1 of 72

2025-2026 RESOLUTION��THE UNITED STATES FEDERAL GOVERNMENT SHOULD SIGNIFICANTLY INCREASE ITS EXPLORATION AND/OR DEVELOPMENT OF THE ARCTIC.

2 of 72

AGENDA

  1. Topic history, Mining backfiles, the Arctic
  2. National Actors, their policies and interests
  3. Critical terms “Its,” “Development” and “Exploration”
  4. Advantage Areas
  5. Topic Affs
  6. Negative Positions

2

3 of 72

1. THE ARCTIC TOPIC� - TOPIC RESOURCES� - MINING FOR EVIDENCE� - WHAT IS THE ARCTIC

3

4 of 72

EVIDENCE MINING FOR THE TOPIC

4

Topic paper was originally directed toward action by the Arctic Council

(https://acrobat.adobe.com/id/urn:aaid:sc:VA6C2:2926c325-4f15-4dcd-8ad7-0f29d24c2b05)

- modified with development and exploration (no discussion in the topic paper)

Back file mining

Topics to review

- 2014-2015 high school Oceans topic

- 2022-2023 high school NATO topic

- 2016-2017 college climate topic

Files to review

- Russia files from NATO topic

- China files

- Heg/hardpower

- Security K

- Set Col K

5 of 72

WHAT IS THE ARCTIC?

5

Geographically – area north of arctic circle (24 hours daylight and 24 hours of darkness during solstices)

Politically 8 Arctic nations, mostly Russia (50%)

6 of 72

ARCTIC NATION STATES

Direct contact with the Arctic

  1. United States
  2. Russia
  3. Canada
  4. Greenland/Denmark
  5. Iceland
  6. Sweden
  7. Finland
  8. Norway

6

7 of 72

INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS

North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO)

- alliance originally set up to contain the Soviet Union now Russia

      • Article 5 obligates all members to treat an attack against one as an attack against all
      • Ukraine conflict has increased unity

- all Arctic members of NATO (Sweden and Finland joined after Ukraine invasion

- military exercises conducted periodically in the Arctic

7

8 of 72

INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS

Arctic Council

  • intergovernmental forum promoting cooperation, coordination and interaction among the Arctic States, Arctic Indigenous Peoples and other Arctic inhabitants on common Arctic issues (e.g., sustainable development and environmental protection)
  • established in 1996.

- Chair rotates (now Denmark/Greenland)

Six working groups (monitoring, emergency response, protection of marine environment, contamination, flora and fauna, sustainable development)

8

9 of 72

OTHER ACTORS

9

China

- investments in NSR, energy infrastructure

India

- sea routes

- resources

- scientific research

Indigenous Peoples in Alaska (Aleut, Alutiiq, Yup’ik, Iñupiaq (Northwest Alaskan Inuit), Athabaskan, Tlingit and Haida)

- cultural preservation

- climate change effects

10 of 72

RESOURCES IN THE ARCTIC

10

Oil and gas

- up to 25 percent of unexplored oil and gas reserves.

Rare Earth Minerals

- generous deposits of rare-earth elements, from neodymium and praseodymium to terbium and dysprosium

- home to significant volumes of other valuable natural resources (metals, minerals, precious stones)

Fishing

- commercial harvest of groundfish, shellfish, salmon, and other resources in Alaska constitute more than 60 percent of marine fish landings in the United States

11 of 72

RELEVANT TREATIES

11

Law of the Sea (a.k.a. UNCLOS, LOST)

- most nations are signatories (but not the US)

- governs maritime boundaries (e.g., EEZ), outer continental shelf (right to harvest mineral and non-living material in the subsoil of their continental shelf)

Central Arctic Ocean fisheries agreement

- 16 year ban on fishing in Central Arctic Ocean (CAO)

- Signatories include Canada, Denmark, Norway, Russia, the United States, China

Arctic Search and Rescue (ASAR) Agreement

Outer Space Treaty

12 of 72

2. SIGNIFICANT ACTORS IN THE ARCTIC��

12

13 of 72

UNITED STATES ARCTIC POLICY

Policy Goals

- security (early warning from nuclear attack)

- economic

-navigation

- oil

- environment (security)

- indigenous culture

13

14 of 72

UNITED STATES ARCTIC POLICY- ACTORS

Dept. of State (DOS)

Dept. of Defense (DOD)

-bases (Eielson Air Force Base in Alaska, the US naval air station at Keflavík in Iceland, the Pituffik space base in Greenland, the Bodø air station in Norway, and the US theater missile defense systems in Northeast Asia)

DoD Arctic Strategy and Global Resilience Office

- early warning network

- US Navy

14

15 of 72

UNITED STATES ARCTIC POLICY- ACTORS

Dept. of the Interior (land management oil leases)

National Oceanic Atmospheric Agency (NOAA) (Dept. of Commerce)

- satellite observation

Dept. of Homeland Security

- Coast Guard (CG)

15

16 of 72

UNITED STATES OFFICIAL ARCTIC POLICY

History of Arctic policy

1984 -Arctic Research And Policy Act (ARPA)

2009 - National Security and Presidential Directive

2022- National Strategy For the Arctic (security, climate change/protection, sustainable development, and international governance)

2024 – DOD Arctic Strategy policy (repeat of goals)

16

17 of 72

UNITED STATES ARCTIC POLICY GOALS UNDER TRUMP

Trump policy shift

- America First

- transactional, bilateral, and resource-driven (unilateral strategic acquisition) – shift away from cooperative governance

- Russia (potential cooperation, strategy against China)

(https://thegeopolitics.com/polar-realignment-trump-putin-and-the-future-of-arctic-power-politics/)

- minimize resources directed toward climate and environment goals

- Greenland takeover???

- Canada takeover

17

18 of 72

WHAT IS THE ARTIC (ALASKA)?

18

Alaska

National Petroleum Reserve in Alaska (NPRA) – Federal land

Alaska National Wildlife Preserve (ANWR) – Federal land

Prudhoe Bay- 8% of America’s domestic oil.

19 of 72

RUSSIAN ARCTIC POLICY

History

- fear of invasion (chip on shoulder)

- warm water ports

- oscillating attitudes toward the west

- traditional rival with China

Arctic is a top priority

  • Working through international frameworks (less so post Ukraine)
  • Military presence
  • Economic infrastructure development

(https://www.thearcticinstitute.org/arctic-2023-russian-foreign-policy-concept/)

19

20 of 72

RUSSIAN ARCTIC POLICY

Arctic Policy 2035 (policy objectives)

• To ensure Russia’s sovereignty and territorial integrity.

• To preserve the Arctic as a world territory, with stable and mutually beneficial partnerships.

• To guarantee high living standards and prosperity for people of the Russian Arctic zone.

• To develop the Russian Arctic as a strategic resource base and its rational use to accelerate national economic growth.

• To develop the NSR as a competitive national transport line of the Russian Federation in the global market.

• To protect the Arctic environment, the primordial homeland, and the traditional way of life of the indigenous minorities in the Russian Arctic

(https://www.ni-u.edu/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/NIUShort_07212020_DNI202201735_IceRusha.pdf)

20

21 of 72

RUSSIAN ARCTIC POLICY – CHINA AND THE WEST

China

  • financing Arctic energy projects and ports
  • Russia hesitant to grant China a stronger role in Arctic governance highlights this unease.

The West

  • Ukraine shifts cooperative efforts
  • bilateral engagement with non-Arctic partners and plans to develop alternative Arctic governance forums to diminish Western influence in the region.
  • fears that the US and NATO will soon increase surface, subsurface, and air deployments closer to the Arctic zone.

21

22 of 72

RUSSIAN POLICY

      • Heavy militarization (icebreakers, Northern fleet, air bases) Increasing defense in depth by extending out-of-area denial capabilities on both sides of the Arctic as well as across North Pole approaches
      • Russia persists in interpreting the NSR as a body of “internal waters” under Article 234 of UNCLOS (also known as the Ice Clause).
      • Russia passed a law in December 2022 updating the NSR legal status
      • Russia planted an underwater flag to claim the Continental shelf under Law of the Sea includes the North pole

22

23 of 72

NATO POLICY

    • Deter Russia (protect the northern flank)
    • Military exercises regularly scheduled for Arctic warfighting

23

24 of 72

CHINA

24

China

  • Invests in Russian infrastructure e.g., Northern

Sea Route (NSR) to avoid shipping through Mid East.

  • uses economic partnerships to expand strategic footprint without provoking direct geopolitical confrontation.
  • resource access diversification as part of the Belt and Road Initiative for fossil energy, rare earths, and fishing stocks.
  • Limited military presence, but scientific presence may reinforce intel and domain awareness
  • Chinese Arctic activities must be understood as fundamentally dual-purpose. military presence in the Arctic is limited but suspicions arise that scientific research presence feeds intelligence and domain awareness

25 of 72

INDIA

25

India

  • Interests in trade routes
  • Cooperation with Russia on NSR and energy
  • Scientific cooperation on Arctic and climate

26 of 72

3. TOPIC DEFINITIONS, ITS, DEVELOPMENT AND EXPLORATION

26

27 of 72

WHAT IS DEVELOPMENT

27

Development is distinct from economic growth strategies

MSS Research 2010

MSS Research is the social science research division of The Mother's Service Society, a non-profit organization established in Pondicherry, India in 1970. 2010 “Indicators of Economic Progress: The Power of Measurement and Human Welfare” http://www.mssresearch.org/?q=node/626

The term development is commonly used as a catch-all phrase for something that includes, but extends beyond considerations of economic growth. Socio-economic development is frequently used as a proxy for per capita economic growth measured in real terms. Sometimes it is used with reference to the economic welfare of citizens; sometimes more broadly to include non-economic factors such as health, education, life expectancy, social inclusion, gender equity, social cohesion, freedom, democratic participation and good governance; and at others with reference to national investments in infrastructure, education, science and technology, energy and other fields deemed essential for national progress. In contrast to this vague general usage, we would argue for making a clear and emphatic distinction between growth and development. Growth represents a horizontal quantitative expansion of existing capacities and activities in society; whereas development involves a qualitative enhancement in the structural capabilities of society, an increasing capacity for organization, coordination, and complexity. Growth may be regarded primarily as an economic concept, but development in any field belongs to the wider realm of society as a whole. Growth generates more of the same on a larger scale. Development generates something new and better that was not possible earlier. Development relates to enhancement of social productivity through strategies such as investments in human capital by education and training, enhancement of social capital and organizational capabilities — with regard to governance, production, commerce, research, social welfare, etc. — technological advancement, greater access to information, and networking between individuals and institutions

28 of 72

WHAT IS DEVELOPMENT

28

Development is activity relating to the exploitation of resources. Exploration refers to any activity related to the identification or evaluation of resource deposits.

U.S. Code ’90 [16 U.S. Code § 2462; June 28; Legal Information Institute, “Definition: development from 16 USC § 2462(4),” “ANTARCTIC MINERAL RESOURCES PROTECTION” https://www.law.cornell.edu/definitions/uscode.php]

(3)The term “development” means any activity, including logistic support, which takes place following exploration, the purpose of which is the exploitation of specific mineral resource deposits, including processing, storage, and transport activities.

(4) The term “exploration” means any activity, including logistic support, the purpose of which is the identification or evaluation of specific mineral resource deposits. The term includes exploratory drilling, dredging, and other surface or subsurface excavations required to determine the nature and size of mineral resource deposits and the feasibility of their development.

29 of 72

WHAT IS DEVELOPMENT

29

Development increases well being

Peck & Phillips, n.d. – *Director of David Cameron’s Quality of Life Policy Group AND **President & CEO, Edelman, the world's largest Public Relations firm

[Jules & Robert, “Growth vs Development” Citizen Renaissance, http://www.citizenrenaissance.com/the-book/part-three-where-are-we-heading/chapter-seven-the-rise-of-ecological-economics/growth-vs-development//]//SG

Leading American economist Herman Daly illustrates the fundamental difference between growth and development by these definitions:¶ Growth – the quantitative increase in size or throughput of biophysical matter. Daly has argued economic growth is based on the “limitless transformation of natural capital into man-made capital”.¶ Development – the qualitative improvement in economic welfare from increased quality of goods and services as defined by their ability to increase human well-being. This infers promoting increased economic activity only insofar as it does not exceed the capacity of the ecosystem to sustain it.

30 of 72

WHAT IS DEVELOPMENT – DISTINCT FROM SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT???

30

Sustainable development is distinct from resolutional development –

Leeds City Council ‘12

(Leeds City council, “What is Sustainable Development?” June 28, 2012, http://www.leeds.gov.uk/docs/What%20is%20sustainable%20development.pdf)

The various definitions of sustainable development tend to agree that it has the following key ¶ characteristics that distinguish if from conventional development: ¶sustainable development is concerned with the achievement of social, economic and ¶ environmental objectives at the same time, rather than a process of trading ¶ advantages in one sphere against losses in another. It is about integrating objectives ¶ rather than balancing them; ¶ • sustainable development recognises the impacts that decisions taken locally will have ¶ globally; ¶ • sustainable development recognises the impacts that decisions taken now will have ¶ on generations in the future; ¶ • sustainable development places a high emphasis on participation by the public in ¶ decisions that affect them. ¶ ¶ Sustainable development is a sophisticated concept that challenges conventional schools of ¶ thought and recognises the reality that quality of life depends on economic, social and ¶ environmental improvement at the same time, not at the expense of each other. Finding ¶ solutions that achieve this ‘win-win-win’ outcome is not straightforward and requires an ¶ approach that challenges existing methodologies and changes the way that things are done ¶ at present.

31 of 72

WHAT IS EXPLORATION

31

Exploration is creating surface disturbance

Code of Federal Regulations 13 (43 CFR 3809.5: Definitions, current as of 2013, From Title 43 Public Lands: Interior, Subtitle B Regulations Relating to Public Lands,

http://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/43/3809.5)

Exploration means creating surface disturbance greater than casual use that includes sampling, drilling, or developing surface or underground workings to evaluate the type, extent, quantity, or quality of mineral values present. Exploration does not include activities where material is extracted for commercial use or sale.

32 of 72

WHAT IS EXPLORATION

32

Exploration is systematic search and discovery – distinct from research, surveys, and hypothesis driven investigation

NOAA 12 – National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

[NOAA, “OceanExploration’sSecond Decade,” NOAA, http://www.sab.noaa.gov/Meetings/2012/november/OE_Review_Report_Final.pdf]//SG

The present Panel affirms the brief definition of exploration of the 2000 Panel: Exploration is the systematic search and investigation for the initial purpose of discovery and the more elaborated definition of the US Navy: Systematic examination for the purposes of discovery; cataloging/documenting what one finds; boldly going where no one has gone before; providing an initial knowledge base for hypothesis-based science and for exploitation. The Panel affirms that Ocean Exploration is distinct from comprehensive surveys (such as those carried out by NAVOCEANO and NOAA Corps) and at-sea research (sponsored by National Science Foundation, Office of Naval Research, and other agencies), including hypothesis-driven investigations aimed at the ocean bottom, artifacts, water column, and marine life.

33 of 72

WHAT IS EXPLORATION

33

Exploration is Observation

US Committee on Science 03 (Summary of Activities of the Committee on Science US House of Representatives For the One Hundred Seventh Congress, January 2, 2003 http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CRPT-107hrpt809/pdf/CRPT-107hrpt809.pdf)

Ocean exploration is defined as the systematic observation of all facets of the ocean in the three dimensions of space and the fourth dimension of time. Ocean exploration leads to un- predictable rewards; possibilities include cures for diseases, discovery of untapped mineral, energy, and biological resources, insights into ocean system functions, and beautiful geological and biological vistas.

34 of 72

WHAT IS EXPLORATION

34

Arctic Ocean exploration – Laundry list

NOAA 01 (National Ocean and Atmospheric Administration, January 2001, “A New Era of Ocean Exploration” http://oceanservice.noaa.gov/websites/retiredsites/oceanpanel.pdf)

Navy proposes the following topical areas as suitable for

National commitments and interagency efforts in ocean

exploration:

Seafloor exploration & mapping (e.g., Neptune, GOMaP)

Hyperspectral sensing from space

Long-time series in U.S. waters as part of an integrated ocean observing system (OCEAN.US)

• Cooperative coastal efforts with other nations

Inventories of marine life (e.g. a census of marine mammals)

Inventories of polar ice caps

Marine archaeology

35 of 72

WHAT IS EXPLORATION

Exploration and Research are distinct

Auster 01 Department of Marine Sciences Northeast Underwater Research Technology & Education Center University of Connecticut (Peter, Marine Biologist Joins New Federal Ocean Exploration Program,

http://advance.uconn.edu/2001/010904/01090408.htm)

Marine biologist Peter Auster is going on a mission into inner space. He is one of three scientists leading the first cruise of a new formal ocean exploration program funded by the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration. For more than four decades, the U.S. has spent billions of dollars on space exploration and only a small fraction of that kind of money on the ocean. That may be changing. Last fall, a panel of nationally renowned scientists, commissioned by President Clinton, recommended that a federal ocean exploration program be established. On Sept. 9, Auster, the science director of the National Undersea Research Center at UConn's Avery Point campus, and scientists from the University of Maine and the College of Charleston, begin the first leg of this underwater journey called Deep East 2001. The three National Undersea Research Centers located at east coast universities, including UConn, are organizing three voyages this fall that will involve a dozen scientists from a variety of institutions and organizations. Auster and his group will dive in the submarine canyons of Georges Bank, and on Bear and Physalia Seamounts (underwater mountains). That will put them about 180 to 200 miles off the New England coast and a little less than a mile below the surface. Because of the depths, they will be using Alvin, the only manned submersible the U.S. owns that is capable of going that deep. "This is formalizing the scientific exploration of the ocean the National Undersea Research Program has been conducting for years," Auster says. "We are not going out just to see what is there, but to systematically observe a part of the world where few, if any, have been before, and we will use that information to generate new questions about how the world works." Auster says there is a key difference between exploration and research. Whereas research starts with a question and is carefully crafted into a hypothesis for testing, exploration is about making the kind of primary observations that generate those original questions, he says. And there are plenty of observations to be made, as 95 percent of the oceans have yet to be investigated.

35

36 of 72

WHAT IS ITS

  • Its references the USFG
  • How does the USFG develop???

what if anything is direct development

does facilitating development count

- How does the USFG explore???

36

37 of 72

3. ADVANTAGE AREAS

37

38 of 72

SECURITY

US/Russia War

Causes

    • Increase in US/NATO military presence in the Arctic leading to miscalculation
    • Lack of US military presence in response to Russian expansion
    • Disputes over the NSR and other sea routes
    • Oil
    • Unconventional warfare - Early warning stations

Impact – nuclear exchange

(https://cepa.org/comprehensive-reports/up-north-confronting-arctic-insecurity-implications-for-the-united-states-and-nato/)

(https://www.thearcticinstitute.org/rising-tensions-shifting-strategies-evolving-dynamics-us-grand-strategy-arctic/)

Cooperation advantages – Arctic may be a cooperation opportunity

38

39 of 72

SECURITY

US/China War

- accidental clash

- resource competition

- impact – nuclear war

US Hegemony

    • Arctic dominance critical to military
      • Naval, space, surveillance
    • Military tech based on rare earth materials
    • Spillover from drone/satellite development

- Impacts – conflict resolution, economic stability

39

40 of 72

SEA ROUTES

Climate change opens up Arctic sea routes

Northern Sea Route (NSR)

Northwest Passage (NWP)

Transpolar Sea Route (TSR) (2050)

transporting goods from Europe to the Far East via the NSR could be 25 percent more profitable than the Suez Canal Route

Impacts- economic collapse, Trade good, Naval Heg

40

41 of 72

RARE EARTH RESOURCES

Essential for the manufacturing of high-tech products like batteries, semiconductors, magnets, and catalysts.

United States heavily relies on critical materials to drive innovation

- Competitiveness (integrated circuits)

  • Hegemony impacts (military)
  • Climate impacts (RE tech)
  • Tech impacts

41

42 of 72

CLIMATE

Positive feedbacks in Arctic

- sea ice reflection/heat absorption

- CO2 exposure ocean

acidification

Methane effects

"Arctic methane bomb“

Biodiversity

42

43 of 72

DISEASES

Frozen microbes will be released from permafrost melt

Pandemics

Potential bio tech

43

44 of 72

INDIGENOUS PEOPLES

US tribes

- climate change affecting culture

- indigenous knowledge on ecosystem management

- development also may threaten culture

(https://www.arcticwwf.org/newsroom/features/arctic-connected-the-arctics-indigenous-communities-under-threat/)

44

45 of 72

OIL (ENVIRONMENTAL)

Oil Leasing/drilling/offshore

Shipping issues (tankers)

- oil spills are magnified

- biodiversity loss

Drilling issues

- ecosystem effects

Oil pipelines

Climate/biodiversity (CO2)

45

46 of 72

OIL (GEO-POLITICAL)

Middle East Conflict

Russian Conflict

- economic impact

- geo political

Economic impacts

- third world development

- China

46

47 of 72

4. AFFIRMATIVES

47

48 of 72

ARCTIC DOMAIN AWARENESS (NDCA, UM)

Plan Text: The United States federal government should increase its deployment of domain awareness technology, including early warning radars, uncrewed aerial and underwater vehicles, and satellites, in the Arctic.

- domain awareness is key to anticipating current threats and predicting future ones in the Arctic.

Advantages

- prevent miscalc and accidents

- International cooperation to maintain the liberal order

- climate monitoring

48

49 of 72

SPACE (CDL, GDS)

Plan: Plan: The United States federal government should significantly increase funding for space-based operations in the Arctic.

Advantages

  • Climate monitoring
  • Situational awareness (security)
  • Navigation sea lanes

49

50 of 72

GEO-ENGINEERING (CDL, UM)

Plan: The United States federal government should significantly increase its development of geoengineering pilot projects in the Arctic.

Plan: The United States federal government should develop and deploy Marine Cloud Brightening technology in the Arctic

Use geo-engineering to protect sea ice

Advantages

  • Climate
  • Global governance
  • biodiversity

50

51 of 72

US RUSSIA COOPERATION (NDCA, UM)

Plan: The United States federal government should significantly increase its scientific exploration of permafrost in the Russian Arctic under the auspices of the Agreement on Enhancing International Arctic Scientific Cooperation.

Plan: The United States federal government should significantly increase its scientific exploration of permafrost in the Russian Arctic under the auspices of the Agreement on Enhancing International Arctic Scientific Cooperation.

Plan: The U.S. should restore scientific cooperation programs with Russia and/or China in the Arctic.

Cooperation at different levels in the Arctic with Russia or China

Advantages

    • Spills over to conflict resolution and other areas
    • Solves climate/environmental problems

51

52 of 72

US RUSSIA LNG (NFS, NDCA)

Plan: The U.S. should significantly increase offshore oil and natural gas drilling in the Arctic.

Advantages

- Avoid oil conflicts

52

53 of 72

INDIGENOUS CLIMATE ADAPTION (NFS, NDCA, UM, WAKE)

Example Plan: The United States federal government, through the Denali Commission, should increase collaborative climate adaption infrastructure development to Native Alaskan Arctic communities.

Plan: The U.S. should develop wind, solar, and geothermal energy projects in the Arctic to provide sustainable power for Arctic communities.

Advantages

        • Solving climate threats to indigenous peoples – Structural violence
        • Federal involvement (set col)

53

54 of 72

ICE BREAKERS (UM, GDS, EMORY)

Plan The United States federal government should increase its development of the Arctic through the deployment of nuclear-powered icebreakers

Icebreakers critical for Arctic sea lanes

- shipping/trade

- security/shipbuilding

- oil spill cleanup

54

55 of 72

US INDIA COOPERATION (UM)

Plan: The United States federal government should significantly increase its scientific exploration research with the Republic of India in the Arctic.

Advantages

    • US/India relations
      • Solve Russia/US Arctic war
      • Solve Ukraine war
    • Research
      • Climate advantage

55

56 of 72

COAST GUARD (UM)

Plan: The United States federal government should conduct exploration and/or development of the Arctic with Russia under the Arctic Coast Guard Forum.

Quasi-military organization under Dept. of Homeland Security

Ocean safety (oil spills)

US influence, conflicts, fish wars

Sea lane control

56

57 of 72

INFRASTRUCTURE/MILITARY BASES (UM)

Plan: United States federal government should significantly increase its development of logistical infrastructure in the Alaskan Arctic. The

Plan: United States federal government should significantly increase its development of the Arctic by building military bases along topical trade routes.

Advantages

-oil development prevent oil prices

- security – deterrence using Arctic military units

57

58 of 72

TRIBES LAND TRUST (UM)

Plan: The United States federal government should increase its development of Native land trusts in Alaska.

Advantages

        • Native self determination/structural violence
        • Settler Colonialism

58

59 of 72

FLOATING NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS (UM)

Plan: The United States federal government should significantly increase its development of the Arctic by deploying Floating Nuclear Power Plants.

Advantages

- Prevent pollution from other

  • Climate

59

60 of 72

SMALL MODULAR REACTORS (SMRS) (UM)

Plan: ??? Deployment of small modular reactors (SMR)s in the Arctic

Advantages

  • Climate
  • Sustainability
  • Military readiness (energy)

60

61 of 72

GREENLAND MINERALS (UM)

Plan: The United States federal government should increase its Arctic development and exploration of minerals in Greenland

Advantages

- Minerals

  • Relations

61

62 of 72

REMOTE MONITORING

Develop uncrewed vehicles for Artic exploration

  • Development of aerial (UAV) and underwater (UUV) uncrewed vehicles that will be used for tracking, navigation and fleet management, domain awareness and ISR, and the protection of critical undersea infrastructure and other assets.
  • Advantages

security (early warning)

resource exploitation

sea lane monitoring

prevent miscalc

hegemony (tech)

62

63 of 72

U.S. NAVY

Strengthening Naval forces in the Arctic

- readiness

- Arctic operations (hardening)

- anti-submarine warfare (ASW)

Advantages

US Hegemony

- SLOCs

- deter Russia/China

- increase in Russian naval access

Economic- protect trade

63

64 of 72

ARCTIC CODE OF CONDUCT

Propose Military Code of Conduct in Arctic

(https://cepa.org/comprehensive-reports/up-north-confronting-arctic-insecurity-implications-for-the-united-states-and-nato/)

obtains a common understanding of what represents acceptable, legitimate, and nonthreatening military operations at peacetime in the region.

Advantages

- prevents miscalc

- facilitates peaceful development

64

65 of 72

US CANDIAN OIL AGREEMENT

Current dispute over territorial claims for continental shelf in Beaufort Sea (task force)

Advantages

US/Canadian relations good

Affirming Law of the Sea (treaties good)

Oil advantage

65

66 of 72

TRIBES

Ban drilling in the ANWR to protect the Gwich’in tribe

Advantages

        • biodiversity (caribou, whales)
        • preserving native Gwich’in cultural rights

(https://alaskawild.org/blog/the-gwichin-and-the-arctic-national-wildlife-refuge/#:~:text=There%20are%20two%20distinct%20Indigenous,in%20greater%20support%20of%20it.)

66

67 of 72

6. NEGATIVE POSITIONS

67

68 of 72

DISADS

    • Politics DA (rotating impacts e.g., govt shutdown)
      • Spending link
      • Countries (Russia, Canada, China) link
      • Treaties link
    • Russia/strategic stability DA (provoking Russia)
    • Russian Politics
    • Russian Economy
    • China DA (provoking China)
    • Russia/China DA (causing Russia/China alliance)
    • Asian/European military trade off DA
    • Environment DA

68

69 of 72

COUNTERPLANS

    • Consult/Conditions CPs
      • NATO
      • Canada
      • Russia
      • Arctic Council
      • Indigenous groups
    • Agent CPs
      • Arctic Council
      • EU does the plan
      • Canada does plan
      • Alaska does plan

69

70 of 72

COUNTERPLANS

    • Process CPs (US foreign policy mechanisms)
      • Environmental Impact Statement (EIS)
      • Public private partnerships
      • Track Two communications

- Do the plan somewhere other than the Arctic

- Advantage CPs directed toward advantage areas)

70

71 of 72

KRITIKS

    • Security
      • Links to aff security scenarios
      • Links to environment

- Settler Colonialism

- links to topic wording (development and exploration are charged words)

    • Capitalism
      • Links to development/minerals definition

71

72 of 72

QUESTIONS?�

72