Ac version 3 Observation 1: sq 4

Domestic Development CP

2AC Domestic Develop Ans

Coop Key

U.S. Domestic development AND international coop is critical to have lasting effect on Nano Development

NSTC 2k

[National Science and Technology Council Committee on Technology Subcommittee on Nanoscale Science, Engineering and Technology, “ NATIONAL NANOTECHNOLOGY INITIATIVE: The Initiative and Its Implementation Plan,” July, http://webcache. googleusercontent.com/search? q=cache:usLHz81XDuAJ:www.wtec. org/loyola/nano/IWGN. Implementation.Plan/nni. implementation.plan.pdf+ united+states+and+ nanotechnology+initiative+and+ %22international+cooperation% 22+OR+multilateral!&hl=en&gl= us]

The promises of nanotechnology can best be realized through long term and balanced investment in U.S. infrastructure and human resources in five R&D categories in particular: (1) Nanostructure properties: Develop and extend our understanding of biological, chemical, materials science, electronic, magnetic, optical, and structural properties in nanostructures; (2) Synthesis and processing: Enable the atomic and molecular control of material building blocks and develop engineering tools to provide the means to assemble and utilize these tailored building blocks for new processes and devices in a wide variety of applications. Extend the traditional approaches to patterning and microfabrication to include parallel processing with proximal probes, selfassembling, stamping, and templating. Pay particular attention to the interface with bionanostructures and bio-inspired structures, multifunctional and adaptive nanostructures, scaling approaches, and commercial affordability; (3) Characterization and manipulation: Discover and develop new experimental tools to broaden the capability to measure and control nanostructured matter, including developing new standards of measurement. Pay particular attention to tools capable of measuring/manipulating single macro- and supra-molecules of biological interest; (4) Modeling and simulation: Accelerate the application of novel concepts and high-performance computation to the prediction of nanostructured properties, phenomena, and processes; (5) Device and system concepts: Stimulate the innovative application of nanostructure properties in ways that might be exploited in new technologies. International Perspective. The United States does not dominate nanotechnology research. There is strong international interest, with nearly twice as much ongoing research overseas as in the United States (see the worldwide study Nanostructure Science and Engineering, NSTC 1999). Other regions, particularly Japan and Western Europe, are supporting work that is equal to the quality and breadth of the science done in the United States because there, too, scientists and national leaders have determined that nanotechnology has the potential to be a major economic factor during the next several decades. This situation is unlike the other post-war technological revolutions, where the United States enjoyed earlier leads. The international dimensions of nanotechnology research and its potential applications implies that the United States must put in place an infrastructure that is equal to that which exists anywhere in the world. This emerging field also creates a unique opportunity for the United States to partner with other countries in ways that are mutually beneficial through information sharing, cooperative research, and study by young U.S. researchers at foreign centers of excellence. A suitable U.S. infrastructure is also needed to compete and collaborate with those groups.

Ban Nano CP

2AC Ban Nano Answers

Coop Key – Ban Fails

Regulations and cooperation between countries before nanotech is developed are key to check a nano arms race – an all-out ban and current treaties won’t work

Gubrud 97 (Mark Avrum Gubrud, a research associate, Center for Superconductivity Research (University of Maryland, College Park), is ''a physicist, writer and social activist, November 1997, http://www.foresight.org/Conferences/MNT05/Papers/Gubrud/, “Nanotechnology and International Security”)

It is highly likely the world will continue to be divided into sovereign states with competing militaries as the nanotechnic revolution approaches, and that, certainly in the United States at least, much of the research leading to it will be sponsored through the military with an eye to military applications. Therefore, if we are to have any hope of avoiding a catastrophic arms race it is essential to consider possibilities for control of nanotechnic arms.¶ It is easy to dismiss the idea of an outright ban on the use of assemblers in weapons manufacture, the use of nanostructures in weapons, or any similar proposal, as impractical and unverifiable. What is often lost sight of, however, is that arms control always involves more than treaties and "national means of verification." Above all, it requires the will to control dangerous and undesirable weapons, and a willingness to cooperate in order to achieve such control. If such will is present among the parties who need to be involved, there is much that can be done.¶ The most threatening aspect of a possible nanotechnic arms buildup is the sheer mass of weaponry that may be produced. Not producing such masses of arms, nor preparing the facilities that may be required for their production, is not an unverifiable commitment. Voluntary transparency, by which nations allow their treaty partners to maintain prescribed monitoring capabilities on national territory, can permit asssurance that no such large-scale buildup is taking place. Such arrangements will only remain effective, however, as long as nations refrain from attempting to settle disputes by violence. Even the mere threat of violence, ordinary "peaceful" confrontation, is likely to provoke withdrawal from a weak control regime in the event of a serious crisis.¶ It should be much easier to put a control regime in place before any large-scale confrontation develops, while nations are at peace, than to stop an arms race in forward gear and ask for intrusive monitoring so that it can be reversed. Unfortunately, arms control, unlike arms acquisition, has no natural constituency other than public anxiety about the danger of war, and this is at its lowest precisely when the greatest progress could and should be made towards eliminating weapons left over from the last arms race, and erecting a structure that can hold off the next one.¶ Probably the most important arms control step that could be taken now, other than continuing the process of nuclear disarmament, is to conclude a general and global treaty banning the placement or testing of destructive devices in orbit, and the targeting of objects in space by ground-based weapons. The possibility of a rapid buildup of space weapons is the most dangerous and destabilizing prospect of 21st century military confrontation. The recent US test of a ground-based antisatellite laser is appalling; let us hope it serves to demonstrate the real continuing danger of a future space arms race.¶ The vexing questions of outer space and sea law, and the division of resources that may become valuable in the future, must be addressed before these issues become a source of international conflict, that is, before the technology is developed which makes what has heretofore been viewed as a "commons" an attractive target for sovereign ownership.¶ In spite of the arguments made above that nuclear weapons might serve as a stabilizing factor in a nanotechnic confrontation, continuing and completing the job of nuclear disarmament is an urgent priority. It is inexcusable to leave our people and our civilization exposed to the danger of nuclear annihilation at a time when there are few sources of tension between the major nuclear powers and none that are considered remotely serious enough to occasion a crisis that could lead to war.¶ Nations must learn to trust one another enough to live without massive arsenals, by surrendering some of the prerogatives of sovereignty so as to permit intrusive verification of arms control agreements, and by engaging in cooperative military arrangements. Ultimately, the only way to avoid nanotechnic confrontation and the next world war is by evolving an integrated international security system, in effect a single global regime. World government that could become a global tyranny may be undesirable, but nations can evolve a system of international laws and norms by mutual agreement, while retaining the right to determine their own local laws and customs within their territorial jurisdictions.