Plan: The United States federal government should remove cooperation with prosecution and the
“severe” qualifier as requirements of T visa recipients.
ADVANTAGE ONE: BALKANS
Trafficking policy in the Balkans is strictly determined by international norms
Nicole Lindstrom, May 2006, Lecturer, Department of Politics, University of York, former Core Visiting Faculty, Graduate Program in International Affairs,
The New School, former Assistant Professor, Departments of Political Science and International Relations and European Studies, Central European University, former
Research Fellow, The Center for the Study of Globalisation and Regionalisation at the University of Warwick, Ph.D., M.A. Political Science, Maxwell School of
Syracuse University, B.A. Political Science and International Studies, Macalester College, International Affairs Working Paper 2006-09, “Transnational Responses to
Human Trafficking in the Balkans,” p.1-19, http://www.newschool.edu/internationalaffairs/docs/wkg_papers/Lindstrom_2006-09.pdf
To what extent might Krastev’s claims about the anti-corruption consensus be applied to the issue of human
trafficking in the Balkans? Human trafficking, like corruption, has become a global obsession of the international
community in the past decade and the Balkans a key target in their antitrafficking efforts. Policies to combat
trafficking have also been followed a top-down pattern, where international organizations rely on a combination
of incentives and sanctions to pressure governments toconform to common legal standards and policy
procedures. An expanding network of local nongovernmental, state, and transnational actors are directly involved in every stage of the policy making process.
Like in the case of corruption, we can also observe efforts to better measure the scope of trafficking, as well as governments’ compliance with anti-trafficking policies.
While global anti-trafficking policies interact with different domestic conditions, to date anti-trafficking policy
in the Balkans, like anticorruption policies, has appeared to follow a one-size-fits-all pattern. Anti-trafficking
policy, like anti-corruption, exemplifies a “transnational” policy by Orenstein’s definition, one that is “developed,
diffused, and implemented with the direct involvement of global policy actors and coalitions at or across the
international, national, or local levels of governance.” 3 In the case of anti-trafficking in the Balkans,
transnational policy actors have not only been involved directly in all stages of the policy process; one could
argue that anti-trafficking policy would not exist without the involvement of transnational actors. That is,
transnational actors have placed human trafficking high on the policy agenda, developed policies to combat it,
and have overseen implementation of these policies. However, by viewing anti-trafficking policy in the Balkans
as a strictly top-down process, backed by a consensus among the transnational policy community, we neglect
other interesting questions. For one, what are the different ways in which transnational actors frame the problem
of trafficking and how have these ideas shaped the development of different policy strategies? Why might one
frame and related policy strategy prevail over another? Finally, what can we learn from the implementation of
antitrafficking policies in the Balkans to date, specifically some of the unintended consequences?
US emphasis on law enforcement fails.
Nicole Lindstrom, May 2006, Lecturer, Department of Politics, University of York, former Core Visiting Faculty, Graduate Program in International Affairs,
The New School, former Assistant Professor, Departments of Political Science and International Relations and European Studies, Central European University, former
Research Fellow, The Center for the Study of Globalisation and Regionalisation at the University of Warwick, Ph.D., M.A. Political Science, Maxwell School of
Syracuse University, B.A. Political Science and International Studies, Macalester College, International Affairs Working Paper 2006-09, “Transnational Responses to
Human Trafficking in the Balkans,” p.1-19, http://www.newschool.edu/internationalaffairs/docs/wkg_papers/Lindstrom_2006-09.pdf
Law enforcement strategies have become a central focus of anti-trafficking strategies. Efforts to prevent,
suppress and prosecute traffickers have resulted in increased trans-border cooperation among law enforcement
agencies as well as high-profile operations such as Mirage. The law enforcement approach has resulted in numerous traffickers being
apprehended, convicted and prosecuted. Yet critics argue that the law enforcement approach has failed to significantly reduce
the trade, with traffickers demonstrating great flexibility and ingenuity in eluding police by quickly changing
transportation and distribution routes or moving the trade further underground. Critics also argue that the law
enforcement approach has also resulted in a re-victimization of trafficked persons. For one, they suggest that operations like
Mirage result in more women being apprehended and charged on illegal migration or prostitution charges than identifying and assisting trafficked women and their
traffickers. Moreover, aggressive policing has the unintended consequence of moving much of the prostitution trade to private apartments, often on the outskirts of
cities and towns, where women are further isolated and vulnerable to violent abuse. 39 HelgaKonrad, Chair of the Stability Pact Task Force on Trafficking in Human
Beings, referring to the declining RCP numbers, states: The [RCP] figures show that the
trafficking in human beings is going underground.
It shows that the traffickers rapidly react to our responses in the fight against human trafficking. And it shows that the
victims are no longer found in bars and brothels. Brothel raids caused traffickers to shift the victims to private locations where, of course, access is more difficult and
where it becomes more difficult to provide assistance. 40 Finally,
because the law enforcement approach rests on convicting and
prosecuting individual traffickers (a condition of the UN Protocol) prosecutors must rely largely on the
willingness of victims to testify against their traffickers. 41 Since designated “victims of trafficking” are granted
immunity from illegal migration or prostitution charges, refusing to testify can make them more vulnerable to
threats of immediate deportation or prosecution. Moreover, as victim assistance programs, including emergency
and short-term shelters, are being increasingly being managed and funded by state agencies, assistance can be
made conditional on the women cooperating with the prosecution. If a person does agree to testify governments are legally required to
provide witness protection. Yet in many cases the very same government and law enforcement agencies tasked with providing this protection have themselves been
implicated with being involved in the trafficking trade. In sum, critics
of the law enforcement approach argue that when the principal
concern of this approach is to stop criminals, the interests of their victims become of secondary concern, often
leading to their further exploitation C. Re-trafficking as a failure of migration and law enforcement approaches Re-trafficking has been
identified as an increasingly prevalent problem. The 2005 RCP report documents that anywhere from three percent to 50 percent of women
repatriated from destination countries to their home countries from 2003 to 2005 were re-trafficked within a year. The IOM attributes the high rates of re-trafficking to
the predatory strategies of recruiters, who target highly vulnerable repatriated persons. Recruiters, unlike traffickers, are often embedded in particular cities and towns
and thus less vulnerable to being apprehended at border crossings or brothel raids. Yet the IOM also acknowledges serious gaps in the repatriation and reintegration
process, where women are returned home to face poverty, shame, and often abuse without adequate social support. 42 IOM’s critics, however, argue that the high rates
of re-trafficking raise fundamental questions about the long-term effectiveness of its migration approach to anti-trafficking that makes repatriation and preventing illegal
migration its central aim. Local and transnational networks of NGOs have taken the lead in addressing the re-trafficking issue, creating assistance and referral networks
that track women being repatriated to their home countries. While informal monitoring and referral networks can provide some short-term assistance to repatriated
women, advocates of an economic approach to anti-trafficking argue that the ongoing cycle of trafficking illuminates the underlying structural or economic nature of the
problem. As the EU fortifies its borders against the migrant and crime exporting states to its south and east, and funds increased law enforcement initiatives in its
bordering regions like the Balkans, traffickers continue to profit on the limitless supply of the unemployed and dislocated persons who become trapped in the trafficking
cycle. Concluding remarks We
can draw several conclusions from this analysis. First, anti-trafficking policy has become
an “obsession” of the international community, with a wide range of transnational actors coordinating efforts to
develop, diffuse and implement anti-trafficking policy. Yet differences exist in how transnational actors frame
the nature of the trafficking problem, pointing to the need to investigate points of conflict as well as
“consensus” in emerging transnational policy areas. Whether trafficking is portrayed as a migration, law
enforcement, human rights or economic problem shapes the kind of policy strategies created to address the
issue. Second, what frame prevails over another depends, in part, on the positional advantages and material resources of its main proponents. As the two most
powerful actors in the region, the United States and the European Union exert disproportionate influence in promoting a more
migration and law enforcement approach to anti-trafficking efforts. Finally, some unintended consequences of
implementing anti-trafficking policies to date may be leading to undermining theauthority and legitimacy of the
prevailing policy paradigms. Migration and law enforcement approaches can have the unintended effect of
exacerbating the vulnerability and exploitation of trafficked persons. To create more effective transnational antitrafficking policies we might consider the following shift in focus. For one, including a wide range of relevant actors can make
transnational anti-trafficking policy less top-down. For instance, creating mechanisms in which trafficked persons can be given a direct voice in policy-making can help
overcome potential conflicts of interest when service providers, whether local NGOs, governments, or transnational actors, have incentives to interpret their first hand
accounts to further a particular agenda. This could assist in resolving disputes between the IOM, which claims that declining shelter numbers can be attributed to law
enforcement policies, and their critics who argue the IOM’s migration approach is to blame. Second, the
increasing awareness of re-trafficking
highlights the limitations of policing, whether of borders or sex work, and turns our attention towards the
underlying economic and social causes of trafficking. Easing strict visa regimes or granting extended or even
permanent resident status to trafficked persons are two immediate solutions to reduce retrafficking.
US is key.
H. Richard Friman, and Simon Reich, 2007, the Eliot Fitch Professor for International Studies, Professor of Political Science, and Director of the Center for
Transnational Justice, at Marquette University, Ph.D. Cornell University; Professor at the Graduate School of Public and International Affairs, and Director of the Ford
Institute for Human Security, at the University of Pittsburgh, Ph.D., M.A., Cornell University; “Human Trafficking, Human Security and the Balkans,” Paper presented
at the annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, August 30 – September 2, 2007, Chicago, IL, p.18-19,
http://www.allacademic.com//meta/p_mla_apa_research_citation/2/1/0/2/8/pages210282/p210282-18.php
A relative emphasis on enhancing the rule of law—criminalization of trafficking and related practices and
enforcement that places victims at risk while focusing on organized trafficking networks and border control—is
unlikely to resolve the challenge of human trafficking. A multifaceted, integrated approach that better
addresses the root causes of human trafficking, addressing factors that influence patterns of demand and supply
for exploited persons, holds greater promise. Yet rhetoric in this regard continues to outstrip practice. The problem is not the
absence of ideas but the failure of these ideas to attract the requisite support for integrated implementation. Such
a pattern is clearly not unique to human trafficking in the Western Balkans, 105 or to the issue area of human
trafficking. Broad criminalization and patterns of selective enforcement dominate the internationaldrug control
regime despite calls for a greater emphasis on the broader socioeconomic roots of supply and demand. 106
Andreas and Nadelmann argue that global prohibition regimes “tend to mirror the criminal laws of countries
that have dominated the global society.” 107 Over the last century and into the new millennium the United States
has played this dominant role, supported and occasionally contested by the EU and its member states. In this sense, the path towards the
realization of a human security approach to the illicit global economy lies in influencing the policies and
practice of the United States. Domestic and transnational nongovernmental organizations have played, and will continue to play, a crucial role in this
regard. Andreas and Nadelmann point to the role of governments as well as nongovernmental “transnational moral entrepreneurs” in shaping the rise and influence of
global prohibition regimes. Moreover, conflicts between transnational moral entrepreneurs, ranging from individuals to nongovernmental organizations, over the proper
ways of conceptualizing the problem and the proper solutions have shaped the structure and effectiveness of regimes in reducing the incidence of the undesired activity.
The intertwined issues of human trafficking and prostitution, and the deep divide among transnational moral
entrepreneurs as well as governments over the latter’s prohibition in both policy and practice, lead Andreas and
Nadelmann to see limited possibilities for success in the global prohibition regime against human trafficking.
108 Yet a human security approach, by its multifaceted nature, holds out a potential path to address human
trafficking without necessarily becoming paralyzed by the debate over prostitution. Regardless of whether one
sees the potential for choice by those who engage in prostitution or sees the very concept of sex work as
immoral exploitation, a human security approach reveals that progress is still possible through taking steps to
ease freedom from want, freedom from fear and the weaknesses of rule of law that help to drive the practice of
human trafficking. Transnational moral entrepreneurs have placed human security, with all of its gray areas, on
the global agenda. As Roland Paris writes, human security has worked as a “rallying cry”, uniting diverse coalitions and as the basis for a global “political
campaign” against issues such as land mines. 109 Human trafficking, more so than trafficking in drugs, endangered species or violations of intellectual property rights,
reveals a human face. Like the horrible images of injuries to children and noncombatants by land mines ,
the images and stories of trafficked
children, women and men have the potential to create pariahs among those who fail to act. To date, however,
the human security approach remains underutilized and its potential unrealized. The Western Balkans offers
insights as to why a multifaceted, integrated approach to human trafficking is necessary, and why efforts
towards such an approach have fallen short.
Trafficking causes Balkan instability
Mary Kaldor, 9-1-2008, Director of the Centre for the Study of Global Governance, and Professor of Global Governance at the London School of Economics,
co-chair of the Helsinki Citizens Assembly, Governor of the Westminster Foundation for Democracy, former Scholar at the Stockholm International Peace Research
Institute, B.A., Politics, Philosophy and Economics, Oxford University; “The Balkans-Caucasus tangle: states and citizens,”
http://www.opendemocracy.net/article/democracy_power/balkans_caucasus_tangle
There is a real risk of spreading destabilisation in the Balkans and the Caucasus. The criminal/nationalist
entrepreneurs who profited from the wars in the 1990s were never properly dealt with. On the contrary, they
have been nurtured by the combination of nationalist governments, high unemployment and lawlessness.
Governments in the region - in Bosnia-Herzegovina, Serbia, Macedonia, Albania or Georgia, for example - are not simply (as the jargon has it)
"weak states"; their weakness is sustained by what some have described as shadow networks of transnational crime
and extremist ideologies. There has been an expansion of human-trafficking, money-laundering, and the smuggling of cigarettes,
alcohol, drugs, and weapons over the last decade - much of it to satisfy European and American markets - and all in the face of
international agreements, aid programmes and the presence of foreign troops and agencies. These problems are
the outward manifestation of unresolved economic, social and institutional problems which the international
community - whose policy toward these regions has been dominated by a top-down approach designed above
all to maintain stability - has failed to address. Political efforts have been focused on status; military efforts have given priority to separating
forces and controlling heavy weapons; economic efforts have concentrated on economic growth, macroeconomic stability and control of inflation. Meanwhile the
entrepreneurs of violence have fed on the spread of grassroots populist nationalism and/or religious
radicalisation that has exploited the frustrations arising from high levels of unemployment, high crime rates and
human-rights violations, the trauma of past violence, and the weakness of civil society. For example, the Kosovo Liberation
Army leader Hashim Thaci won the Kosovar elections of 17 November 2007, and (while the main current Serbian politicians are nationalist enough) there is a risk that
the more extreme radical nationalist Tomislav Nikolic will do well in the Serbian presidential elections scheduled for 20 January 2008. Violence
will further
strengthen the position of these "spoilers". The Ahtisaari plan for Kosovo envisages "decentralisation", which
means in current conditions a kind of internal partition between Serb and Albanian municipalities. A new bout
of ethnic cleansing will lead to the expulsion of Serbs from the southern part of Kosovo and of the few
remaining Albanians in the north. Militant groups with names like the Albanian National Army or the Prince Lazar Army (named after the Serbian
leader killed in the myth-encrusted battle of Kosovo in 1389) are already mobilising. The violence could spread to areas where there are
neighbouring Albanian minorities, such as Macedonia and southern Serbia, as well as to Bosnia-Herzegovina.
The tension will be worsened if, as is expected, a Serbian blockade of Kosovo is imposed; this would in particular stop electricity supplies. It
is possible to
outline similar scenarios in the south Caucasus.
Plan solves alt causes
Keefer 6 Sandra, Colonel U.S. Army War College, HUMAN TRAFFICKING AND THE IMPACT ON
NATIONAL SECURITY FOR THE UNITED STATES, http://stinet.dtic.mil/cgibin/GetTRDoc?AD=ADA448573&Location=U2&doc=GetTRDoc.pdf
There is no doubt that profits made from human trafficking are enormous. Slave traffickers around the world
have rediscovered how profitable it is to buy and sell people. The United Nations believes that the trafficking of
human beings is now the third largest source of money for organized crime, after arms and drugs. 9 It has become the
world’s fastest growing criminal enterprise, an estimated $9.5 billion per year. The commodities involved in this illicit trade
are men, women, and children and the trafficker’s goal is to maximize profits. The sale and distribution of
trafficked humans in the U.S. is a global, regional, and national problem. 10 Attracted by huge profits made at minimal risks to the
trafficker, criminal organizations at all levels are now involved with this heinous crime. The fall of communism, coupled with
deteriorating third world economies, has fueled the dramatic rise of this form of commerce. 11 An ounce of cocaine wholesale is $1200 but you
can only sell it once, a woman or child $50-$1000 but you can sell them each day over and over and over again
(30 to 40 customers a day), and the markup is unbelievable. 12 Trafficking humans – especially
children…enables these international mobsters to play in the wider field…of trafficking drugs, weapons, arms,
chemicals, toxic waste, and even piracy on the high seas. Research substantiates indisputable links between
human trafficking and organized criminal syndicates the world over. 13
Failure to stabilize the Balkans sets off World War Three
Paris ‘2 (Roland Paris, Assistant Professor of Political Science and International Affairs at University of Colorado, Political Science Quarterly, Volume 117, Issue
3, Fall, Proquest)
Nevertheless, the
phrase "powderkeg in the Balkans" would have carried historical significance for listeners who
possessed even a casual knowledge of European history. Since the early part of the twentieth century, when
instability in the Balkans drew in the great powers and provided the spark that ignited World War I, the region
has been widely known as a powderkeg. In 1947, for instance, members of the International Court of Justice noted that the Balkans had been "so
often described as the `powder-keg' of Europe."51 Today, the term continues to be attached to the region's politics, conjuring up memories of the origins of World War
I. The meaning of the powderkeg metaphor is straightforward: the
Balkans can explode at any time, and the resulting conflagration
can spread to the rest of Europe; preventing such an explosion is vital to the continent's, and perhaps even to
American, security. When Clinton described Kosovo as a powderkeg, he warned that the Kosovo conflict might spill over not only to
surrounding Balkan states, but to Europe as a whole; and he insinuated that the United States could be compelled to
fight in such a pan-European conflict, just as it did in World Wars I and II. "
That goes nuclear
Daily Mail (London), May 29, 1999, “The Nuclear Warning,” p. 25
NATO’S military campaign in the Balkans is risking nuclear war on two fronts, it was claimed yesterday. Viktor
Chernomyrdin, Russia’s special envoy to Yugoslavia warned the bombing could escalate into a global conflict. And
the CIA cautioned that the Serbs might resort to detonating a rudimentary nuclear weapon in Kosovo if a
ground attack leaves them cornered. Shortly before beginning a new round of peace talks in Belgrade, Mr Chernomyrdin told The Washington Post:
‘The world has never in this decade been so close as now to the brink of nuclear war.’ He warned that Russia might
pull out of attempts to find a diplomatic solution. ‘If the situation continues in the same vein, the continuation of the talks would be senseless,’
he said.
Changing our definition solves trafficking globally.
Payne 09 JD Candidate, Regent School of Law,
Valerie S. “ON THE ROAD TO VICTORY IN AMERICA'S WAR ON HUMAN TRAFFICKING: LANDMARKS, LANDMINES, AND THE NEED FOR
CENTRALIZED STRATEGY,” 21 Regent U.L. Rev. 435, Lexis)
What is human trafficking? The answer to this foundational question is informed by one‘s personal, or even
legal, framework.116 Varying viewpoints invariably lead to varying definitions. In legislating the scope and
boundaries of human trafficking as a crime, much hinges on the arrangement of particular wording in
definitional provisions.117 Anti-trafficking laws impacting the United States exist at three levels— state,
federal, international.118 Although these pieces of legislation cast ―a kind of definitional anchor, none
―define human trafficking or trafficking victimization in exactly the same way.‖119 The definitional provisions at each level
have triggered ongoing lengthy political debate120 and vigorous disagreement,121 which tends to delay the enactment process.122 Beyond slowing the legislative
process,
the implications of these definitional debates—and the differences between statutory provisions— are far
reaching, impacting not only a victim‘s ability to receive appropriate relief and government benefits,123 but
also methodologies for victim screening protocols124 and gathering statistical research data.125 Overall,
differences in definitions make it difficult to standardize certain tools that are vital to fighting the war on
human trafficking. Just as it is difficult to fight a war against an enemy who is not clearly defined, lack of
uniformity among statutory definitions can lead to confusion that impedes effectiveness in the war on human
trafficking.
ADVANTAGE TWO: MULTILAT
The plan aligns the US definition with the UN’s – that’s key to credibility.
Hartsough 02 JD Candidate @ Hastings College of Law,
(Tala, “Asylum for Trafficked Women: Escape Strategies Beyond the T Visa” Hastings Women’s Law Journal,
13 Hastings Women’s L.J. 77)
Although the legislative history of the Act indicates concern for the victims of trafficking and recognizes that trafficking violates women's human rights, the
T visa
is a limited option. It limits the class of people who are eligible n253 and places a numerical limit on the number of visas granted each
year. n254 At most, 5000 people per year will be granted T visas. n255 In addition to providing relief for a limited number of trafficked persons, the Act focuses
on crime-fighting, ignoring prevalent human rights issues. A statement made by one of the Act's sponsors
evidences the prioritization of the Act as a crime bill. "The legislation further includes the creation of a new
form of visa for trafficking victims. This will substantially allow for more aggressive prosecution, as well as the
protection of these witness victims." n256 The relief from deportation is inexorably linked to the crimefighting mechanism of requiring cooperation and testimony. International human rights authorities and nongovernmental organizations have expressed skepticism about a crime control approach adequately protecting
the human rights of victims of trafficking. The United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, Mary Robinson, wrote
regarding the U.N. Trafficking Protocol: "it is important in this context to note that victim protection must be
considered separately from witness protection, as not all victims of trafficking will be selected by [*102]
investigating and prosecuting agencies to act as witnesses in criminal pro-ceedings." n257 The U.N. Special
Rapporteur on Violence Against Women expressed concern that the international instrument dealing with
trafficking, the U.N. Trafficking Protocol, "is being elaborated in the context of crime control, rather than
with a focus on human rights." n258 The Special Rapporteur's report on trafficking also highlighted concern about individual countries adopting this
crime-fighting approach. "On the issue of trafficking, Governments overwhelmingly adopt a law and order approach,
with an accompanying strong anti-immigration policy. Such an approach is often at odds with the protection
of human rights." n259 The Act's emphasis on protecting only those subject to "severe" forms of trafficking
and facing "extreme hardship" upon removal, as well as its crime-fighting requirements, compromise the protection that should be
afforded all people trafficked into the United States. Excluding some victims of trafficking from removal
protection amounts to forced repatriation and is inconsistent with human rights norms . n260 Those women who
are granted temporary stays in the United States should not have their rights violated by being detained and prosecuted. n261
Responses to human trafficking are the litmus test.
Dr. Christal Morehouse completed her Ph.D. in political science at Humboldt University in Berlin, “Combating human trafficking: policy gaps and hidden
political agendas in the USA and Germany”, VS Verlag, 2009 p262-263
Since 1904, the international community has formalized its work to understand what human trafficking encompasses. Starting from a partial approach by addressing one
victim-group (i.e. white women) and one type of labor exploitation (e.g. sex trafficking), the international community expanded its understanding of this issue and with
this the ability to take action to reduce its scope. Over
the past one hundred years, the international community has slowly put
together the pieces of the human trafficking puzzle. It has led anti human trafficking efforts since the abolition
of institutional slavery and influenced national legislation in the United States of America and the Federal Republic of Germany. After
decades of slow evolution the international policy framework has progressed from a rough block of metal and emerged as a sharpened needle. The impetus of national
efforts to define and stem human trafficking has drawn from the international community’s long-term efforts to build a comprehensive anti trafficking policy
framework.
Yet this instrument is not perfect. This highly developed policy tool should continue to be improved. At
the national level, government and societal responses to human trafficking are a litmus test of the strength
and quality of our democracies. This analysis has shown that both the German and American Governments have made earnest efforts to address the
problem of human trafficking by creating robust anti human trafficking policy frameworks. Both have learned from their engagement with this issue at the international
level. Yet in
the national context, the sharpened anti human trafficking policy-needle has been dulled by policy
gaps and hidden agendas. Hence national human trafficking policies are subordinated to competing and
incompatible policy objectives that jeopardize the primary goal. These policy gaps and hidden agendas cast
doubt on the commitment of both governments to stopping human trafficking and to doing so by means of
a human rights approach . The recommendations made in this analysis not only shed light on these hidden political agendas and gaps in policy in the
United States of America and the Federal Republic of Germany, they also propose how to improve policy in both countries. The suggested changes could
increase the protection of human trafficking victims, improve information on the scope and nature of human
trafficking, as well as enhance the ability of governments to prosecute perpetrators. Both the German and the US
Governments could profit from a closer comparison and exchange of their anti human trafficking policies and initiatives. This analysis could in turn act as a springboard
for increased exchange and learning. Combating human trafficking is not an isolated policy niche that concerns only a few select experts. Although
the
immediate consequences of human trafficking are felt most intensely by the victims of the crime, it is
nonetheless an issue that concerns the whole of society.
Integrating the commitment to the United Nations concept of human rights strengthens United States
credibility, spills over to climate cooperation and restores UN credibility
Wexler, Winter 2008 (Lesley - assistant professor at Florida State University College of Law, 22 Geo. Immigr.
L.J. 285, p. lexis)
The development of a human rights strategy to protect migrants yields several benefits that a purely constitutional framework lacks. First, the
use of human
rights treaties and discourse creates links to the international movement to protect human rights. These links can
strengthen protections at home in two ways: by drawing international attention and pressure to bear on domestic efforts 46 and providing
a shared language and understanding for domestic advocates to interact with, and learn from, international experiences. 47 As many countries face
similar immigration issues, the shared wisdom of an international approach may be particularly useful in this area.
Such international interactions might also facilitate the transmission of human rights assessments and impact statements
throughout the world. Human rights review might complement U.N. efforts to mainstream human rights and
integrate them at an operational level. 48 The visibility and leadership capabilities of the U nited S tates make it
particularly able to promote the use of human rights assessments. 49 Just as the U nited S tates' development and
implementation of environmental impact statements has shaped environmental policy in a significant number of
countries, 50 the U nited S tates could also reinvigorate its human rights policy through its leadership and assist
other countries in developing a stronger commitment to human rights. 51 Impact assessment provides other countries with an
opportunity [*292] to embrace the importance of human rights without making a strong commitment to a treaty regime they might be unwilling to or be incapable of
enforcing. Human rights impact statements and other review mechanisms might also be used as evidence of good faith domestic treaty compliance. To the extent that
the United States already implicitly complies with reporting requirements under the human rights treaties it has ratified and implemented, foreign countries find
America's disinclination to use human rights language problematic. 52 Thus, instead of using a constitutional metric to determine violations when collecting
information on police brutality, for example, U.S. states could do so instead by documenting the issue in terms of human rights. By
adding treaty language
our efforts at compliance across the globe becomes easier. Enhancing our
reputation for human rights compliance is especially important given current political realities. Many countries hold a
declining opinion of the U nited S tates. 53 The international community would welcome America's affirmation of
the continuing importance of human rights in the wake of many post-September 11th actions such as torture, extraordinary rendition,
to the assessment process, transmitting
increased domestic surveillance, and harsher and more frequent detention of immigrants. Moreover, the international community would benefit from the assurance that
the concept of "human rights" means more than a justification for regime change. 54 American
exceptionalism to human rights law angers
our allies and complicates efforts to secure their cooperation. 55 Not surprisingly, many countries view the United States' silence
about its own human rights failings as hypocritical. 56 In particular, the international community strongly criticizes the State Department's annual human rights reports
for omitting an assessment of domestic performance as well as omitting "actions by governments taken at the request of the United States or with the expressed support
of the United States . . . ." 57 Human rights advocates suggest that U.S.
leadership on human rights faces a severe [*293] credibility
gap --for instance, other countries perceive the U nited S tates as a laggard on human rights treaty compliance in regards
to migrants 58 --but that repudiation of past abuses and momentum for policy changes could restore its leadership . 59 As
many have suggested, good international relations are vital to winning the War on Terror. 60 Moreover, international cooperation is essential to
address immigration related issues such as human trafficking. A visible commitment to migrants' human
rights might bolster the U nited S tates' credibility when it seeks better treatment for the approximately 2 million American emigres. 61 Other
international problems, such as climate change and related environmental issues, also require cooperation and leadership.
An increased willingness to participate in global human rights discourse and demonstrate adherence to human
rights treaties might enhance our ability to lead and participate in other arenas .
Climate leadership is critical to solve warming – prevents extinction
Ban Ki-Moon, Secretary General of the United Nations, 10-25. NY Times, “We Can Do It,”
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/26/opinion/26iht-edban.html
Every day, the critical December summit in Copenhagen grows closer. All agree that climate
change is an existential threat to humankind. Yet
issues are complex, affecting everything from national economies to individual lifestyles. They
involve political trade-offs and commitments of resources no leader can undertake lightly. We could see all that at recent climate negotiations in
Bangkok. Where we needed progress, we saw gridlock. Yet the elements of a deal are on the table. All we require to put them in place is
political will. We need to step back from narrow national interest and engage in frank and constructive discussion in a spirit of global common cause. In this, we
agreement on what to do still eludes us. How can this be? The
can be optimistic. Meeting in London earlier this week, British Prime Minister Gordon Brown told the leaders of 17 major economies (responsible for some 80 percent
of global greenhouse gas emissions) that success in Copenhagen is
within reach—if they themselves engage, and especially if they themselves go to
Copenhagen to push an agenda for change. U.S. leadership is crucial. That is why I am encouraged by the spirit of compromise shown in the
bipartisan initiative announced last week by John Kerry and Lindsey Graham. Here was a pair of U.S. senators — one Republican, the other Democratic — coming
together to bridge their parties’ differences to address climate change in a spirit of genuine give-and-take. We cannot afford another period where the United States
stands on the sidelines. An
engaged U nited S tates can lead the world to seal a deal to combat climate change in Copenhagen. An
engaged U nited S tates will cause unnecessary — and ultimately unaffordable — delay in concrete strategies
and policies to beat this looming challenge. Leaders across the globe are increasingly showing the engagement and leadership we
need. Last month, President Barack Obama joined more than 100 others at a climate change summit at U.N. headquarters in New York — sending a clear message of
indecisive or insufficiently
solidarity and commitment. So did the leaders of China, Japan and South Korea, all of whom pledged to promote the development of clean energy technologies and
ensure that Copenhagen is a success. Japan’s prime minister promised a 25 percent cut in greenhouse gas emissions from 1990 levels by 2020, laying down a marker
for other industrialized nations. The European Union, too, has pledged to make a 30 percent reduction as part of a global agreement. Norway has announced its
readiness for a 40 percent cut in emissions. Brazil has unveiled plans to substantially cut emissions from deforestation. India and China are implanting programs to curb
emissions as well. Looking forward to Copenhagen, I have four benchmarks for success: Every country must do its utmost to reduce emissions from all major sources,
including from deforestation and emissions from shipping and aviation. Developed countries must strengthen their mid-term mitigation targets, which are currently
nowhere close to the cuts that the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change says are needed. Developing countries must slow the rise in their emissions and
accelerate green growth as part of their strategies to reduce poverty. A successful deal must strengthen the world’s ability to cope with an already changing climate. In
particular, it must provide comprehensive support to those who bear the heaviest climate impacts. Support for adaptation is not only an ethical imperative; it is a smart
investment in a more stable, secure world. A deal needs to be backed by money and the means to deliver it. Developing countries need funding and technology so they
can move more quickly toward green growth. The solutions we discuss cannot be realized without substantial additional financing, including through carbon markets
and private investment. A deal must include an equitable global governance structure. All countries must have a voice in how resources are deployed and managed.
Can we seal a comprehensive, equitable and ambitious deal in Copenhagen that will reduce
greenhouse gas emissions and limit global temperature rise to a scientifically safe level? Can we catalyze clean energy growth?
That is how trust will be built.
Can we help to protect the most vulnerable nations from the effects of climate change? Can we expect the United States to play a leading role? The best answer to all
these questions was given last week by Senators Kerry and Graham: “Yes,
we can.”
Warming is real and anthropogenic – most recent studies.
Environmental Defense Fund, a US-based nonprofit environmental advocacy group, “Global Warming Myths
and Facts,” 1/13/2009, http://mrgreenbiz.wordpress.com/2009/01/13/global-warming-myths-and-facts-2/
There is no debate among scientists about the basic facts of global warming. The most respected scientific
bodies have stated unequivocally that global warming is occurring, and people are causing it by burning fossil
fuels (like coal, oil and natural gas) and cutting down forests. The U.S. National Academy of Sciences, which in
2005 the White House called "the gold standard of objective scientific assessment," issued a joint statement
with 10 other National Academies of Science saying "the scientific understanding of climate change is now
sufficiently clear to justify nations taking prompt action. It is vital that all nations identify cost-effective steps
that they can take now, to contribute to substantial and long-term reduction in net global greenhouse gas
emissions." (Joint Statement of Science Academies: Global Response to Climate Change [PDF], 2005) The only debate in the science community about global warming is about how much and how fast warming
will continue as a result of heat-trapping emissions. Scientists have given a clear warning about global warming, and we have more than enough facts — about causes and fixes — to implement solutions right now. MYTH
Even if global warming is a problem, addressing it will hurt American industry and workers. FACT A well designed trading program will harness American ingenuity to decrease heat-trapping pollution cost-effectively,
jumpstarting a new carbon economy. Claims that fighting global warming will cripple the economy and cost hundreds of thousands of jobs are unfounded. In fact, companies that are already reducing their heat-trapping
emissions have discovered that cutting pollution can save money. The cost of a comprehensive national greenhouse gas reduction program will depend on the precise emissions targets, the timing for the reductions and the
means of implementation. An independent MIT study found that a modest cap-and-trade system would cost less than $20 per household annually and have no negative impact on employment. Experience has shown that
properly designed emissions trading programs can reduce compliance costs significantly compared with other regulatory approaches. For example, the U.S. acid rain program reduced sulfur dioxide emissions by more than 30
percent from 1990 levels and cost industry a fraction of what the government originally estimated, according to EPA. Furthermore, a mandatory cap on emissions could spur technological innovation that could create jobs and
wealth. Letting global warming continue until we are forced to address it on an emergency basis could disrupt and severely damage our economy. It is far wiser and more cost-effective to act now. MYTH Water vapor is the
Although water vapor traps more
heat than CO2, because of the relationships among CO2, water vapor and climate, to fight global warming
nations must focus on controlling CO2. Atmospheric levels of CO2 are determined by how much coal, natural
gas and oil we burn and how many trees we cut down, as well as by natural processes like plant growth.
Atmospheric levels of water vapor, on the other hand, cannot be directly controlled by people; rather, they are
determined by temperatures. The warmer the atmosphere, the more water vapor it can hold. As a result, water
vapor is part of an amplifying effect. Greenhouse gases like CO2 warm the air, which in turn adds to the stock
of water vapor, which in turn traps more heat and accelerates warming. Scientists know this because of satellite measurements documenting a rise in
water vapor concentrations as the globe has warmed.
The best way to lower temperature and thus reduce water vapor levels is to
reduce CO2 emissions. MYTH Global warming and extra CO2 will actually be beneficial — they reduce cold-related deaths and stimulate crop growth. FACT Any beneficial
effects will be far outweighed by damage and disruption. Even a warming in just the middle range of
scientific projections would have devastating impacts on many sectors of the economy. Rising seas would inundate coastal communities,
contaminate water supplies with salt and increase the risk of flooding by storm surge, affecting tens of millions of people globally. Moreover, extreme weather events, including heat
waves, droughts and floods, are predicted to increase in frequency and intensity, causing loss of lives and
property and throwing agriculture into turmoil. Even though higher levels of CO2 can act as a plant
fertilizer under some conditions, scientists now think that the "CO2 fertilization" effect on crops has been
overstated; in natural ecosystems, the fertilization effect can diminish after a few years as plants
acclimate. Furthermore, increased CO2 may benefit undesirable, weedy species more than desirable
species. Higher levels of CO2 have already caused ocean acidification, and scientists are warning of
potentially devastating effects on marine life and fisheries. Moreover, higher levels of regional ozone (smog), a result of warmer temperatures, could worsen
most important, abundant greenhouse gas. So if we’re going to control a greenhouse gas, why don’t we control it instead of carbon dioxide (CO2)? FACT
respiratory illnesses. Less developed countries and natural ecosystems may not have the capacity to adapt. The notion that there will be regional “winners” and “losers” in global warming is based on a world-view from the
1950’s. We live in a global community. Never mind the moral implications — when an environmental catastrophe creates millions of refugees half-way around the world, Americans are affected. MYTH Global warming is
The global warming we are experiencing is not natural. People are
causing it. People are causing global warming by burning fossil fuels (like oil, coal and natural gas) and
cutting down forests. Scientists have shown that these activities are pumping far more CO2 into the atmosphere
than was ever released in hundreds of thousands of years. This buildup of CO2 is the biggest cause of global
warming. Since 1895, scientists have known that CO2 and other greenhouse gases trap heat and warm the earth. As the warming has intensified over the past three decades, scientific scrutiny has
increased along with it. Scientists have considered and ruled out other, natural explanations such as sunlight, volcanic
eruptions and cosmic rays. (IPCC 2001) Though natural amounts of CO2 have varied from 180 to 300 parts per million (ppm), today's CO2 levels are around 380 ppm. That's 25% more than
the highest natural levels over the past 650,000 years. Increased CO2 levels have contributed to periods of higher average temperatures
throughout that long record. (Boden, Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center) As for previous Arctic warming, it is true that there were stretches of warm periods over the Arctic earlier in
just part of a natural cycle. The Arctic has warmed up in the past. FACT
the 20th century. The limited records available for that time period indicate that the warmth did not affect as many areas or persist from year to year as much as the current warmth. But that episode, however warm it was, is
not relevant to the issue at hand. Why? For one, a brief regional trend does not discount a longer global phenomenon. We know that the planet has been warming over the past several decades and Arctic ice has been melting
unlike the earlier periods of Arctic warmth, there is no expectation that the current upward trend in
Arctic temperatures will reverse; the rising concentrations of greenhouse gases will prevent that from
happening. MYTH We can adapt to climate change — civilization has survived droughts and temperature shifts before. FACT Although humans as a whole have
survived the vagaries of drought, stretches of warmth and cold and more, entire societies have collapsed from
dramatic climatic shifts. The current warming of our climate will bring major hardships and economic
dislocations — untold human suffering, especially for our children and grandchildren. We are already seeing significant costs from today's global warming which is caused by greenhouse gas pollution. Climate
has changed in the past and human societies have survived, but today six billion people depend on interconnected ecosystems and complex technological infrastructure. What's more, unless we limit the
amount of heat-trapping gases we are putting into the atmosphere, we will face a warming trend unseen
since human civilization began 10,000 years ago. (IPCC 2001) The consequences of continued warming at
current rates are likely to be dire. Many densely populated areas, such as low-lying coastal regions, are highly vulnerable to climate shifts. A middle-of-the-range projection is that the homes
persistently. And
of 13 to 88 million people around the world would be flooded by the sea each year in the 2080s. Poorer countries and small island nations will have the hardest time adapting. (McLean et al. 2001) In what appears to be the
first forced move resulting from climate change, 100 residents of Tegua island in the Pacific Ocean were evacuated by the government because rising sea levels were flooding their island. Some 2,000 other islanders plan a
similar move to escape rising waters. In the United States, the village of Shishmaref in Alaska, which has been inhabited for 400 years, is collapsing from melting permafrost. Relocation plans are in the works.
Scarcity of water and food could lead to major conflicts with broad ripple effects throughout the globe. Even if
people find a way to adapt, the wildlife and plants on which we depend may be unable to adapt to rapid climate
change. While the world itself will not end, the world as we know it may disappear. MYTH Recent cold winters and cool summers don’t feel like global warming to me. FACT While different
pockets of the country have experienced some cold winters here and there, the overall trend is warmer winters.
Measurements show that over the last century the Earth’s climate has warmed overall, in all seasons, and in
most regions. Climate skeptics mislead the public when they claim that the winter of 2003–2004 was the coldest ever in the northeastern United States. That winter was only the 33rd coldest in the region since
records began in 1896. Furthermore, a single year of cold weather in one region of the globe is not an indication of a trend in the
global climate, which refers to a long-term average over the entire planet. MYTH Global warming can’t be happening because some glaciers and
ice sheets are growing, not shrinking. FACT In most parts of the world, the retreat of glaciers has been dramatic. The best available scientific data indicate that Greenland's massive ice sheet is shrinking. Between 1961 and
The consensus among scientists is that rising air temperatures are the most important
factor behind the retreat of glaciers on a global scale over long time periods. Some glaciers in western Norway, Iceland and New Zealand have been
1997, the world’s glaciers lost 890 cubic miles of ice.
expanding during the past few decades. That expansion is a result of regional increases in storm frequency and snowfall rather than colder temperatures — not at all incompatible with a global warming trend. In Greenland, a
NASA satellite that can measure the ice mass over the whole continent has found that although there is variation from month to month, over the longer term, the ice is disappearing. In fact, there are worrisome signs that
melting is accelerating: glaciers are moving into the ocean twice as fast as a decade ago, and, over time, more and more glaciers have started to accelerate. What is most alarming is the prediction, based on model calculations
and historical evidence, that an approximately 5.4 degree Fahrenheit increase in local Greenland temperatures will lead to irreversible meltdown and a sea-level rise of over 20 feet. Since the Arctic is warming 2-3 times faster
than the global average, this tipping point is not far away. The only study that has shown increasing ice mass in Greenland only looked at the interior of the ice sheet, not at the edges where melting occurs. This is actually in
line with climate model predictions that global warming would lead to a short-term accumulation of ice in the cold interior due to heavier snowfall. (Similarly, scientists have predicted that Antarctica overall will gain ice in
the near future due to heavier snowfall.) The scientists who published the study were careful to point out that their results should not be used to conclude that Greenland's ice mass as a whole is growing. In addition, their data
suggested that the accumulation of snow in the middle of the continent is likely to decrease over time as global warming continues. MYTH Accurate weather predictions a few days in advance are hard to come by. Why on
earth should we have confidence in climate projections decades from now? FACT Climate prediction is fundamentally different from weather prediction, just as climate is different from weather. It is often more difficult to
make an accurate weather forecast than a climate prediction. The accuracy of weather forecasting is critically dependent upon being able to exactly and comprehensively characterize the present state of the global atmosphere.
Climate prediction relies on other, longer ranging factors. For instance, we might not know if it will be below freezing on a specific December day in New England, but we know from our understanding of the region's climate
that the temperatures during the month will generally be low. Similarly, climate tells us that Seattle and London tend to be rainy, Florida and southern California are usually warm, and the Southwest is often dry and hot
.
Today’s climate models can now reproduce the observed global average climates over the past century and
beyond. Such findings have reinforced scientist’s confidence in the capacity of models to produce reliable
projections of future climate. Current climate assessments typically consider the results from a range of models
and scenarios for future heat-trapping emissions in order to identify the most likely range for future climatic
change.
We don’t need to eliminate all emissions, just get them to a safe level.
Corydon Ireland, Harvard Gazette, “McKibben’s movement: 350.org,” 10/19/ 2009, http://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2009/10/mckibben-brings-350-home/
McKibben’s message is that the Earth is warming rapidly, that climate change is too late to stop, but that it is
not too late to act. Acting means getting humankind, with its proliferating autos and industries, back to 350
parts per million of atmospheric carbon dioxide, the principal gas associated with global warming. (Levels are 390 ppm
now, and rising at about 2 ppm each year.)
The 350 ppm level is what scientists last year said is the maximum at which civilization can prosper. Above that,
they believe, the Earth over the next century will continue its rapid baking: melting glaciers and polar sea ice,
spurring insect-born diseases, and displacing populations threatened with drought, flooding, and rising seas. (By
one estimate, there will be 700 million “climate refugees” clamoring for shelter by the end of this century.)
In short, said McKibben, what
is ahead is a climate challenge so vast that it is now “on a civilization scale.”
*Bill McKibben is an American environmentalist and writer who frequently writes about global warming and
alternative energy
A clear and consistent definition is critical to application establishing an international human rights
framework
Chuang, 5/3/2006 (Janie - practioner-in-residence at American University Washington College of Law, The United States as global sheriff, Michigan Journal of
International Law, p. 466-467)
The second criterion for assessing the
TVPA sanctions regime concerns whether the United States looks to international standards in applying its domestic
to consider include whether the substance and application of the U.S. minimum standards comply with the definitions
set forth in international instruments and the interpretations and recommendations of international bodies.142 As
Cleveland notes, “[s]tates are much more likely to voluntarily comply with international norms that they
perceive to be fair, and reliable interpretation and application of international norms by transnational actors is critical
to encouraging nations to recognize, internalize, and obey international law.”143 Given the struggles over the trafficking definition,
consistency with international norms is crucial to the successful operation of the international anti-trafficking legal
framework. As the legislative guide to the Protocol makes clear, “[t]he main reason for defining the term ‘trafficking in persons’ in
international law was to provide some degree of consensus-based standardization of concepts” to undergird
“efficient international cooperation in investigating and prosecuting cases.”144 An agreed definition would also
standardize research and other activities, allowing for better comparison of national and re145 gional data and a clearer global picture of the
problem. By substituting its own trafficking definition for that of the Protocol and failing to apply more comprehensive human rights standards
in its country assessments, however, the U.S. sanctions regime currently diverges in critical respects from the evolving
international anti-trafficking framework.
sanctions laws. Key factors
Immigration provides a unique test to the human rights system
Wexler, Winter 2008 (Lesley - assistant professor at Florida State University College of Law, 22 Geo. Immigr.
L.J. 285, p. lexis)
To develop a sense of how human rights review would operate in practice, this paper uses immigrants' human rights as a starting point from which to identify issues
raised by particular design choices. As
immigrants suffer a wide variety of human rights abuses and possess an extensive array of
provide a helpful test case for the [*304] development of a human rights review
international human rights protections, they
process. Immigrants are subject to various and often overlapping government authorities and policies, so designers can compare different federal, state, and local
approaches to human rights review. Moreover, such a model tests the limits of human rights review as immigrants are a
relatively unpopular, politically powerless social group.
An international framework of human rights prevents extinction
Copelon, 1998/1999 (Rhonda - professor of law and director of the International Women’s Human Rights Law
Clinic, 3 N.Y. CityL. Rev. 59, p. lexis)
The indivisible human rights framework survived the Cold War despite U.S. machinations to truncate it in the international arena. The
framework is there to shatter the myth of the superiority [*72] of the U.S. version of rights, to rebuild popular expectations, and to help develop a culture and
jurisprudence of indivisible human rights. Indeed, in
the face of systemic inequality and crushing poverty, violence by official and
private actors, globalization of the market economy, and military and environmental depredation, the human rights
framework is gaining new force and new dimensions. It is being broadened today by the movements of people in different parts of the world,
particularly in the Southern Hemisphere and significantly of women, who understand the protection of human rights as a matter of individual and
collective human survival and betterment. Also emerging is a notion of third-generation rights, encompassing collective rights that
cannot be solved on a state-by-state basis and that call for new mechanisms of accountability, particularly affecting Northern countries. The
emerging rights include human-centered sustainable development, environmental protection, peace, and security. 38 Given the poverty and inequality in the United
States as well as our role in the world, it
is imperative that we bring the human rights framework to bear on both domestic and
foreign policy.
An effective and credible UN is the only real way to prevent CBW proliferation
Kishore Mahbubani, Singapore’s Ambassador to the United Nations and Former Permanent Secretary, Foreign Ministry and Dean of the Civil Service College,
2003 (Unilateralism and United States Foreign Policy edited by David M. Malone) p. 148
It is only natural that there should be differences in the needs and interests of the rich and the poor. The poor wish to put priority on economic development. By
contrast, the rich have a vested interest in the status quo. Hence, for example, the
United States and most other developed countries have a vital
interest in preventing the spread of weapons of mass destruction, especially the new generation of chemical and biological
weapons. Conventions to restrict their development have been negotiated and adopted through the General Assembly process, clumsy and slow though it may be.
But the only real way to prevent their proliferation is by creating a global consensus where all the countries feel
that they have a common stake in global peace and prosperity. To have such a stake, each society-no matter how rich or poor,
small or large-must feel that it is a stakeholder in a global community. Effective participation in UN processes helps to
convert all nations into stakeholders. Both psychologically and materially, all nations must feel that they have a say in the management of the
globe. Just as democracy elicits the commitment of the citizen to respect the results of elections and the subsequent decisions of the elected
government, a vote in the UN delivers a similar commitment from the nation-state. These processes do not work perfectly, either nationally or
internationally, but the crucial role that the UN plays in making stakeholders out of each nation is neither well understood
nor appreciated.
Extinction
John D. Steinbruner, Senior Fellow, Brookings Institution, and Vice Chair, Committee on International Security and Arms Control, National Academy of
Sciences, 12/22/1997 (“Biological Weapons: A Plague Upon All Houses” – Foreign Policy) p. lexis
Although human pathogens are often lumped with nuclear explosives and lethal chemicals as potential weapons of mass destruction,
there is an obvious, fundamentally important difference: Pathogens are alive, weapons are not. Nuclear and chemical
weapons do not reproduce themselves and do not independently engage in adaptive behavior; pathogens do both of
these things. That deceptively simple observation has immense implications. The use of a manufactured weapon is a singular event. Most of the damage occurs
immediately. The aftereffects, whatever they may be, decay rapidly over time and distance in a reasonably predictable manner. Even before a nuclear warhead is
detonated, for instance, it is possible to estimate the extent of the subsequent damage and the likely level of radioactive fallout. Such predictability is an essential
component for tactical military planning. The
use of a pathogen, by contrast, is an extended process whose scope and timing cannot be precisely
controlled. For most potential biological agents, the predominant drawback is that they would not act swiftly or decisively enough to be an effective weapon. But
for a few pathogens - ones most likely to have a decisive effect and therefore the ones most likely to be contemplated for deliberately hostile use - the risk runs in the
other direction. A
lethal pathogen that could efficiently spread from one victim to another would be capable of initiating an intensifying
cascade of disease that might ultimately threaten the entire world population. The 1918 influenza epidemic demonstrated
the potential for a global contagion of this sort but not necessarily its outer limit.
Soviet scientists and tech leakage make rogue state bioterror likely.
Kate Wong, Scientific American, “Soviet Bioweapons Still a Threat,” 2/20/2001, http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=soviet-bioweapons-still-a
Despite U.S. efforts to change the situation, the threat of Soviet bioweapons remains. Research and production
facilities in Russia and the New Independent States are poorly guarded and vulnerable to theft, says Kathleen Vogel of
Cornell University. Moreover, Russia continues to deny access to four Ministry of Defense bioweapons facilities for inspection. "We have no proof, but there are
concerns that Russia is restricting access to retain its biological weapons capability. We hope there are other reasons," Vogel reports. Former biological weapons
specialists in Russia and the New Independent States have received some U.S. funding to redirect their research for peaceful purposes. But Vogel, who spoke Friday at
the annual meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science in San Francisco, notes that because of the unstable Russian economy, "you
can’t
rule out people engaging in proliferation through temptation or corruption." Scientists are particularly concerned
about the possible theft of smallpox virus samples. The only official repositories for the virus, which was eradicated in 1980, are at the U.S.
Centers for Disease Control in Atlanta and the State Research Center for Virology and Biotechnology in Koltsovo, Russia. But other facilities in Russia may hold the
virus, too. Other
worrisome microbes include genetically engineered strains of anthrax and plague bacteria that are
resistant to Western antibiotics, as well as animal pathogens developed for use against agricultural targets.
According to Vogel, the most dangerous threat may come from the recruitment of former bioweapons scientists by
scheming governments. "U.S. nonproliferation programs are essential," she asserts, "because we must make it more
difficult for states to recruit these scientists and obtain their sophisticated bioweapons technologies and knowhow."
Soviet-developed bioweapons use modified strains that are far more deadly, and detection is impossible.
Jonathan B. Tucker, director of the CBW Nonproliferation Project at the Center for Nonproliferation Studies, Biological and Chemical Weapons, “The Migration
of Russian Biological Weapons Experts Is a Serious Threat,” 2001, ISBN 0-7377-0556-6, p. 61-2
Another disturbing possibility is that scientists could smuggle Russian military strains of biological agents to
outlaw countries or terrorist groups seeking a BW capability. Obtaining military seed cultures is not essential for making biological
weapons, because virulent strains can be obtained from natural sources. According to Alibek, however, Soviet bioweapons
specialists modified a number of disease agents to make them particularly deadly: for example, by
rendering them resistant to standard antibiotic therapies and to environmental stresses. Because a seed culture of dried
anthrax spores could be carried in a sealed plastic vial the size of a thumbnail, detecting such contraband at a border is almost impossible.
Unlike fissile materials, biological agents do not give off telltale radiation nor do they show up on x-rays. The article in Sovershenno Sekretno claims that “Stealing BW
is easier than stealing change out of people’s pockets. The most widespread method for contraband transport of military strains is very simple—within a plastic cigarette
package.” Smuggling
of military strains out of secure facilities in Russia has already been alleged. Domaradskij’s
scientist named Anisimov developed an antibiotic resistant strain of tularemia at the military microbiological facility in Sverdlovsk (now Yekaterinburg). He was then
transferred to a Biopreparat facility, but because he wanted to get a Ph.D. degree for his work on tularemia, he stole a sample of the Sverdlovsk
strain and brought it with him to his new job. When accused of the theft, Anisimov claimed innocence, but analysis of his culture revealed that it
bore a biochemical marker unique to the Sverdlovsk strain. Despite this compelling evidence, senior soviet officials reportedly covered up the incident. The more
than 15,000 viral strains in the culture collection at the Vector virology institute include a number of highly
infectious and lethal pathogens such as the smallpox, Ebola, and Marburg viruses, the theft of diversion of
which could be catastrophic. Because of the current concerns about the possible smuggling of military seed cultures, the U.S. government is spending
memoir states that in 1984, when security within the Soviet BW complex was extremely high, a
$1.5 million to upgrade physical security and accounting procedures for the viral culture collection at Vector and plans to invest a similar amount in enhanced security
at Obolensk.
Loss of UN credibility threatens to undermine the entire system of multilateral foreign policy – there is a
unique spillover effect
Joachim Krause, Professor of International Relations, University of Kiel and Member of the Council of the International Institute for Strategic Studies, Spring
2004 (“Multilateralism: Behind European Views” – Washington Quarterly) http://www.twq.com/04spring/docs/04spring_krause.pdf
The principal cause of the crisis undoubtedly has been the failure of the United Nations to ensure a global system of collective security—
the intended centerpiece of multilateralism—to deal with conflicts and threats that have emerged in the 1990s and into the twenty-first century.
The failure of collective security has triggered criticism of other forms of multilateralism as well, such as
multilateral negotiations on the prevention of climate change or on a verification protocol for the Biological Weapons Convention (BWC). As long as the
crisis of collective security is not directly addressed, the reputation of other forms of multilateral foreign policy
will suffer collateral damage, with potentially disastrous consequences for international order.
Only multilateral cooperation prevents great power wars that make extinction inevitable
Gwynne Dyer, former senior lecturer in war studies at the Royal Military Academy Sandhurst, 12/30/ 2004, The End of War, The
Toronto Star, p. lexis
The "firebreak" against nuclear weapons use that we began building after Hiroshima and Nagasaki has held for well over half a century now. But the
proliferation of nuclear weapons to new powers is a major challenge to the stability of the system. So are the coming crises, mostly
environmental in origin, which will hit some countries much harder than others, and may drive some to desperation. Add in the huge impending shifts in the
great-power system as China and India grow to rival the United States in GDP over the next 30 or 40 years and it will be hard to keep things
from spinning out of control. With good luck and good management, we may be able to ride out the next half-century without the firstmagnitude catastrophe of a global nuclear war, but the potential certainly exists for a major die-back of human population. We cannot command the good luck,
but good management is something we can choose to provide. It depends, above all, on preserving and extending the multilateral system that
we have been building since the end of World War II. The rising powers must be absorbed into a system that emphasizes co-operation and
makes room for them, rather than one that deals in confrontation and raw military power. If they are obliged to play the traditional great-power
game of winners and losers, then history will repeat itself and everybody loses.
Multilateral cooperation solves terrorism
John Newhouse, senior fellow at the Center for Defense Information, Summer 2002, The Threats America
Faces, World Policy Journal, Volume XIX, No 2, p. http://www.worldpolicy.org/journal/articles/wpj022/newhouse.html
Nothing less than sustained multilateralism will enable major powers to neutralize the interactive problems of
terrorism and weapons of mass destruction. As noted above, passive defense based on agreements among nations and between nations and international institutions
is the only reliable means of limiting the spread of destructive weapons and discouraging their use by one state against another, whether by design or accident.
Efforts to shut down financial support for terrorist cells must be multilateral. The scope of the challenge is
evident in former national security advisor Brent Scowcroft’s observation that "there are thousands of avenues for the
laundering of money into the terrorist organization."45 Regarding intelligence, no matter how good the performance of the
intelligence community, surprises are probably unavoidable. For that reason, measuring performance by the standard of prediction is unrealistic and
can damage the standing, morale, and performance of intelligence agencies. They are engaged not in winning a war against terrorism but in managing it — restricting the activities and options
of hostile forces. However, in waging this campaign the administration talks of discarding deterrence and various forms of passive defense in favor of a strategy of preemption. In that case,
prediction would have to become the measure of performance, because a preemption- based strategy would require sustained and timely collection of the kind of intelligence that is rarely
Effective intelligence collection must be conducted bilaterally but with a wide
array of countries. Terrorism can be contained if intelligence services and police agencies acquire the habit of
cooperating closely with each other and suppressing their competitive instincts and preference for acting alone. The United States would be the chief beneficiary of such
available, least of all in a form that connects all the dots.
activity, first, because it appears to be the primary target of various nonstate terrorists; second, because it lacks adequate human resources for gathering the intelligence it needs, notably in
Central Asia; and third, because its ability to eavesdrop on global communications is declining. The rapid growth of commercially available technologies is allowing for the creation of all but
unbreakable computer codes. Fiber-optic lines give off no electronic signals that can be monitored.46
The U nited S tates needs help, especially from allies and
other friendly regimes that have productive relationships with countries in this region and in the Middle East. (America has never been good at old-fashioned
spying or penetrating the intelligence services of unfriendly countries.) The 1984 summer Olympics in Los Angeles may have produced a
model of diligent cooperation among intelligence services operating at both the national and multilateral levels. Well in advance of
the games, the U.S. intelligence community felt certain that the possibility of a terrorist action in Los Angeles had been virtually eliminated. Subsequent Olympic events
have been equally insulated against terrorism. More impressive was what did not happen during Y2K, when planned attacks by terrorists were thwarted by the
combined efforts of intelligence services.
Nuclear war
Patrick Speice, JD Candidate, 47 Wm and Mary L. Rev. 1427, February 2006, Lexis
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." 40 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. 41 Although nuclear devices are extraordinarily complex, the
technical barriers to constructing a workable weapon are not significant. 42 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. 43 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. 44 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. 45 This resulted in at least 35,000 nuclear scientists becoming unemployed in an economy that was collapsing. 46 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, 47 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. 48 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.
Terrorists want nukes – only a matter of time.
Rolf Mowatt-Larssen, Senior Fellow, Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs at Harvard, “Al Qaeda Weapons of Mass Destruction Threat: Hype
or Reality?” January 2010, http://belfercenter.ksg.harvard.edu/files/al-qaeda-wmd-threat.pdf
Several terrorist groups have actively sought weapons of mass destruction (WMD) of one kind or another. In
particular, the Japanese cult group Aum Shinrikyo, al Qaeda and its associates—notably the Egyptian Islamic Jihad, Jemaah Islamiya and Lashkar al Tayyib—figure
most prominently among the groups that have manifested some degree of intent, experimentation, and programmatic efforts to acquire nuclear, biological and chemical
weapons. To date, however, al
Qaeda is the only group known to be pursuing a long-term, persistent and systematic
approach to developing weapons to be used in mass casualty attacks.
Osama bin Ladin’s assertion in 1998 that it was his Islamic duty to acquire weapons of mass destruction
ensured that the fulfillment of this intent would become a top priority for his lieutenants in the ensuing years. In
an effort to explain his thinking to his followers, and to help guide their efforts, the al Qaeda leader has offered a number of statements that provide a need and rationale
for using weapons of mass destruction as a means of achieving the group’s concrete and ambitious goals. Most recently, he promised in a 2007 video release to
“escalate the killing and fighting against you (Americans)”–on grounds of destroying an international conspiracy to control the world–adding, “The capitalist system
seeks to turn the entire world into a fiefdom of the major corporations under the label of globalization in order to protect democracy.”
These statements should not be interpreted as empty rhetoric and idle threats: Osama bin Ladin has signaled a
specific purpose for using WMD in al Qaeda’s quest to destroy the global status quo, and to create conditions more conducive
to the overthrow of apostate regimes throughout the Islamic world. His argument is essentially that even weapons of mass destruction—which are outlawed under
bin Ladin’s morality-based argument on the nature of the
struggle between militant Islamists and the US-led coalition of secular forces focuses the group’s planning on
the acquisition of strategic weapons that can be used in mass casualty attacks, rather than on the production of tactical, more
Islam—are a justifiable means of countering US hegemony. Osama
readily available weapons such as “dirty bombs,” chemical agents, crude toxins and poisons.
In this light, it
is not surprising that the group’s top WMD priority has been to acquire nuclear and strategic
biological weapons. Considering the potential that such weapons hold in fulfilling al Qaeda’s aspirations, their
WMD procurement efforts have been managed at the most senior levels, under rules of strict
compartmentalization from lower levels of the organization, and with central control over possible targets and
timing of prospective attacks. In this sense, their approach has been “Muhammed Atta-like”—similar to the modus operandi Khaled Sheikh Mohammed
employed in making preparations for the 9/11 attacks—as opposed to resembling the signature characterizing most terrorist attacks to which the world has become
accustomed.
UN legitimacy prevents the application of preemption
James Steinberg, Deputy National Security Adviser to Clinton and Current Head of the Foreign Policy Studies Program, Brookings Institution, Summer
2003 (“The Bush Foreign Policy Revolution” – New Perspectives Quarterly) Sorry, Lost the PG Numbers
However justified, a
doctrine of early use of force poses enormous risks not only for the stability of the global system, but also for our
national security itself because of the destabilizing and unintended consequences of war. There is also a
problem in making this a US doctrine because it legitimates it for others as well. What is to prevent India or Pakistan
from employing the American precedent in their own conflict, for example? The danger of letting go of UN legitimacy is
that it may lead to a free-for-all in the international system where each country's judgment counts for the same and there is no objective
principle that others can point to.
Russia would model by preempting countries in Central Asia
The Record 9/29/2002 p. lexis
"If
something in the zone between preemption and prevention came to be the general international
understanding, you could see a significant increase in the number of attacks," Allison said. These distinctions
may seem academic to the majority of Americans, who tell pollsters they support an attack on Iraq, but they are crucial to the thinking of
European, Russian
and Chinese leaders. Many Europeans fear the Bush doctrine could encourage Russia to claim a
similar right to preemptive military action to defeat the Chechen separatists it calls terrorists, and to defend southern
Russian regions from cross-border incursions being staged from within Georgia.
Russian aggression in Central Asia undermines the global economy, Russian stability, and results in
WMD conflicts
Ariel Cohen, Senior Policy Analyst @ the Heritage Foundation, 1/25/1996 (Heritage Foundation Reports) p. lexis
Much is at stake in Eurasia for the U.S. and its allies. Attempts to restore its empire will doom Russia's transition to a
democracy and free-market economy. The ongoing war in Chechnya alone has cost Russia $ 6 billion to date (equal to Russia's IMF and
World Bank loans for 1995). Moreover, it has extracted a tremendous price from Russian society. The wars which would be required to
restore the Russian empire would prove much more costly not just for Russia and the region, but for peace, world stability, and security.
As the former Soviet arsenals are spread throughout the NIS, these conflicts may escalate to include the use of
weapons of mass destruction. Scenarios including unauthorized missile launches are especially threatening. Moreover, if successful, a
reconstituted Russian empire would become a major destabilizing influence both in Eurasia and throughout the world. It would
endanger not only Russia's neighbors, but also the U.S. and its allies in Europe and the Middle East. And, of course, a neo-imperialist Russia could
imperil the oil reserves of the Persian Gulf. Domination of the Caucasus would bring Russia closer to the Balkans, the Mediterranean Sea, and the Middle
East. Russian imperialists, such as radical nationalist Vladimir Zhirinovsky, have resurrected the old dream of obtaining a warm port on the Indian Ocean. If Russia
succeeds in establishing its domination in the south, the threat to Ukraine, Turkey, Iran, and Afganistan will increase. The
independence of pro-Western
Georgia and Azerbaijan already has been undermined by pressures from the Russian armed forces and covert actions by the intelligence and
security services, in addition to which Russian hegemony would make Western political and economic efforts to stave off
Islamic militancy more difficult. Eurasian oil resources are pivotal to economic development in the early 21st century.