Resolution 1:
Resolved: The United States Federal Government should substantially change its nuclear posture to be more consistent with its nuclear disarmament commitments.
Resolution 2:
Resolved: The United States Federal Government should substantially reduce the size of its nuclear weapons arsenal, and/or substantially reduce and restrict the role and/or missions of its nuclear weapons arsenal.
Resolution 3:
Resolved: The United States Federal Government should substantially change its nuclear posture in one or more of the following ways:
- Ratification and implementation of the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty
- Adoption of a nuclear declaratory policy substantially reducing and restricting the use of its nuclear weapons
- A substantial reduction in the size of its nuclear weapons arsenal
- Negotiation and implementation of a bilateral agreement with Russia that at least includes a substantial reduction in nuclear weapons
- A substantial decrease in the operational readiness of its nuclear weapons.
Criterion for the Papers
· Multilateralism
· Types of major affirmatives
· Room for ‘big’ disarmament
· Fidelity to the controversy paper
· Some end of open-endedness
Non-Active Options
R: The United States federal government should substantially reduce and restrict the role and/or missions of its nuclear weapons arsenal, and/or substantially reduce the size of its nuclear weapons arsenal.
2.1 R: The USFG should substantially reduce and restrict the missions, role and/or size of its nuclear weapons arsenal.
2.2 R: The USFG should substantially reduce and restrict the missions, role and/or size of its nuclear weapons arsenal through unilateral policies and/or multilateral initiatives.
Questions for group 1
-
Consistent vs. compliance - Sean
-
Article VI spec - Sean
-
Nuclear weapons posture vs. nuclear posture - Jarrod
-
Unilateralism relationship to nuclear posture
-
What is allowed as affirmatives?
-
Its reference to posture?
Questions for group 2
-
Make all reduce and restrict
-
Unilateral and/or multilateral – how to word that (does multilateral include bilateral)
-
International
-
Good faith and/or nature of implementation, negotiating if agreed to implement
Approach 4: Open-ended list - Dave, Steve
R: The USFG should make its nuclear posture substantially more compliant with its nuclear disarmament commitments in one or more of the following ways:
- Ratify and implement one or more extant bilateral or multilateral agreement(s) on nuclear disarmament
- Substantially restrict the missions, role and/or size of the nuclear weapons arsenal
- Negotiate and implement a fissile material cut-off treaty
- Negotiate and implement a bilateral arms control agreement with Russia [and/or China]
- Negotiate and implement a bilateral agreement with Russia for deep reductions in strategic and/or tactical nuclear weapons.
Questions
- Countries (China, Korea?)
- Can limit bilateral Arms Control?
- 1 vs. 4 - stem
3.1 R: The United States federal government should substantially change its nuclear posture in one or more of the following ways:
- Ratify and implement one or more extant bilateral or multilateral agreement(s) on nuclear disarmament
- Implement a declaratory policy substantially restricting the use of nuclear weapons
- Implement substantial reductions in its nuclear weapons
- Negotiate a fissile material cut-off treaty and implement any agreement arising from these negotiations
- Negotiate a bilateral agreement with Russia, incuding offering a substantial reduction in nuclear weapons, and implement any agreement arising from these negotiations
3.2 R: The United States federal government should substantially change its nuclear posture in one or more of the following ways:
- Ratify and implement the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty
- Negotiate a fissile material cut-off treaty and implement any agreement arising from these negotiations
- Negotiate a bilateral agreement with Russia, including offering a substantial reduction in nuclear weapons, and implement any agreement arising from these negotiation
- Implement substantial reductions in its nuclear weapons
- Implement a declaratory policy substantially restricting the use of nuclear weapons
3.3 R: The United States federal government should substantially change its nuclear posture in one or more of the following ways:
- Ratify and implement the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty
- Negotiate a fissile material cut-off treaty and implement any agreement arising from these negotiations
- Negotiate a bilateral agreement with Russia, including offering a substantial reduction in nuclear weapons, and implement any agreement arising from these negotiation
- Implement substantial reductions in its nuclear weapons
- Adopt a universal nuclear no first use pledge
- De-alert its nuclear arsenal (NOTE: This is not a final wording - just a note that it maybe should be added to the list)
Questions for group 3
- Some open-ended (esp declaratory policy like NFU)
- NFZs?
- targeting affs
Research Agenda Items (i.e., the specific research tasks for our committee)
Discussed:
-
Consistent or more consistent (or more compliant)? - Gordon, Ryan
-
Move substantially to the disarmament obligations? (To be vs. make), Gordon, Ryan
-
Obligations or commitments? - Gordon, Ryan
-
NPT and/or nuclear disarmament commitments - explore specific and include wording --such as npt and/or npt and review conferences -- singular or plural - Gordon
-
Need contextual evidence to support the reductions affirmatives via missions - does restrict provide - Steve
-
Restrict - Is this agent specific? - Steve
-
How should we prevent affirmatives that only prevent future missions. Restrict and reduce? - Steve
-
"Nuclear posture" or "nuclear weapons posture" - Kevin
-
Role vs. mission - Kevin
-
Nuclear weapons vs. nuclear weapons arsenal vs. nuclear arsenal - does it allow testing and/or does it allow other forms - Mike
-
Are there other nuclear devices - DUBS, space weapons - that aren't weapons.- testing and fissile material - Mike
To Discuss:
-
Vetting the new words and phrase in topic 2 - move, towards elimination, forces vs. weapons, extant
-
Are negotiation needed to allow affirmatives to solve (for core affirmatives?) - Brent
-
Are there ways to allow the additional mechanism of negotiation without making the topic too ended?
-
Draft wording to modify topic 2 to adjust item 4 and only allow for Russia and FMCT or other key negotiations (and consider function of 1) - Dave, Greta
Modified List #1: Only altering plank 4
The United States federal government should make its nuclear posture substantially more compliant with its nuclear disarmament commitments in one or more of the following ways:
- Ratifying and implementing one or more extant bilateral or multilateral agreement(s) on nuclear disarmament
- Implementing a declaratory policy substantially restricting the use of nuclear weapons
- Implementing substantial reductions in its deployed nuclear forces
- Negotiate and implement a fissile material cut-off treaty and/or a bilateral agreement with Russia reducing deployed nuclear forces
Modified List #2: Altering planks 1 and 4
The United States federal government should make its nuclear posture substantially more compliant with its nuclear disarmament commitments in one or more of the following ways: - Ratify and implement the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty
- Negotiate and implement a fissile material cut-off treaty
- Negotiate and implement a bilateral agreement with Russia reducing deployed nuclear forces
- Implement substantial reductions in its deployed nuclear forces
- Implement a declaratory policy substantially restricting the use of nuclear weapons
Modified List #3: Altering planks 1 and 4, and altered declaratory policy
The United States federal government should make its nuclear posture substantially more compliant with its nuclear disarmament commitments in one or more of the following ways: - Ratify and implement the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty
- Negotiate and implement a fissile material cut-off treaty - Negotiate and implement a bilateral agreement with Russia reducing deployed nuclear forces
- Implement substantial reductions in its deployed nuclear forces - Adopting/announcing a universal nuclear no first use pledge
Questions:
- Should reductions be limited to deployed weapons?
- Do we want to allow changes in all declaratory policies?
Original
The USFG should substantially change its nuclear posture to be more consistent with its nuclear disarmament commitments.
Consistency
The USFG should substantially change its nuclear posture to increase consistency with its nuclear disarmament commitments.
NPT Spec
The USFG should substantially change its nuclear posture to be more consistent with its nuclear disarmament commitments to Article VI of the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons.
NPT Spec & Consistency
The USFG should substantially change its nuclear posture to increase consistency with its nuclear disarmament commitments to Article VI of the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons.
NPT Spec w/o disarm
The USFG should substantially change its nuclear posture to be more consistent with its commitments to Article VI of the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons.
NPT Spec & Consistency w/o disarm
The USFG should substantially change its nuclear posture to increase consistency with its commitments to Article VI of the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons.
Compliance
The USFG should substantially change its nuclear posture to increase compliance with its nuclear disarmament commitments.
Compliance & NPT Spec
The USFG should substantially change its nuclear posture to increase compliance with its nuclear disarmament commitments to Article VI of the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons.
Compliance, w/NPT spec w/o disarm
The USFG should substantially change its nuclear posture to increase compliance with its commitments to Article VI of the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons.