose 0.7 percent in June after falling in each of the preceding three
months, the Federal Statistics Service said July 19. “The recent pickup in real wages should feed through to retail sales as
the year progresses,” Daniel Salter and Vladimir Kuznetsov, analysts at UniCredit SpA, said today in an e-mailed note.
“The upcoming elections should lead to greater government expenditure, while changes to social taxes in 2012 should give
companies more flexibility to increase wages.”
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
156
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
DDI 2011
Link—Spending
Russian Budget on the Brink—Excess Spending Collapses Economy.
Reuters. 6-26-11. Reuters. “Dep fin min says Russian budget badly overcommitted.”
http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/06/26/russia-budget-official-idUSLDE75P07X20110626
Russia's government has set itself a spending target so high it threatens the country's fiscal stability, Deputy Finance
Minister Sergei Shatalov said on Sunday. Russia sees a limited budget deficit "entirely because of buoyant oil prices", he
told the Russian Economic and Financial forum in Strasbourg. "If all programmes announced by the government are
fulfilled the budget spending could reach 29 percent of GDP," he said. "And this is a serious danger for the financial
stability of the state."
Russian Spending Unsustainable—Fiscal Discipline key to Sustained Social Spending
Reuters. 6-26-11. Reuters. “Russia faces elections with budget woes, firm rouble.” http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/06/26/russiarouble-official-hold-for-melissa-idUSLDE75P01V20110626
Russia's government has promised voters more social spending than it can muster without threatening the country's fiscal
stability as elections approach, a deputy finance minister warned on Sunday. With a parliamentary election due in
December, and presidential poll in March 2012 in which Prime Minister Vladimir Putin or President Dmitry Medvedev
could run, Russia has pledged extra funds for social programmes and domestic output. "If all programmes announced by
the government are fulfilled the budget spending could reach 29 percent of GDP," Sergei Shatalov, a deputy to hawkish
Finance Minister Alexei Kudrin, told the Russian Economic and Financial forum in Strasbourg. "And this is a serious
danger for the financial stability of the state," he said, adding Russia is not ready to withdraw fiscal stimulus measures that
helped the country out of the crisis of 2008-2009.
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
157
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
DDI 2011
Link—Capital Outflow
The big capital outflows necessitated by the plan increase inflation and weaken the value of the ruble
Shatalova and Rose 7/21/11- Ekaterina Shatalova and Scott Rose, Staff Writers for Bloomberg (7/21/11, “Russia’s Economy to
Accelerate After Second-Quarter Slowdown,” http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-07-21/russia-s-economic-growth-slowed-to-37-in-second-quarter.html) SP
Broadcaster CTC Media, food retailers OAO Magnit and O’Key Group LLC, mobile operator OAO Mobile TeleSystems,
technology holding AFK Sistema, and lender OAO Sberbank may profit, they wrote. Full-Year Forecasts The
government’s 4.2 percent growth forecast for 2011 may be revised when the Economy Ministry presents updated
projections in late August, Klepach said, adding that there is a “range of estimates” from 4 percent to 4.5 percent.
Economists expect Russia’s economy to expand 4.6 percent this year and 4.5 percent in 2012, according to the median of
17 forecasts in a Bloomberg survey. GDP may expand 4.5 percent in the second half after growing 3.9 percent in the first
six months of the year, Economy Minister Elvira Nabiullina said today in Moscow. The government maintains its 6.5
percent to 7.5 percent forecast for full-year inflation, according to Klepach, who said the final figure may be nearer the
lower end of that range. Prices advanced 9.4 percent in June from a year earlier, the statistics service said July 5. Ruble
Risks The ruble is unlikely to weaken significantly next year, Klepach said. Still, a shrinking current-account surplus may
turn into a deficit in 2013 or 2014, depending on global commodity prices and import volumes. Russia had a current
account surplus of $32.4 billion in the first quarter, according to central-bank data. “There are risks,” Klepach said. “It’s
also possible to avoid sharp devaluations, but here a lot depends on the global economy.” While an even or slightly
negative current account balance won’t necessarily cause a significant weakening of the ruble, it would excerpt pressure on
the Russian currency, Klepach said. “When there are big capital outflows, it’s harder to maintain the ruble rate.”
Russia’s chronic capital outflow problem contributes to inflation, which is the biggest factor inhibiting
Russian development
Iosebashvili 7/18/11- Ira Iosebashvili, Staff Writer for the Wall Street Journal (7/18/11, “Russia’s Recovery May Stymie Inflation
Fight,” http://wsj.com/emergingeurope/2011/07/18/russias-recovery-may-stymie-inflation-fight/?mod=google_news_blog) SP
Russia has dodged several bullets this year when it comes to inflation, including an unexpected jump in fuel prices in the
spring and the impact of June’s short-lived ban on vegetables from the European Union. But the main threat to the central
bank’s inflation forecast may come from the unlikeliest of places — an economy that is finally starting to heat up.
Consumer prices rose 5.1% between the start of the year and July 11, with most of the inflation taking place in the first few
months of 2011. Russia’s central bank has been promising price growth of no more than 7% this year. The strength of
Friday’s industrial output data for June — up 5.7% on the year — caught market watchers off guard, showing a
manufacturing sector expanding after a four-month slump as money from more than half a year of high oil prices filters
down through Russia’s economy. “The crisis has ended in Russia,” declared Lars Rasmussen, an analyst at Danske Bank.
Monday morning saw a handful of investment banks raising their forecasts for Russia’s economic growth this year. The
encouraging data has also led some analysts to predict an imminent end to the country’s chronic capital outflow problem, as
a result of which a net $31 billion has left the country since the start of the year. Russia, an emerging market long viewed as
having been left in the dust by the double-digit recoveries of some of its BRIC peers, may finally be seeing its ship come in.
The flip side of all this may be a jump in consumer prices, Mr. Rasmussen said. Inflation has arguably been the country’s
most tenacious economic ailment, but the issue is particularly sensitive with presidential elections slated for 2012 and the
majority of Russians naming rising prices as one of the country’s chief problems. That may be why the central bank has
been so adamantly promising price growth of no more than 7% this year — a new post-Soviet low that analysts had
doubted until inflation actually began slowing this summer. The Bank of Russia left rates unchanged in June after raising
them in nearly every one of the previous months this year in an effort to stem inflation. The regulator has also allowed the
ruble to strengthen in its bid to contain price growth, and the currency has risen nearly 8% since the start of the year. If the
central bank truly intends to make its forecast a reality, more of the same may be in store during the second half of the year.
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
158
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
DDI 2011
Link—Budget
Russian Budget Key—Any Deviations in Fiscally Disciplined Budget Risk Economic Stagnation.
Siletsky, Igor. Staff Writer for the Moscow Time. 6-29-11. The Moscow Times. “President’s address: fine-tuning the economy.”
http://english.ruvr.ru/2011/06/29/52564671.html
Russia’s economy needs a new growth model, which will soon emerge. Today, not all elements of fiscal policy are up to
scratch as regards the modernization of the country, Dmitry Medvedev noted. On Wednesday June 29, he delivered his
Budget Address for 2012-2014 to the government and parliament, and defined priority areas of government spending.
Russia’s fiscal system did quite well to restore the economy after the crisis, says Dmitry Medvedev. "Growth in 2010
stabilized at around 4 percent. We expect roughly the same rate this year, maybe a bit higher. We have been able to
significantly reduce the federal budget deficit. And, most importantly, we have fulfilled all of the government’s social
obligations. The key tasks for our fiscal policy are the modernization of our country and its economy, and creating an
environment that improves its competitiveness and its stable long-term development." Many of Russia’s policies, including
those related to government spending and revenues, are not fully aligned to providing stimuli for the innovation-driven
development of the country, Dmitry Medvedev notes. He also says that the government needs to draw up a schedule for the
privatization of major stakes in government-controlled companies. The only exception will be infrastructure companies or
those enterprises that are directly involved in providing national security. The president also called for an improvement in
the efficiency of government spending, by forming a sensible network of state agencies. There is also a need to better the
types of services they offer, as well as their quality. The social sphere remains a priority area for the government. The
Russian head of state stresses that improvements in this field must not boil down to a mechanical growth of expenses.
"People who work in public services should earn a competitive salary. This goes for teachers and medical workers first and
foremost, and their pay should significantly increase thanks to the aforementioned programs. Starting from 2012, there will
be a reform of the financial support system for servicemen and their equivalents." The president named the decentralization
of power an important stimulus for economic growth. Medvedev believes that regions need to have more influence on the
investment climate and greater scope to resolve social issues. Moreover, the Address emphasizes that issues of economic
growth and modernization, and the provision of targeted social assistance to people require the involvement of subjects of
the Federation and municipal bodies. To this end, proposals for decentralization at all levels of power, including when it
comes to fiscal issues, need to be drawn up by December 1, 2011. All up, Dmitry Medvedev identified 12 key tasks in his
Budget Address. In his comments, Finance Minister Alexei Kudrin added that they need to be completed in the next three
years. "They concern major strategic, fundamental issues and current middle-term tasks for the next three years. Strategic
planning is the key one here and everything should start here, so that government funds are matched to these goals. These
should always be balanced tasks with a resource backing and we still have a lot to do here." Kudrin says that implementing
all of these measures will facilitate the achievement of the number one task of Russia’s fiscal policy – modernizing the
economy and boosting its competitiveness, providing for stable long-term development.
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
159
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
DDI 2011
Link—Trade Off
Counterplan Destroys Russian Space Budget and Prevents Successful Independent Projects.
Maria Antonova. Staff writer for Agence France Press. 7-2-11. Agence France Press. “Russia gains edge in space race as US shuttle
bows out.” http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5hGADnIqGh-ZfhBj6DhJYbEgvQpg?docId=CNG.929e9c254b0a78971b4b58b7a3749ac8.241
While Russia gains a symbolic victory, it will be a costly one, with the obligation to build more space ships to go back and
forth to the ISS eating up a budget that could be spent on other projects. Unlike the reusable NASA shuttles, the Russian
Soyuz space capsules are single-use, except for the section in which spacemen return to Earth. The situation is "not very
convenient because it lays a heavy burden on Roskosmos's production capacities," space industry expert Igor Marinin told
AFP. Roskosmos this year declared its budget as $3 billion, a fraction of NASA's massive $18.5 billion budget. And it has
faced embarrassing setbacks, including the failure of several satellite launches that led to the sacking of the long-serving
space chief Anatoly Perminov in April. The country's space industry has also drawn smirks with a clunky experiment
simulating a trip to Mars, in which volunteers are spending more than a year confined at a Moscow research institute and
"landed" in a specially designed sand pit. To recoup its costs, Roskosmos hopes to build a stronger presence in the
commercial space market, such as satellite launches, its newly appointed chief Vladimir Popovkin said at the Saint
Petersburg Economic Forum last month.
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
160
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
DDI 2011
Internal Link—Russia Key
Russia key to Global Economy
Shai Ahmed, Associate Web Producer for CNBC.com. 7-7-11. CNBC.com.
http://www.cnbc.com/id/43665569/Emerging_Markets_to_Drive_Global_Economy_King
Despite a manufacturing slowdown in Russia, China and Brazil, emerging markets will be key to the recovery of the global
economy, Stephen King, chief economist at HSBC told CNBC. "The longer term story is all about the connection between
the emerging market countries and those trade flows beginning to expand from a very low base. These are going to
transform emerging nations in the years ahead and even though the US and Europe are quite weak, emerging markets will
drive global activity in the next few years," he said. King told CNBC that he expected these emerging countries to remain
magnets for global capital, in particular for Asian investment in Latin America and Africa set to continue. While emerging
markets have been insulated from the harshest aspects of the financial crisis and subsequent recession, the prolonged
economic weakness has begun to impact on the BRIC (Brazil, Russia, India and China) countries and the pace of activity in
these countries has faded. "The good news is that inflationary pressures have fallen back quite significantly partly because
of these quantitative tightening policies that we`ve had," he added.
Russia Key to Global Recovery
Alex Magno. Journalist for the Philippine Star. 6-30-11. The Philippine Star.
http://www.philstar.com/Article.aspx?articleId=701203&publicationSubCategoryId=64
While sympathetic to the need to restore financial stability in the European zone, the emerging economies are concerned
over the possibility that the IMF might become too engrossed with Europe to the detriment of the developing world. A
number of European economies might indeed be financially vulnerable, but they do not represent the engines of the future
global economy. The main engines of global growth today are the so-called “BRIC economies” (Brazil, Russia, India and
China). These are economies (that might soon include Indonesia) with large populations and high economic growth rates.
Their requirements for IMF support differ vastly from the bailout needs of the PIGS
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
161
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
DDI 2011
Internal Link—Fiscal Discipline
But fiscal discipline is key to continued recovery
Nezavisimaya Gazeta 3/31/11 (Writer for Russian newspaper Rianovosti, Rianovosti,
http://en.rian.ru/papers/20110331/163305296.html)
The past thee years have seen the number of Russian regions with budget deficits rise: from 37 in 2008 to 63 in 2010, Fitch
Ratings reported on Wednesday. At the same time, industrial production surpassed pre-crisis levels in only half the regions.
Experts believe recovery has been slow and unsteady in most regions, and that numerous problems persist in regional
economies. However, looking into the effects of the global financial crisis on European countries, Fernando Mayorga, Fitch
Ratings managing director for international regional finance, concluded that Russia’s standing looks good. At least, ratings
forecasts for its regions are likely to be positive. He warns, however, that Russia needs more stringent fiscal discipline to
keep up its achievements.
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
162
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
DDI 2011
Internal Link—Inflation
Excess Russian Spending Generates Inflation
Agence France-Presse. 7-21-11. MSN News. http://news.ph.msn.com/business/article.aspx?cp-documentid=5072349
But Putin reaffirmed his politically-sensitive promise of seeing the budget deficit trimmed to a minimum in 2011 ahead of
years of more heavy state spending on new national projects. "We hope to see the budget deficit this year come down to a
minimum and potentially even disappear," said Putin. "We know the forecasts for 2012, 2013 and 2014 and it is no
accident that we are planning a small deficit. Objective data from the economy of Russia and the world show that it will not
be easy to lose this deficit." Putin has predicted 4.2-percent growth this year -- well above a 3.8-percent forecasts reported
by Moscow's Alfa Bank -- and expressed frustration at Russia's failure to match the 8.1 percent figure recorded in the last
pre-crisis year of 2007. But Russia's growth is being balanced against concerns about inflation. Finance Minister Alexei
Kudrin has repeatedly cautioned the government about setting its budget spending targets based on high expectation for the
price of Russia's energy and other commodity exports. He predicted a budget deficit this year of around one percent of the
gross domestic product. But the fiscally conservative minister cautioned: "This will depend on how strictly we follow out
ministerial and agency spending recommendations."
Russian Inflation in Energy Costs Devastates U.S. Economy
K. Cameron Lau, Anchor for International Business Times T.V. 7-11-11. International Business Times. http://tv.ibtimes.com/u-sgovernment-debt-default-is-not-an-option/1208.html
In the second news conference in less than two weeks addressing the looming August 2nd debt limit deadline, President
Obama made clear today that he intends to come to a bipartisan resolution that will tackle the debt crisis in a serious way
and in a reasonable period of time. With the general consensus now being the endorsement of an increased debt limit by the
end of the month, the main contention is now centered around whether the final deficit reduction package will include $4
trillion in budget savings over the next decade or $2 trillion as proposed by House Speaker John Bohner, who is also
seeking a policy of zero tax increases. Mr. Obama was quick to assert though, that his proposed cuts to tax breaks and
egregious loopholes working in favor of the ultra rich and oil companies would not in any way translate into increased taxes
this year or next. The administration has warned repeatedly of the catastrophic consequences that could follow in the event
of a U.S. debt default scenario. In an attempt to illustrate the dire nature of the situation, the U.S. Treasury has referred to
the possibility of a debt default as quote 'an unprecedented event in American history that would precipitate another
financial crisis.' They have stated that if Congress fails to up the debt limit, the government will have to stop, limit, or delay
payments on a broad range of legal obligations including Social Security and Medicare benefits, military salaries, interest
on the national debt, and coupon payments to bond holders. Almost immediately, these actions would likely undermine
world confidence in the U.S. and the dollar as a safe haven in the global financial system. As economists and analysts have
already projected, bond prices would go up, interest rates on short term loans would jump, and gold and oil prices would
push higher, fueling inflation in the BRIC nations, which would ultimately force energy costs to go up even more in the
United States. The end result would be a massive destabilization of the U.S. economy already in a battle to regain
equilibrium.
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
163
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
DDI 2011
Internal Link—Pensions
Russia Responds to Budget Crisis by Slashing Pensions
Busvine, Douglas. Staff Writer for Reuters. 6-20-11. Reuters. “Analysis: Russia’s biggest contingent liability: oil.”
http://uk.reuters.com/article/2011/07/20/us-russia-risks-idUKTRE76J2KY20110720
Still, economists note, policy makers have learned from the crisis after blowing $200 billion in reserves to defend the
rouble, a futile exercise that is unlikely to be repeated. A more flexible currency would absorb the impact of an oil-price
shock, supporting rouble-denominated revenues, while Russia's external vulnerability has been reduced as firms have
extended maturities on their foreign debt, they add. Russia can head off trouble if it undertakes an ambitious pensions
reform that would raise the retirement age and ensure that only the deserving get the minimum state pension. And
Medvedev's push to accelerate privatization, which under one government proposal would treble annual proceeds to $30
billion, would also help reduce quasi-sovereign liabilities. "There has been no real stress test of the fiscal position," said
Guriev of Russia's oil dependency and the systemic risks that extend from it. "There is a growing understanding of these
issues (in government), but nothing will happen before the elections."
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
164
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
DDI 2011
Internal Link—Gas Tax
Russian economic crisis causes gas sector tax increase
Ria Novosti. 6/29/11. Ria Novosti. “Medvedev calls for higher subsoil tax on gas sector.”
http://en.rian.ru/business/20110629/164911597.html
The tax burden on the gas sector needs to be further increased to boost budget revenues, Russian President Dmitry
Medvedev said in his budget address to parliament on Wednesday. "To increase budget revenues, and taking into account
the favorable price conditions on external markets, it is necessary to continue increasing the tax burden on the gas sector,
which means collecting surplus revenues from taxpayers receiving them through their operations on world natural gas
markets," Medvedev said. The Russian government is discussing measures to raise the subsoil tax on gas production
from next year and double it for the gas monopoly Gazprom.
Russian Gas Prices Key to U.S. National Security and Economic Dominance
Rousseau, Professor of international relations at the Azerbaijan Diplomatic Academy. 6-25-11. Foreign Policy in Focus.
http://www.eurasiareview.com/pipeline-politics-in-central-asia-analysis-25062011/
U.S. energy policy, and the major factors in maintaining U.S. national security and economic dominance, is based on secure
access to energy, the continuity of supply, and maintaining relatively inexpensive oil prices. However, most of the world’s
oil is concentrated in places that are hostile to U.S. interests, or vulnerable to political upheaval or terrorism. Regardless, oil
remains on the cutting-edge of many immediate challenges faced by U.S. foreign policy makers and military planners.
There will be no easy solutions until the U.S. government and American consumers develop an alternative infrastructure to
its overwhelmingly oil-based economy. In the meantime, every effort will be made to secure existing oil supplies and
guarantee the continuity of supply. Such efforts are the driving force for U.S. foreign policy and its accompanying military
doctrine. Most analysis dealing with U.S. foreign policy and the country’s expanding energy consumption suggest that oil
imports will continue to increase in the coming decades. The United States will be forced to seek new sources of fossil fuels
due to political and economic changes in regions where it currently receives its supplies. Until now, U.S. foreign policy has
failed to adequately redirect its foreign policy focus toward regions well endowed with different types of energy resources.
The United States must establish bonds of trust with Central and South Asian countries to meet its future energy needs
because its allies and its enemies alike will themselves have to obtain more energy from these regions. Washington must
reflect on its policy direction and carefully rethink its relations with Russia if it still aspires to become an important partner
in the exploitation and development of Siberian oil and gas fields. The Obama administration took the first step in this
direction by hitting the “reset” button in U.S.-Russia relations. Moreover, the United States needs to develop deeper
commercial ties with countries of Central and South Asia, even though some regional governments continue to ardently
disapprove of current U.S. policy. Trade agreements must be concluded with some monopolistic state-owned producers that
are adamant in preserving their absolute sovereignty over their strategic natural resources. Finally, Washington has to
consider the option of negotiating agreements with other large energy consumers (China, India, Japan, and the EU) and
Central and South Asian producers/exporters to avoid costly armed and diplomatic wars based on stiff competition for
limited resources.
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
165
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
DDI 2011
Internal Link—Gas Tax
Gas Tax Strengthens Russian Gas Monopoly Over the EU
Gregory Feifer, Staff writer for Radio Free Europe. 7-21-11. Radio Free Europe, Radio Liberty.
http://www.rferl.org/content/germany_and_russia_too_special_a_relationship/24262486.html
Temperatures were approaching freezing in November 2010 when a stern Vladimir Putin delivered a trademark tirade at a
business forum in Berlin's venerably posh Hotel Adlon, steps from the Brandenburg Gate. Captains of industry sat stony
faced as the Russian prime minister, reminding them Germany was phasing out nuclear power, said they had nowhere to
turn but Russia, which was already supplying 40 percent of the country's demand for natural gas from its vast deposits.
Otherwise, "how will you heat your houses?" he mocked. "Even for firewood, you'd have to go to Siberia." The immediate
object of Putin's ire was a European Union plan -- "no better than terrorism," he called it -- to liberalize its energy markets,
which he said would create barriers to investment by Gazprom, Russia's giant state-controlled monopoly. Gazprom had
spent years buying up European energy infrastructure. That effort was now under threat, prompting thunder from Putin.
"What's this robbery?" It was the kind of performance his hosts had been intent on avoiding. Since the collapse of
communism in Russia, successive German governments have exerted painstaking efforts to smooth relations with Moscow.
Now Putin appeared to confirm his critics' fears. Some read his diatribe as an indication of frustration. The Kremlin had
been confidently cementing European dependence on Russia, partly by collecting stakes in European energy companies.
Then the global financial crisis diminished energy consumption, compounding other developments in the industry that were
threatening to undermine Moscow's strategy. Casting himself as a great liberalizer, Putin proposed the creation of a freetrade zone "from Lisbon to Vladivostok." Germans responded with polite skepticism. Chancellor Angela Merkel issued
vague praise before dismissing the offer as belonging to a "future vision." For the first time in years, however, the future of
Germany's energy relations with Russia is no longer clear. Putin and other officials have been busy seeking exemptions
from EU regulations in Brussels, chiefly by threatening higher gas prices. Meanwhile, Moscow is pushing ahead with
colossal projects to build two pipelines to Europe that the Kremlin hopes will lock in European dependence. One of the
routes will end in Germany, Gazprom's largest customer and Russia's biggest trading partner in general. Moscow sees its
relationship with Berlin as its greatest asset for playing a greater role in European affairs. At the same time, Germany,
positioning itself as Russia's most important EU partner, is trying to finesse what Germans call a "modernization
partnership" with Moscow. The tight relationship worries those who believe that Russia is using its natural resources for
political advantage as well as commercial profit. Critics say that by making lucrative deals with companies in Germany
and elsewhere, Gazprom essentially turns them into Kremlin lobbyists in their own countries, whose susceptibility to
Russian influence grows. Some believe Moscow's promise of a steady flow of cheap energy has encouraged German
politicians to surrender a degree of sovereignty by reducing their enthusiasm for EU unity and collective action, especially
on the energy front. Such tendencies reverberate far outside the country's borders since Germany, the European Union's
longtime industrial engine, is now emerging as its sole political superpower. Falling gas prices may now encourage
Germany to reassess its role, but it may be too late to slow Moscow's race to further consolidate its control over Europe's
energy industry.
Russian Gas Prices Key To European Economy
Gregory Feifer, Staff writer for Radio Free Europe. 7-21-11. Radio Free Europe, Radio Liberty.
http://www.rferl.org/content/germany_and_russia_too_special_a_relationship/24262486.html
Days after Putin's November visit, record snowfall during a freak deep freeze all but shut down Berlin as if to reinforce his
warning. Although the efficient order projected by legislators' modernist offices near the Bundestag seems a world away
from Moscow's corruption and bluster, the fact is that Germany's extraordinary export-driven economic boom depends on
Russian energy. The implications of that dependence were first driven home for most Germans when Gazprom briefly cut
off gas to Ukraine during a price dispute in 2006, disrupting European supplies. As Putin indicated in November, the
dependency will surely grow as Germany moves up its timetable to shut down its nuclear power plants in the wake of
Japan's Fukushima Daiichi disaster, and demand for energy continues to rise.
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
166
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
DDI 2011
Internal Link—Gas Tax
EU Economic and Political Strength Depends on Russian Gas Prices
Gregory Feifer, Staff writer for Radio Free Europe. 7-21-11. Radio Free Europe, Radio Liberty.
http://www.rferl.org/content/germany_and_russia_too_special_a_relationship/24262486.html
“Disgusting," said Marieluise Beck, a Green Party member of parliament, over tea in her office in the same building. "With
the Nord Stream deal, Schroeder gave Russians the first real possibility of dividing and conquering," said Beck, who is
among the very few politicians to criticize, or even admit, Russian influence on foreign policy. She is convinced Gazprom
is different from Western firms because beyond the usual merging of politics and business, it actually helps execute
Moscow's foreign policy by offering very lucrative contracts to European energy companies. Their executives then act as
lobbyists for the Kremlin, leaning on their governments to put their national interests above a unified European energy
strategy. "Of course it weakened the EU," Beck said of Nord Stream, "giving Putin a wonderful opportunity to act
according to his interests and not the interests of those countries."
Relations are on the Brink—German-Russian Cooperation key to Democracy and the Economy
Gregory Feifer, Staff writer for Radio Free Europe. 7-21-11. Radio Free Europe, Radio Liberty.
http://www.rferl.org/content/germany_and_russia_too_special_a_relationship/24262486.html
With the changing gas market offering Germans their best opportunity to tack toward a strong, unified EU position, the
debate about relations with Russia is growing increasingly serious. But whether it leads Berlin to pursue energy security by
looking beyond its immediate national energy interests -- enriching the energy industry through a "privileged" relationship
with Russia -- before it's too late to decide otherwise remains to be seen. How the struggle over energy plays out will affect
other serious matters, including the advocacy of democracy in former Soviet republics, which Russia sees as part of its
sphere of influence. The movement of Ukraine and Belarus back into Russia's orbit, at least for now, has caused the EU's
Eastern Partnership plan for a future free-trade zone and visa-free travel regime for the EU and six countries on Russia's
periphery to be put on hold, perhaps indefinitely.
EU Key to World Economy
Nuno Monteiro, assistant professor of political science at Yale University. And Thomas Wright, adjunct lecturer at the Harris School
for Public Policy at the University of Chicago. 7-21-11. The National Interest. http://nationalinterest.org/commentary/europescontagion-effect-prepare-global-economic-collapse-5640
Europe is on the brink of a major financial disaster. Moody’s has downgraded Irish and Portuguese debt to junk, a status
until now reserved for Greece. This in turn has led interest rates on Spanish and Italian debt to spike. Contagion of these
two major economies is now imminent. If it happens, the global economy will plunge into a crisis that will make the 2008
bankruptcy of Lehman Brothers look like a cakewalk. For the past two years, the EU has treated the debt crisis in its
periphery as a liquidity problem. As Greece, Ireland, and Portugal were forced out of the credit markets by high interest
rates, the EU has stepped in, lending them more money. By 2014, Greek, Irish and Portuguese debt is projected to reach,
respectively, 180 percent, 145 percent and 135 percent of GDP. At the same time, EU bailout plans have forced troubled countries
to implement severe austerity measures that produced recessionary spirals, decreasing the chances that they will be able to meet
skyrocketing obligations. Today, Europe's periphery is all but insolvent. The EU’s approach to the crisis has failed. If Greece,
Ireland, and Portugal do not restructure their debt in an orderly fashion they will ultimately have to default unilaterally. In fact, the
longer EU leaders put off negotiating a coordinated restructuring, the more likely a disorderly default becomes. Financial
markets understand this, which is why these countries have been unable to borrow normally. Now, investors fear the same fate
will befall Spain and Italy, two of the largest economies in Europe, with a combined GDP around four times the size of the Greek,
Irish, and Portuguese economies combined. If Greece, Ireland, and Portugal are too big to fail, Spain and Italy are too big to save.
Europe is fast approaching the moment of truth that will reveal whether it can solve the crisis or be consumed by it. Coming face
to face with the abyss has prompted European leaders tentatively to recognize that if a default is to be avoided, an urgent debt
restructuring is needed. Still, the EU remains uncommitted to any firm timetable or plan and the European Central Bank
(ECB) refuses to accept even a temporary default. Until now, the international community has taken a back seat, allowing
the EU to single-handedly shape the crisis response. But this is a European crisis in name only. As Jean-Claude Trichet,
Chairman of the ECB recently said, “Europeans are at the epicenter of a problem which is a global problem.” The stage is
European but the consequences will be felt from New York to Shanghai. The US economy could be particularly hard hit. A
serious downturn in the Eurozone would significantly lower demand for US exports to Europe, which currently support
fourteen million US jobs. It would also spook global credit markets, raising the costs of financing US public debt.
Derivatives expose US banks to a European default, so the US banking system itself might unravel. In sum, the US
economy’s fledgling recovery would be dead in the water.
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
167
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
DDI 2011
Impact—Russian Economy
Declining Russian economy increases the likelihood of weaponization by China, Iran, and Venezuela and
destroys business confidence
Sestanovich 08- Stephen Sestanovich, George F. Kennan Senior Fellow for Russian and Eurasian Studies (11/25/08, “Russia and
the Global Economic Crisis,” http://www.cfr.org/economic-development/russia-global-economic-crisis/p17844) SP
Unlike most other countries, Russia can always use its arms exports as a means of sweetening commercial deals. At a time
when Russian economic needs are especially great, however, its customers are likely to press their advantage-seeking more
advanced equipment than they have been offered in the recent past. China, whose own military purchases from Russia have
slowed recently, is one Russian client likely to push for such upgrades. Iran and Venezuela are two others of special interest
to the United States. It is widely thought that Russia, while steadily increasing its arms sales to Iran, has declined to sell
Tehran its most advanced air-defense systems. A protracted economic crisis will surely inspire many inside the Russian
defense industry--and probably within the government as well--to call for a review of this policy. All of these strategic
adjustments--in defense spending, arms control, pipeline construction, weapons exports--represent matters of high policy
for Russia's leadership. Yet, all politics being local, some of the most consequential issues created by the economic crisis
may prove to be those that would ordinarily be considered matters of low policy. When production falls and unemployment
rises in Russia, many of the Gastarbeiter, or guest workers, that have been needed to fuel the boom are usually sent home.
For countries of the Caucasus and Central Asia, which have provided most of this enormous transient labor force (some
estimate more than one million workers in Moscow alone), this will be a huge jolt. Quickly, Russia will go from being an
important safety valve for socioeconomic discontent to a source of it. In the short term, Russia's neighbors will doubtless
see this reflux of their own citizens as a reason to maintain good relations with Moscow, in hopes of winning coordinated
management of a potentially dangerous problem. In the longer term, however, they may consider it a measure of their
continuing and unwelcome vulnerability to fluctuations in the Russian economy--and of the need to reduce that
vulnerability if they can. Before the current crisis hit, Russia's leaders believed rapid economic growth was shifting the
global power balance in their favor. The crisis, they fear, may have an even more dramatic effect on the international
pecking order--and deny them the ground they have gained in this decade.
Russian economic collapse destroys investor confidence and provokes political dissent
Chiodo and Owyang 02- Abbigail J. Chiodo and Michael T. Owyang, Senior Research associate AND economist at the Federal
Reserve Bank of St. Louis (2002, “A Case Study of a Currency Crisis: The Russian Default of 1998,”
http://research.stlouisfed.org/publications/review/02/11/ChiodoOwyang.pdf) SP
Government, Risk, and Expectations. With so many uncertainties in the Russian economy, investors turned their attention
toward Russian default risk. To promote a stable investment environment, in February 1998, the Russian government
submitted a new tax code to the Duma, with fewer and more efficient taxes. The new tax code was approved in 1998, yet
some crucial parts that were intended to increase federal revenue were ignored. Russian officials sought IMF funds but
agreements could not be reached. By late March the political and economic situation had become more dire, and, on March
23, President Yeltsin abruptly fired his entire government, including Prime Minister Viktor Chernomyrdin. In a move that
would challenge investor confidence even further, Yeltsin appointed 35-year-old Sergei Kiriyenko, a former banking and
oil company executive who had been in government less than a year, to take his place. While fears of higher interest rates in
the United States and Germany made many investors cautious, tensions rose in the Russian government. The executive
branch, the Duma, and the CBR were in conflict. Prompted by threats from Yeltsin to dissolve Parliament, the Duma
confirmed Kiriyenko’s appointment on April 24 after a month of stalling. In early May, during a routine update, CBR chair
Sergei Dubinin warned government ministers of a debt crisis within the next three years. Unfortunately, reporters were in
the audience. Since the Asian crisis had heightened investors’ sensitivity to currency stability, Dubinin’s restatement of
bank policy was misinterpreted to mean that the Bank was considering a devaluation of the ruble. In another public
relations misunderstanding, Kiriyenko stated in an interview that tax revenue was 26 percent below target and claimed that
the government was “quite poor now.” In actuality, the government was planning to cut government spending and
accelerate revenue, but these plans were never communicated clearly to the public. Instead, people began to expect a
devaluation of the ruble. Investors’ perceptions of Russia’s economic stability continued to decline when Lawrence
Summers, one of America’s top international-finance officials, was denied a meeting with Kiriyenko while in Russia. An
inexperienced aide determined that Summers’s title, Deputy Secretary of the Treasury, was unworthy of Kiriyenko’s
audience and the two never met. At the same time, the IMF left Russia, unable to reach an agreement with policymakers on
a 1998 austerity plan. Word spread of these incidents, and big investors began to sell their government bond portfolios and
Russian securities, concerned that relations between the United States and Russia were strained.
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
168
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
DDI 2011
Impact—Russian Economy
Economic decline and subsequent political succession highlights totalitarianism and takes away liberties
Barannik 10- Dasha Barannik, University of Pennsylvania, Undergraduate Mellon Research Fellowship (4/1/10, “In Search of the
‘Russian Path’: Impact of the 2008 Crisis on Russia’s Economic Policy,”
http://repository.upenn.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1002&context=uhf_2010&seiredir=1#search=%22russian%20economic%20collapse%20impact%22) SP
Between 2000 and 2008 Vladimir Putin presided over a dramatically changing Russia. During his tenure as President, the
country enjoyed its strongest economic position since the end of Communism, characterized by booming average
macroeconomic growth of 6.7 percent per year, modest inflation, budget surpluses, the eradication of foreign debt
obligations and the accumulation of massive hard currency reserves (see Appendix A).1 Between 1999 and 2008 Russia
ranked among the world‘s fastest growing economies, also recording the highest per capita income in purchasing power
parity terms ($16,000) among the promising BRIC countries (Brazil, Russia, India, China).2 Social order and stability
returned after the fallout from the 1998 financial crisis; unemployment levels fell, real disposable income and consumer
spending rose, and many were lifted out of poverty. In comparison to the fractious experiments with democracy of the
1990s, the average Russian citizen viewed himself as safer, more secure, and living better across a series of indicators under
the leadership of Vladimir Putin. Putin‘s rise also engendered the reemergence of autocratic rule and a gradual rollback of
democracy. Centralization of political power at the federal level, enlargement of government resources, the marked absence
of a true political opposition party, and an unprecedented intrusion of the state into economic affairs – all of these indicators
attest to the Kremlin‘s zealous pursuit of control, which many commentators, both Western and Russian, believe cost
Russia dearly in spite of the tremendous economic revival. In terms of public safety, civil society, health, corruption, and
the security of property rights, Russians were worse off in 2008 than they were a decade ago.3
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
169
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
DDI 2011
Impact—Revolt
Increased spending wrecks Russian economy and spurs internal revolt
Latynina, Yulia. Host of a political talk show on Ekho Moskvy radio. 7/20/11 The Moscow Times.
http://www.themoscowtimes.com/opinion/article/the-kremlin-cuts-its-tail-to-spite-the-truth/440807.html#axzz1Sg0jI5Rt
Take, for example, the federal budget. It is practically a classified document; only the consolidated budget has been made
public. It is clear that rampant corruption and increased government spending in an election year will make it impossible to
balance the 2012 budget. Even oil prices exceeding $120 per barrel can’t compensate for how much has been stolen from
the budget. This will lead to two consequences: Inflation will grow because of increased budgetary spending, and taxes
on business will also increase. Russians’ standard of living will drop further amid runaway inflation, businesspeople will be
suffocated by higher taxes, and investors will continue to head for the exits. As a result, the chances of an Arab Spring
hitting Russia in the next couple years will increase dramatically.
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
170
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
DDI 2011
Impact—Nuclear War
Economic collapse causes nuclear war.
Mead 2009. Walter Russell Mead, the Henry A. Kissinger Senior Fellow in U.S. Foreign Policy at the Council on Foreign
Relations, 2-4, 2009, “Only Makes You Stronger,” The New Republic, http://www.tnr.com/politics/story.html?id=571cbbb9-28874d81-8542-92e83915f5f8&p=2
If current market turmoil seriously damaged the performance and prospects of India and China, the current crisis could join
the Great Depression in the list of economic events that changed history, even if the recessions in the West are relatively
short and mild. The United States should stand ready to assist Chinese and Indian financial authorities on an emergency
basis--and work very hard to help both countries escape or at least weather any economic downturn. It may test the political
will of the Obama administration, but the United States must avoid a protectionist response to the economic slowdown.
U.S. moves to limit market access for Chinese and Indian producers could poison relations for years. For billions of people
in nuclear-armed countries to emerge from this crisis believing either that the United States was indifferent to their wellbeing or that it had profited from their distress could damage U.S. foreign policy far more severely than any mistake made
by George W. Bush. It's not just the great powers whose trajectories have been affected by the crash. Lesser powers like
Saudi Arabia and Iran also face new constraints. The crisis has strengthened the U.S. position in the Middle East as falling
oil prices reduce Iranian influence and increase the dependence of the oil sheikdoms on U.S. protection. Success in Iraq-however late, however undeserved, however limited--had already improved the Obama administration's prospects for
addressing regional crises. Now, the collapse in oil prices has put the Iranian regime on the defensive. The annual inflation
rate rose above 29 percent last September, up from about 17 percent in 2007, according to Iran's Bank Markazi. Economists
forecast that Iran's real GDP growth will drop markedly in the coming months as stagnating oil revenues and the continued
global economic downturn force the government to rein in its expansionary fiscal policy. All this has weakened
Ahmadinejad at home and Iran abroad. Iranian officials must balance the relative merits of support for allies like Hamas,
Hezbollah, and Syria against domestic needs, while international sanctions and other diplomatic sticks have been made
more painful and Western carrots (like trade opportunities) have become more attractive. Meanwhile, Saudi Arabia and
other oil states have become more dependent on the United States for protection against Iran, and they have fewer resources
to fund religious extremism as they use diminished oil revenues to support basic domestic spending and development goals.
None of this makes the Middle East an easy target for U.S. diplomacy, but thanks in part to the economic crisis, the
incoming administration has the chance to try some new ideas and to enter negotiations with Iran (and Syria) from a
position of enhanced strength. Every crisis is different, but there seem to be reasons why, over time, financial crises on
balance reinforce rather than undermine the world position of the leading capitalist countries. Since capitalism first emerged
in early modern Europe, the ability to exploit the advantages of rapid economic development has been a key factor in
international competition. Countries that can encourage--or at least allow and sustain--the change, dislocation, upheaval,
and pain that capitalism often involves, while providing their tumultuous market societies with appropriate regulatory and
legal frameworks, grow swiftly. They produce cutting-edge technologies that translate into military and economic power.
They are able to invest in education, making their workforces ever more productive. They typically develop liberal political
institutions and cultural norms that value, or at least tolerate, dissent and that allow people of different political and
religious viewpoints to collaborate on a vast social project of modernization--and to maintain political stability in the face
of accelerating social and economic change. The vast productive capacity of leading capitalist powers gives them the ability
to project influence around the world and, to some degree, to remake the world to suit their own interests and preferences.
This is what the United Kingdom and the United States have done in past centuries, and what other capitalist powers like
France, Germany, and Japan have done to a lesser extent. In these countries, the social forces that support the idea of a
competitive market economy within an appropriately liberal legal and political framework are relatively strong. But, in
many other countries where capitalism rubs people the wrong way, this is not the case. On either side of the Atlantic, for
example, the Latin world is often drawn to anti-capitalist movements and rulers on both the right and the left. Russia, too,
has never really taken to capitalism and liberal society--whether during the time of the czars, the commissars, or the postcold war leaders who so signally failed to build a stable, open system of liberal democratic capitalism even as many former
Warsaw Pact nations were making rapid transitions. Partly as a result of these internal cultural pressures, and partly
because, in much of the world, capitalism has appeared as an unwelcome interloper, imposed by foreign forces and shaped
to fit foreign rather than domestic interests and preferences, many countries are only half-heartedly capitalist. When crisis
strikes, they are quick to decide that capitalism is a failure and look for alternatives. 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,
[CARD CONTINUES, NO TEXT DELETED]
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
171
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
DDI 2011
[CARD CONTINUES, NO TEXT DELETED]
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
can't get the world economy back on track, we may still have to fight.
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
172
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
DDI 2011
***NEG AT RUSSIAN SPENDING DA***
Aff—Fiscal Discipline Fails
Institutional problems are the reasons for Russia’s debt problems, not lack of spending restraint
Jack Diamond ‘2 (Deputy Chief, Public Expenditure Management Division, Fiscal @ the IMF, A International Monetary Fund
working paper, http://fec.com.cn/zhuanti/ziliao/yusuanyingwen/003.PDF)
The first lesson learned from the experience of Russia is that reforming budget systems takes time. It has taken almost a decade to
adopt a legal framework for a market-based system. Even with this advance, the Budget Code is not fully implemented and it is
openly admitted that it will take time to ensure full adherence to the Code. The slow speed of reform reflects the fact that this
institutional transformation is not just a technical matter. Apart from the need to overcome capacity constraints, a more important
brake on the process is the need to make fundamental policy choices. Inevitably, it has taken time to recognize and accept some
of the shifts in the internal balance of power implied by the move to a market-based budget system. Many of these shifts
are still in the process of being resolved. For example, the view of the state's role in economic activity is clearer but still
not fully in line with a market-based system found in most OECD countries. The balance of power between the legislature and
the executive branch also has been clarified, but not fully settled. As noted, although less chaotic than was the case in the initial
stages of the transition process, the balance between central and other levels of government is still evolving. Until these issues
are resolved, the legal framework within which the budget must be managed is often ambiguous and sometimes contradictory. With
the adoption of the Budget Code, the paramount role of the MOF as the financial manager of the government has been confirmed.
However, there still exist problems over the division of responsibilities between different departments of the MOF. For
example, this paper has highlighted the problems that arise from the role of the Budget Department in the budget execution
process, and there are limits on the role of the treasury* as the government's cash manager when debt management is undertaken
elsewhere. The role of external audit in the various stages of the budget process also still lacks clarity, although has not been a source
of conflict simply because of the lack of capacity of the Chamber of Audit to fully carry out its mandate.
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
173
RUSSIA DO THE PLAN CP
DDI 2011
Aff—Non-Unique
Russian debt not overboard
Heidi Lee 8/2/10 (Writer for professional advisor, and economics newspaper/advice paper,
http://www.professionaladviser.com.hk/professional_adviser/analysis/1726033/russian-economy-stay-strong)
After the severe shocks experienced as a result of the financial crisis, the Russian economy is rebounding strongly. We expect GDP to
grow by around 5% this year. This is not all dependent on commodity exports; Russian banks have increased loan growth for the past
three months and retail statistics are also recovering. Inflation is expected to be at 6.5% this year, a record low in the post- Soviet era.
Russia not only continues to run a strong current account surplus of approximately 5.5% but also possesses one of the world’s largest
foreign reserves, currently standing at $460bn. It is estimated that the budget deficit is expected to reach 5% of GDP. However, with
public debt a mere 6% of GDP at the end of 2009, this is very affordable in the current environment and stands in stark contrast to the
highly indebted governments of Western Europe. The government has re-affirmed its commitment to fiscal discipline even though
stimulus spending will continue in this pre-election year. While this has led to some concerns over corporate taxation, personal taxes
will remain at 13%, one of the lowest in Europe.
Last printed 3/8/2016 3:26:00 AM
174