Tournament: Fullerton | Round: 2 | Opponent: UNLV JS | Judge: Andrew Larson
1 – 3, Norms, Pakistan, Solvency
The executive branch of the United States should designate District Court judges to approve or reject targeted killings involving the use of drone strikes based on a strict scrutiny test and follow the decisions and announce the formation of a court consisting of District Court judges with authority to approve or reject drone strikes and that the executive branch will follow the decisions.
CP solves- functional limits create accountability and don’t link to politics
Michaels 11 (Jon, Professor, UCLA School of Law, "The (Willingly) Fettered Executive: Presidential Spinoffs in National Security Domains and Beyond," Virginia Law Review, http://www.virginialawreview.org/content/pdfs/97/801.pdf-http://www.virginialawreview.org/content/pdfs/97/801.pdf)
These are revealing case studies, weighty in their own right and interesting complements to
AND
itself serves as testament to the durability and primacy of the dominant understanding.
2
Immigration will pass – Boehner pushback
Griselda Nevarez journalism degree from Arizona State University. VOXXI 1-6-2014 http://voxxi.com/2014/01/06/immigration-reform-congress-2014-agenda/-http://voxxi.com/2014/01/06/immigration-reform-congress-2014-agenda/
Is immigration reform on the 2014 agenda?¶ Despite the packed agenda, supporters of
AND
the hiring indicates he is serious about getting something done on immigration reform.
Executive pushback to the plan - no turns, opposition is certain
Greg Miller 2/8/13 (Greg Miller covers the intelligence beat for The Washington Post. He is a winner of an Overseas Press Club award for his contribution to a series of stories on the war in Afghanistan. He is also co-author of a book, The Interrogators, about the first unit of Army interrogators to serve in that war. Miller has made reporting trips to countries including Afghanistan, Pakistan, Kuwait and Serbia. Miller is a California native, and previously worked for The Los Angeles Times, Washington post, "Lawmakers propose giving federal judges role in drone strikes, but hurdles await" http://articles.washingtonpost.com/2013-02-08/world/36988536_1_drone-program-special-court-judicial-review)
A proposal to give federal judges a direct role in the nation’s drone campaign
AND
it seems more likely today than it did just a few weeks ago."
PC key to immigration reform- pressure works
Bob Ray Sanders is a columnist for the Fort Worth Star-Telegram 10-22-2013 http://www.bnd.com/2013/10/22/2862687/bob-ray-sanders-theres-no-better.html-http://www.bnd.com/2013/10/22/2862687/bob-ray-sanders-theres-no-better.html
Now that the Republican hijacking of the federal government has been brought to an
AND
to file for office and gear up their campaigns for the 2014 contests.
Restrictions doom Obama – losers lose is true – looks like political overreach and a bargaining failure- perception matters
Dr. Andrew J. Loomis is a Visiting Fellow at the Center for a New American Security, and Department of Government at¶ Georgetown University, "Leveraging legitimacy in the crafting of U.S. foreign policy", March 2, 2007, pg 36-37,¶ http://citation.allacademic.com//meta/p_mla_apa_research_citation/1/7/9/4/8/pages179487/p179487-36.php-http://citation.allacademic.com//meta/p_mla_apa_research_citation/1/7/9/4/8/pages179487/p179487-36.php
American Presidents are vested with certain structural powers, such as those powers granted by
AND
affects the character of U.S. policy, foreign and domestic.
High skilled workers key to sustainable growth- stops double dip recession
Haseltine 10 (Eric, Neuroscientist, Former Head of Science and Technology for US Intelligence Community, "Why America’s Economy is On the Brink of Going Down the Tubes...for Good," The Huffington Post, August 24, http://www.huffingtonpost.com/eric-haseltine/why-americas-economy-is-o_b_688483.html)
Recessions, especially the deep downturn that started in 2008, always cause us to
AND
into our workforce and our economy and help cure our deep economic ills.
Economic decline causes global war – strong stastical support
Royal 10 (Jedediah, Director of Cooperative Threat Reduction – U.S. Department of Defense, "Economic Integration, Economic Signaling and the Problem of Economic Crises", Economics of War and Peace: Economic, Legal and Political Perspectives, Ed. Goldsmith and Brauer, p. 213-215)
Less intuitive is how periods of economic decline may increase the likelihood of external conflict
AND
not featured prominently in the economic-security debate and deserves more attention.
3
The plan creates a dangerous precedent – reviews spill over to every military manuver
Max Boot 2/11/13 (Max Boot is one of America’s leading military historians and foreign-policy analysts. The Jeane J. Kirkpatrick Senior Fellow in National Security Studies at the Council on Foreign Relations in New York, Boot is also a contributing editor to the Weekly Standard and the Los Angeles Times, and a regular contributor to the New York Times, the Wall Street Journal, Commentary, and other publications, dviser to U.S. commanders in Iraq and Afghanistan, bachelor’s degree in history, with high honors, from the University of California, Berkeley (1991), and a master’s degree in history from Yale University (1992), Commentary magazine, "A Drone Court is a Terrible Idea" http://www.commentarymagazine.com/2013/02/11/a-drone-court-is-a-terrible-idea-fisa-terroris/)
Nevertheless creating such a court would be a very bad idea because it would constitute
AND
artillery barrages—to make sure they don’t infringe on someone’s civil rights?
Restricting the executive’s ability to control targeted killing operations collapses heg – causes chain of command uncertainty, undermines unit cohesion, and crushes battlefield decision making
Larry Maher and Herbert L. Fenster 2010 (Larry Maher: Quartermaster General, Herbert L. Fenster: D.C. Bar No. 153825, Attorneys for Amicus Curiae, The Veterans of Foreign Wars of the United States, Nasser al-Aulaqi,¶ vs.¶ Barack H. Obama, et al., CASE NO. 1:10-cv-01469-JDB "BRIEF OF THE VETERANS OF FOREIGN WARS OF THE UNITED STATES AS AMICUS CURIAE IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANTS AND DISMISSAL" http://ccrjustice.org/files/Amicus_Curiae_Brief_of_VFW.pdf-http://ccrjustice.org/files/Amicus_Curiae_Brief_of_VFW.pdf)
The VFW agrees with the Government’s arguments regarding why this suit is barred,¶ including by the political question doctrine. Rather than repeating those arguments, this amicus¶ brief seeks to add perspective to the reasons why suits like the present action would threaten¶ national security by interfering with ongoing military operations. Allowing this case to proceed¶ would contravene the core military principle of "unity of command," and undermine the¶ military’s chain of command, creating uncertainty for subordinate leaders and soldiers. Such¶ litigation also would adversely affect unit cohesion, the glue which binds small units together in¶ the heat of battle, and enables them to survive and accomplish their missions. Further, litigation¶ of cases such as this would undermine battlefield decisionmaking by subjecting tactical,¶ operational and strategic decisions to second-guessing by courts far removed from the battlefield.¶ And, to the extent this case will involve the activities of special operations forces, the VFW¶ urges the Court to tread with particular caution, because of the need to protect the extremely¶ sensitive sources and methods utilized by our nation’s elite forces. ARGUMENT¶ ALLOWING THIS TYPE OF SUIT TO PROCEED WOULD SERIOUSLY IMPAIR¶ NATIONAL SECURITY AND U.S. MILITARY OPERATIONS OVERSEAS¶ "Without doubt, our Constitution recognizes that core strategic matters of warmaking¶ belong in the hands of those who are best positioned and most politically accountable for making¶ them." Hamdi v. Rumsfeld, 542 U.S. 507, 531 (2004), citing Department of Navy v. Egan, 484¶ U.S. 518, 530 (1988); see also Youngstown Sheet 26 Tube Co. v. Sawyer, 343 U.S. 579, 587¶ (1952) (acknowledging "broad powers in military commanders engaged in day-to-day fighting in¶ a theater of war"). As veterans of this nation’s wars, the VFW’s members urge this Court to¶ leave such matters in the hands of the President and Congress, because allowing this suit to¶ proceed would undermine core military institutions such as the chain of command and unit¶ cohesion.¶ A. Adjudication Of This Case Would Compromise The Military Principle Of¶ "Unity Of Command," And Undermine The Chain Of Command¶ "Unity of command," and its corollary, "unity of effort," are fundamental principles of¶ warfare which are central to the effectiveness of Western militaries. See Carl von Clausewitz,¶ On War 200-210 (Michael Howard 26 Peter Paret, ed. and trans., Princeton University Press¶ 1976) (1832) (hereinafter "Clausewitz"). There "is no higher and simpler law of strategy" than¶ to apply this principle in order to concentrate a nation’s military power its adversaries’ "center of¶ gravity." Id. at 204. This principle was first embraced by the American military during the 19th¶ Century, and has subsequently shaped the organizational structure of American warfighting¶ through two world wars and countless other conflicts. See James F. Schnabel, History of the¶ Joints Chiefs of Staff, Vol. 1 at 80-87 (1996); Russell F. Weigley, History of the United States¶ Army at 422-423 (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1984). Unity of command requires the integration of all combat functions into a single organizational element, with command¶ authority vested in a single individual. See U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff, Joint Pub. 3-0, Joint¶ Operations at Appx. A, p. A-2 (2010), available at¶ http://www.dtic.mil/doctrine/new_pubs/jp3_0.pdf-http://www.dtic.mil/doctrine/new_pubs/jp3_0.pdf.
Effective power projection stops hotspot escalation to nuclear war
O’Hanlon 7 – Frederick Kagan, Resident Scholar at the American Enterprise Institute, and Michael O’Hanlon, Senior Fellow and Sydney Stein Jr. Chair in Foreign Policy Studies at the Brookings Institution, "The Case for Larger Ground Forces", Stanley Foundation Report, April, http://stanleyfoundation.org/publications/other/Kagan_OHanlon_07.pdf
We live at a time when wars not only rage in nearly every region but
AND
Such a measure is not only prudent, it is also badly overdue.
4
Armed drone prolif already happened
P.W. SINGER 3/11/13 (director of the 21st Century Defense Initiative at Brookings, foreign policy, "the global swarm" http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2013/03/11/the_global_swarm)
Depending on which source you want to cite, there are currently between 75 and
AND
, one of the major makers in China, and ADE of India.
and no impact because the tech will be terrible
Micah Zenko 2013 (Douglas Dillon fellow in the Center for Preventive Action (CPA) at the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR). Previously, he worked for five years at the Harvard Kennedy School and in Washington, DC, at the Brookings Institution, Congressional Research Service, and State Department’s Office of Policy Planning, council on foreign relations, "Reforming US Drone Strike Policies" pdf)
Based on current trends, it is unlikely that most states will have, ¶
AND
undertake the significant ¶ investment required for armed drones in the near term.
No modeling —-
a. Self interest overrides norms
Etzioni 13, Professor of International Relations @ George Washington University
(Aimtai Etzioni, adviser to the Carter administration, "The Great Drone Debate ", Military Review, 4/2013, http://usacac.army.mil/CAC2/MilitaryReview/Archives/English/MilitaryReview_20130430_art004.pdf-http://usacac.army.mil/CAC2/MilitaryReview/Archives/English/MilitaryReview_20130430_art004.pdf**)**
Other critics contend that by the United States ¶ using drones, it leads other
AND
In such circumstances, the role ¶ of norms is much more limited.
b. Acquisition too easy
Daniel Byman 2013 (Professor in the Security Studies Program at the Edmund A. Walsh School of Foreign Service at Georgetown University and a Senior Fellow at the Saban Center for Middle East Policy at the Brookings Institution, 92 foreign affairs 32, "Why Drones Work: The Case for Washington’s Weapon of Choice", hein online)
Controlling the spread of drone technology will prove impossible; that horse left the barn
AND
(also called Burma) to kill a wanted drug trafficker hiding there.
c. No causal link
Kenneth Anderson 11, Professor of International Law at American University, 10/9/11, "What Kind of Drones Arms Race Is Coming?," http://www.volokh.com/2011/10/09/what-kind-of-drones-arms-race-is-coming/~~23more-51516-http://www.volokh.com/2011/10/09/what-kind-of-drones-arms-race-is-coming/
New York Times national security correspondent Scott Shane has an opinion piece in today’s Sunday
AND
long one, starting with China. The predicament is put this way:
Eventually, the United States will face a military adversary or terrorist group armed with
AND
perceived enemies, even American citizens, who are viewed as a threat.
"Is this the world we want to live in?" asks Micah Zenko, a fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations. "Because we’re creating it."
By asserting that "we’re" creating it, this is a claim that there
AND
that Anwar al-Awlaki was, in objective terms, our enemy?)
It sounds like it must be true. But is it? There are a
AND
what I think the real "arms race" surrounding drones will be.
Unmanned aerial vehicles have clearly got a big push from the US military in the
AND
substantial state that feels like developing them will be able to do so.
But the point is that this was happening anyway, and the technology was already
AND
do their own amateur version, putting some kind of bomb on it.
Moving on from the avionics, weaponizing the craft is also not difficult. The
AND
states competing to come up with weapons technologies that are … more discriminating.
No China scenario
China fears the same precedent the plan tries to solve – its drone use is non-military, limited, and restrained based on internal geopolitical calculations
Andrew Erickson is an associate professor at the Naval War College and an Associate in Research at Harvard University’s Fairbank Centre. Follow him on Twitter @andrewserickson. Austin and Strange is a researcher at the Naval War College’s China Maritime Studies Institute and a graduate student at Zhejiang University., 5-23-2013 http://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/139405/andrew-erickson-and-austin-strange/china-has-drones-now-what-http://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/139405/andrew-erickson-and-austin-strange/china-has-drones-now-what
Beijing, however, is unlikely to use its drones lightly. It already faces
AND
scholars, however, have publicly considered the use of drone strikes overseas.
US and Japanese surveillance drones trigger their asia scenario
Craig Whitlock 10/3/13 (Washington post, "Agreement will allow U.S. to fly long-range surveillance drones from base in Japan"http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/agreement-will-allow-us-to-fly-long-range-surveillance-drones-from-base-in-japan/2013/10/03/aeba1ccc-2be8-11e3-83fa-b82b8431dc92_story.html)
The U.S. military will deploy long-range Global Hawk surveillance drones
AND
in territorial disputes with the Philippines, Vietnam, Thailand and other countries.
No U.S./China war—mutually assured destruction, geography
Keck, 13 (Zachary – Assistant Editor of The Diplomat, 7/12, "Why China and the US (Probably) Won’t Go to War", The Diplomat, http://thediplomat.com/flashpoints-blog/2013/07/12/why-china-and-the-us-probably-wont-go-to-war/-http://thediplomat.com/flashpoints-blog/2013/07/12/why-china-and-the-us-probably-wont-go-to-war/)
But while trade cannot be relied upon to keep the peace, a U.S.-China war is virtually unthinkable because of two other factors: nuclear weapons and geography.
The fact that both the U.S. and China have nuclear weapons is the most obvious reasons why they won’t clash, even if they remain fiercely competitive. This is because war is the continuation of politics by other means, and nuclear weapons make war extremely bad politics. Put differently, war is fought in pursuit of policy ends, which cannot be achieved through a total war between nuclear-armed states.
This is not only because of nuclear weapons destructive power. As Thomas Schelling outlined brilliantly, nuclear weapons have not actually increased humans destructive capabilities. In fact, there is evidence to suggest that wars between nomads usually ended with the victors slaughtering all of the individuals on the losing side, because of the economics of holding slaves in nomadic "societies."
What makes nuclear weapons different, then, is not just their destructive power but
AND
be destroyed in short-order in the event of a total conflict.
Since no policy goal is worth this level of sacrifice, the only possible way for an all-out conflict to ensue is for a miscalculation of some sort to occur. Most of these can and should be dealt by Chinese and the U.S. leaders holding regularly senior level dialogues like the ones of the past month, in which frank and direct talk about redlines are discussed.
These can and should be supplemented with clear and open communication channels, which can
AND
scenes diplomacy could help facilitate the process of finding mutually acceptable retaliatory measures.
Geography is the less appreciated factor that will mitigate the chances of a U.S.-China war, but it could be nearly as important as nuclear weapons. Indeed, geography has a history of allowing countries to avoid the Thucydides Trap, and works against a U.S.-China war in a couple of ways.
First, both the United States and China are immensely large countries—according to the Central Intelligence Agency, the U.S. and China are the third and fourth largest countries in the world by area, at 9,826,675 and 9,596,961 square km respectively. They also have difficult topographical features and complex populations. As such, they are virtually unconquerable by another power.
This is an important point and differentiates the current strategic environment from historical cases where
AND
this will lessen their insecurity and therefore the security dilemma they operate within.
Besides being immensely large countries, China and the U.S. are also
AND
that the other will threaten its national survival and most important strategic interests.
True, the U.S. operates extensively in China’s backyard, and maintains
AND
in reducing their conflict potential, if history is any guide at least.
Thus, while every effort should be made to avoid a U.S.-China war, it is nearly unthinkable one will occur.
The aff has not articulated how US China war actually happens, unfounded fears
China not a threat—military spending doesn’t correlate with power projection, experts, military overstretch, primarily defensive capabilities, too far behind American capabilities
Carpenter, 13 (Ted Galen – senior fellow for defense and foreign policy studies at the Cato Institute, April 4, "China’s Military Spending: No Cause for Panic", CATO Institute, http://www.cato.org/publications/ commentary/chinas-military-spending-no-cause-panic-http://www.cato.org/publications/ commentary/chinas-military-spending-no-cause-panic)
When the Chinese government released its latest defense budget, there was once again considerable angst in the United States and its East Asian allies. The official budget showed an increase of 10.7 from the previous year, continuing a trend over more than a decade of annual double-digit growth. A budget that was only 2422.3 billion in 2003 had grown to 2460.1 billion in 2008 and 24115.7 billion in 2013.
Such a trend suggests that improving the country’s military capabilities, primarily through modernization programs, is a high priority for China’s political elite. Furthermore, virtually no knowledgeable person believes that the official budget accurately measures the extent of Beijing’s military spending. Several key items, including the costs of research on new weapons, are not included in that budget.
Independent estimates vary widely, though, and have done so throughout the past decade
AND
power parity figure for that same year was 24197.9 billion.
Adding to the sense of unease in the US and China’s neighbors is the chronic lack of transparency about Beijing’s underlying security doctrine. US officials in both the Bush and Obama administrations expressed the view that China’s spending seemed excessive for the country’s legitimate defense needs.
But the surge in Beijing’s military outlays needs to be viewed in context. Even if one accepts the high-end estimates of the Pentagon and IISS (which are hardly indisputable), the United States still spends better than three times as much as China. Chinese officials have stressed that point in response to Washington’s criticism that the PRC’s budgets are excessive.
The gap is even more glaring when one considers that the United States is located
AND
unrest in both Tibet and Xinjiang, that is not a minor mission.
Writing in the Fall 2012 issue of the Washington Quarterly, Andrew Scobell, a
AND
extent has China begun to project military power beyond the extreme western Pacific.
The nature of Beijing’s military buildup tends to confirm the judgment of Scobell and Nathan
AND
submarines, anti-satellite weapons, and various forms of cyber warfare.
All of those changes appear to have a common purpose. They are primarily designed
AND
the arrival or reduce the effectiveness of intervening US naval and air forces."
The Chinese buildup certainly poses a concern if the United States persists in its implied
AND
one percent of its gross domestic product on the military are long overdue.
But the modest increases in Beijing’s military capabilities are a far cry from China seeking
AND
Beijing’s latest defense budget does not change that reality in any meaningful way.
No conflict in the SCS—both sides not too aggressive, experts
Thayer, 13 (Carlyle A. Thayer – Emeritus Professor at the University of New South Wales, May 13, "Why China and the US won’t go to war over the South China Sea", East Asia Forum, http://www.eastasiaforum-http:www.eastasiaforum/ .org/2013/05/13/why-china-and-the-us-wont-go-to-war-over-the-south-china-sea/)
China’s increasing assertiveness in the South China Sea is challenging US primacy in the Asia Pacific.
Even before Washington announced its official policy of rebalancing its force posture to the Asia Pacific, the United States had undertaken steps to strengthen its military posture by deploying more nuclear attack submarines to the region and negotiating arrangements with Australia to rotate Marines through Darwin.Since then, the United States has deployed Combat Littoral Ships to Singapore and is negotiating new arrangements for greater military access to the Philippines.
But these developments do not presage armed conflict between China and the United States. The People’s Liberation Army Navy has been circumspect in its involvement in South China Sea territorial disputes, and the United States has been careful to avoid being entrapped by regional allies in their territorial disputes with China. Armed conflict between China and the United States in the South China Sea appears unlikely.
Another, more probable, scenario is that both countries will find a modus vivendi
AND
is not the case … it is a strategy of collaboration and cooperation’.
/Squo solves restrictions on targeted killing and stops signature strikes – PPG ensures enforcement
Jim Lobe 5/24/13 (graduated magna cum laude from Williams College in Williamstown (Massachusetts), with highest honors in History in 1970 and received a law degree from Boalt Hall School of Law at the University of California, Berkeley, in 1974, Washington D.C. correspondent and chief of the Washington bureau of Inter Press Service (IPS), an international news agency specializing in coverage of issues and events of interest to developing countries, from 1980 to 1985, and again from 1989 to the presentinter press service, inter press service, "obama narrows the scope of terror war" http://www.ipsnews.net/2013/05/obama-narrows-scope-of-terror-war/)
Responding to growing criticism by human rights groups and foreign governments, U.S
AND
to the Pentagon – a reform long sought by human-rights groups.
No escalation of SCS – hardliners are moderating and regional coop is rising – our evidence cites high ranking Chinese officials
Buszynski, 12 (Leszek Buszynski Spring, Visiting Fellow at the Strategic and Defence Studies Centre at the
Australian National University, Washington quarterly spring 2012, "The South China Sea: Oil,¶ Maritime Claims, and¶ U.S.—China Strategic¶ Rivalry")
Aware that events have moved against China since at least the July 2010¶ ASEAN
AND
by October the protesters were¶ rounded up and the demonstrations terminated.¶ 58
5
Turn-
Effective use of drones key to prevent militant rise in Pakistan – no blowback,
Nadim 12 visiting scholar at the Woodrow Wilson Center
(Hussain, How Drones Changed the Game in Pakistan, nationalinterest.org/how-drones-changed-the-game-pakistan-7290)
Regardless of what the news agencies in Pakistan claim about the negative effects of drone
AND
at all as long as they get to burn a few American flags.
Their Reidel ev says the US needs to pressure INDIA not to go to war over Kashmir – no link to Pakistan relations
Pakistan can’t build US relations – no trust between agencies, unpopular political position, and media spin
Husain Haqqani March/April 2013 (Professor of International Relations at Boston University and a
Senior Fellow at the Hudson Institute. He served as Pakistan’s Ambassador to the United
States in 2008-11, foreign affairs, "Breaking Up Is Not Hard
to Do"
But in the end, these attempts to build a strategic partnership got nowhere.
AND
circles to believe the worst of anyone trying to mend the frayed partnership.
Their Boyle ev isn’t about relations – says that Pakistan faces domestic pressure, no causal connection to relations
No chance that Pakistan will collapse
Bandow 09 (Senior Fellow @ Cato, former special assistant to Reagan (11/31/09, Doug, "Recognizing the Limits of American Power in Afghanistan," Huffington Post,http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php ?pub_id=10924)
From Pakistan’s perspective, limiting the war on almost any terms would be better than
AND
state in the vain hope of salvaging Afghanistan would be a terrible mistake."
Turn - Drones are comparatively the best option – reduced reliance causes a shift to ground operations which increases civilian casualties
MARK BOWDEN 8/14/13 (national correspondent for The Atlantic, graduate of Loyola University Maryland, where he also taught from 2001-2010. A reporter and columnist for The Philadelphia Inquirer for more than 30 years, Bowden is now an adjunct professor at The University of Delaware, the atlantic, "The Killing Machines" http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2013/09/the-killing-machines-how-to-think-about-drones/309434/3/-http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2013/09/the-killing-machines-how-to-think-about-drones/309434/3/)
No civilian death is acceptable, of course. Each one is tragic. But
AND
are led, as Obama was, to the logic of the drone.
Reliance on ground operations forces the US into multiple wars – turns the case causes more backlash
MARK BOWDEN 8/14/13 (national correspondent for The Atlantic, graduate of Loyola University Maryland, where he also taught from 2001-2010. A reporter and columnist for The Philadelphia Inquirer for more than 30 years, Bowden is now an adjunct professor at The University of Delaware, the atlantic, "The Killing Machines" http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2013/09/the-killing-machines-how-to-think-about-drones/309434/3/-http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2013/09/the-killing-machines-how-to-think-about-drones/309434/3/)
Once the pursuit of al-Qaeda is defined as "law enforcement," ground
AND
order to protect life") but also might be the more moral choice.
No chance of conflict—new Pakistan PM solves relations, Pakistan becoming more democratic, close relationship between Singh and Sharif, Indian optimism, favorable circumstances, Pakistan army is willing to improve ties, deeper economic engagement planned, more positive Indian discourse
Kumar, 13 (Sanjay – correspondent for The Diplomat, "Pakistan’s Elections: A Harbinger of Peace on the Subcontinent?", The Diplomat, http://thediplomat.com/the-pulse/2013/05/16/pakistans-elections-a-harbinger-of-peace-on-the-subcontinent/-http://thediplomat.com/the-pulse/2013/05/16/pakistans-elections-a-harbinger-of-peace-on-the-subcontinent/)
Now that we know Nawaz Sharif will succeed Raja Pervez Ashraf as the next prime minster of Pakistan, it’s worth noting that Pakistan has never seen a democratic transition as smooth as the one set to take place between the outgoing Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP) and the newly elected Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz, or PML(N).
In its 66-year history as an independent nation, Pakistan has witnessed three military coups and extended rule by army generals. Even today, the nation is plagued by political turmoil. But this year seems to be a new chapter in its turbulent history.
The verdict from the 2013 elections gives the PML(N) 123 seats out of 254 declared results as of Tuesday evening, giving Sharif’s party an unassailable lead over its main rivals, PPP and Imran Khan’s Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf, which had secured 31 and 26 seats, respectively. The electoral results for the final 18 of Pakistan’s 272 National Assembly seats remain unannounced.
The voter turnout this year was impressive, with 60 percent of all registered voters
AND
message to the outside world and gives hope for peace on the Subcontinent.
In particular, India has a stake in the democratic success of its neighbor, with whom relations have been turbulent. There is widespread hope in India that Sharif, who formed a new Indo-Pakistani relationship in the 1990s, will revive the peace process and improve Islamabad’s ties with New Delhi.
Indian Prime minister Manmohan Singh was one of the first world leaders to congratulate Sharif after his emphatic victory. In a letter, Singh talked about charting a new course for the relationship between the two countries and invited his Pakistan counterpart to visit India.
Sharif reciprocated and emphasized the need for improved relations with India. He further stressed the importance of resolving issues, including Kashmir, through peaceful means. He even informally invited the Indian premier to his inauguration ceremony in Islamabad.
According to veteran Pakistani author and political analyst Ahmed Rashid, circumstances may be more favorable this time for Sharif to improve ties with New Delhi. He writes, "During his two premierships in the 1990s, Sharif made genuine efforts at peace with India but was thwarted by an aggressive and uncompromising army." But, he continues, "The army—faced with a severe weakening of the state—now seems more amenable to improving relations with New Delhi."
The Hindu opines that where Sharif "gives most hope is in his strong and unambiguous articulation of better India-Pakistan relations, though this will depend on his stated determination to correct the civil-military imbalance, and reclaim the national agenda from the security establishment. Whether he can succeed is another question, but India will be hoping he will."
As Pakistan passes through a rough economic patch, deeper engagement with its immediate neighbor will not only give the volatile country increased political stability but will also boost growth. India can play a major role in reviving Pakistan’s bankrupt economy as a potential investor.
According to an article published by the New Delhi-based think tank Institute for Defence Studies and Analyses (IDSA), trade between the two South Asian countries could receive renewed impetus under the new regime, barring complications from opposition by the religious right. However, the IDSA article also notes that "one should not expect a lot of change in policies related to terrorism targeted at India or its aversion to India’s presence in Afghanistan."
Despite skepticism, there is a general mood of optimism in India about the regime change in Pakistan. Just a couple of weeks ago Indian media was full of anti-Pakistan stories in the wake of the attack on Indian prisoner Sarabjit Singh in a Pakistani jail. While most Indian reports were full of jingoism in their coverage of the death of Singh, the election has changed the tone of the discourse.
The optimism stems from Sharif’s earlier initiatives in the 1990s to deepen ties with India
AND
the Line of Control under the leadership of former military ruler Pervez Musharraf.
The new leadership in Pakistan has a very tough job at hand: alleviate the deep-seated historical fear and mistrust between the two countries.
Likewise, India will have to show maturity in understanding the changing mood and aspirations of the people of Pakistan.
New Delhi needs to recognize that never before has there been such an overwhelming consensus for Pakistan to normalize relations with India. If the leaderships of both countries work hard to tap this desire, they may be able to usher in a new era of peace and progress on the Subcontinent.
Current drone policy locks in cooperation from allies—-drones are naturally declining from as a function of their own success—-Obama’s adopted a flexible framework that emphasizes non-lethal methods where appropriate—-creates a foundation for sustainable coop while preserving drone flexibility
Peter Juul 13, Policy Analyst at the Center for American Progress, 2/6/13, "Moving Beyond 9/11: The United States Needs a Broader-Based and Sustainable Counterterrorism Policy," http://susris.com/2013/02/07/drone-basing-revelation-underscores-strong-defense-and-security-bonds/
Terrorism will be with us in some form or another for the foreseeable future.
AND
well as various regional cooperation initiatives— provides a foundation for the future.
Deterrence checks
Khan, 12 (Ikram Ullah, analyst for the South Asian Strategic Stability Institute, "Nuclear Pakistan: Defence Vs Energy Development," 7/26, http://www.eurasiareview.com/26072012-nuclear-pakistan-defence-vs-energy-development-oped/-http://www.eurasiareview.com/26072012-nuclear-pakistan-defence-vs-energy-development-oped/)
We must be clear that nuclear weapons are here to maintain peace and stability between
AND
it prevented the likelihood of an all out nuclear war in South Asia.
No war—economic interdependence
Hopewell, 12 (Kimberly, writer for American Foreign Policy, a Princeton newspaper, "India-Pakistan Relations: Peace Through Economics?" 4/15, http://afpprinceton.tumblr.com/post/21145247330/india-pakistan-relations-peace-through-economics-http://afpprinceton.tumblr.com/post/21145247330/india-pakistan-relations-peace-through-economics)
In the last half century, India-Pakistan relations have seen three wars;
AND
to move past the 2008 Mumbai terror attacks and reopen a cooperative dialogue.
6
Supreme Court rolls back the plan
Max Boot 2/11/13 (Max Boot is one of America’s leading military historians and foreign-policy analysts. The Jeane J. Kirkpatrick Senior Fellow in National Security Studies at the Council on Foreign Relations in New York, Boot is also a contributing editor to the Weekly Standard and the Los Angeles Times, and a regular contributor to the New York Times, the Wall Street Journal, Commentary, and other publications, dviser to U.S. commanders in Iraq and Afghanistan, bachelor’s degree in history, with high honors, from the University of California, Berkeley (1991), and a master’s degree in history from Yale University (1992), Commentary magazine, "A Drone Court is a Terrible Idea" http://www.commentarymagazine.com/2013/02/11/a-drone-court-is-a-terrible-idea-fisa-terroris/)
This is not to say that such operations should be above any outside review.
AND
judiciary the job of making decisions on the use of military force abroad.
Doesn’t solve cred, too slow (impractical standard of intelligence), constitutional ability to use force given to president (drone strikes are nothing compared to prez ability to use nukes), plan gets rolled back – congress can’t take executive authority back
Kevin Baron 3/18/13 (national security reporter for Foreign Policy, covering defense and military issues in Washington. He is also vice president of the Pentagon Press Association. Baron previously was a national security staff writer for National Journal, covering the "business of war." Prior to that, Baron worked in the resident daily Pentagon press corps as a reporter/photographer for Stars and Stripes. For three years with Stripes, Baron covered the building and traveled overseas extensively with the secretary of defense and chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, covering official visits to Afghanistan and Iraq, the Middle East and Europe, China, Japan and South Korea, in more than a dozen countries. From 2004 to 2009, Baron was the Boston Globe Washington bureau’s investigative projects reporter, covering defense, international affairs, lobbying and other issues. Before that, he muckraked at the Center for Public Integrity. Baron has reported on assignment from Asia, Africa, Australia, Europe, the Middle East and the South Pacific. He was won two Polk Awards, among other honors. He has a B.A. in international studies from the University of Richmond and M.A. in media and public affairs from George Washington University, foreign policy, "Jeh Johnson, drone court "skeptic," argues targeted killing best left to military"http://e-ring.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2013/03/18/jeh_johnson_drone_court_skeptic_argues_targeted_killing_best_left_to_military)
Legal authority for targeted strikes against terrorism suspects that are conducted by the military is
AND
of government, nor have it taken away by an act of Congress."
use of state secret doctrine means ZERO checks –we don’t need to win OPEN noncompliance
Bazzle, J.D., Georgetown University Law Center, ’12
~Timothy, "SHUTTING THE COURTHOUSE DOORS:¶ INVOKING THE STATE SECRETS PRIVILEGE TO THWART¶ JUDICIAL REVIEW IN THE AGE OF TERROR", Civil Rights Law Journal, Vol. 23, No. 1, 2012, RSR~
The war on terror has led to an increased use of the state secrets¶
AND
allege a credible claim of government wrongdoing retain¶ their due process rights.
Plan doesn’t result in less strikes and crushes current op effectiveness
Steve Vladeck 2/10/13 (professor of law and the associate dean for scholarship at American University Washington College of Law. A 2004 graduate of Yale Law School, Steve clerked for Judge Marsha Berzon on the Ninth Circuit and Judge Rosemary Barkett on the Eleventh Circuit. In addition to serving as a senior editor of the Journal of National Security Law 26 Policy, Steve is also the co-editor of Aspen Publishers’ leading National Security Law and Counterterrorism Law casebooks, Lawfare, "Why a "Drone Court" Won’t Work–But (Nominal) Damages Might…" http://www.lawfareblog.com/2013/02/why-a-drone-court-wont-work/)
III. Drone Courts and the Legitimacy Problem¶ That brings me to perhaps the
AND
and practically possible, a drone court would be a very dangerous idea.
