Gonzaga Debate Institute 2010

Hollow Forces Adv. – Impact – Afghanistan Failure = NW

Failure in Afghanistan sends the largest possible signal of american defeat to al-qaeda and international jihadists at large – emboldening new waves of terrorism.

KORB 7 [11.6 Lawrence J., Senior Fellow at the Center for American Progress, & Caroline Wadham, National Security Senior Policy Analyst, November 6, 2007, “The Forgotten Front” Center for American Progress http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2007/11/pdf/afghanistan_report.pdf p. 5] 
Al Qaeda Central is based in the borderlands of Afghanistan and Pakistan and threatens the United States, its allies, and its interests. From their sanctuary in Afghanistan in 2001, Osama bin Laden and Al Qaeda trained for and organized the attacks of September 11. During the U.S.-led invasion of Afghanistan, they were mostly driven from this base. But Al Qaeda has reconstituted itself, and the borderlands of Afghanistan and Pakistan now serve as a territorial hub for Al Qaeda Central, the core leadership of Al Qaeda.5 While Al Qaeda has become a more dispersed, decentralized enemy since 2001, it now uses its sanctuary in the tribal areas of Pakistan to plan and launch attacks against Afghan, NATO-International Security Assistance Force, and U.S. forces in Afghanistan.6 This haven provides Al Qaeda with the space to train, recruit, and rebuild in order to achieve its objective of attacking the United States, its allies and interests. The Afghan insurgency includes elements with purely local objectives—groups who hope to topple the Karzai government and establish control—but it also includes members that are directly linked to the international jihadist network of Al Qaeda. Al Qaeda supports the Taliban and other insurgents by providing training, technical skills, manpower, and financing. A failed mission in Afghanistan could allow the Taliban, Al Qaeda, and its affiliates to gain control of a significant amount of territory in Afghanistan, or even to seize control of the entire state apparatus and operate with impunity. Failure in Afghanistan would be a nearmortal strategic and psychological blow to U.S. efforts in the fight against international terrorist networks and a tremendous boost to the global jihadist movement. Defeat for the United States and the international community would allow Al Qaeda to claim that it has defeated two superpowers in Afghanistan— the United States and the former Soviet Union—and that history is on its side.
Terrorism causes extinction.

Sid-Ahmed 4 (Mohamed, political analyst for the 'Al-Ahram' newspaper, 26 August, [http://weekly.ahram.org.eg/2004/705/op5.htm] AD:6/23/10)JM

A nuclear attack by terrorists will be much more critical than Hiroshima and Nagazaki, even if -- and this is far from certain -- the weapons used are less harmful than those used then, Japan, at the time, with no knowledge of nuclear technology, had no choice but to capitulate. Today, the technology is a secret for nobody. So far, except for the two bombs dropped on Japan, nuclear weapons have been used only to threaten. Now we are at a stage where they can be detonated. This completely changes the rules of the game. We have reached a point where anticipatory measures can determine the course of events. Allegations of a terrorist connection can be used to justify anticipatory measures, including the invasion of a sovereign state like Iraq. As it turned out, these allegations, as well as the allegation that Saddam was harbouring WMD, proved to be unfounded. What would be the consequences of a nuclear attack by terrorists? Even if it fails, it would further exacerbate the negative features of the new and frightening world in which we are now living. Societies would close in on themselves, police measures would be stepped up at the expense of human rights, tensions between civilisations and religions would rise and ethnic conflicts would proliferate. It would also speed up the arms race and develop the awareness that a different type of world order is imperative if humankind is to survive.  But the still more critical scenario is if the attack succeeds. This could lead to a third world war, from which no one will emerge victorious. Unlike a conventional war which ends when one side triumphs over another, this war will be without winners and losers. When nuclear pollution infects the whole planet, we will all be losers.

Hollow Forces Adv. – Impact – Prolif

Collapse of Afghanistan would destroy the NATO alliance, destabilize the region, and cause proliferation of nukes from Pakistan.

Patel 9 (Nirav- research analyst at CSIS, M.A. internt’l rel @ Georgetown, 4-1-9, Small Wars Journal) ET

Afghanistan is not only an Article 5 mission for NATO, but also represents a major test for the organization. Despite beliefs among many in the U.S. national security community that failure for NATO-members to take a lead in Afghanistan operations will sound the death knell for the Alliance; it seems more likely that Afghanistan will impel a major strategic reassessment of the function of NATO. Regardless, these debates often induce policy paralysis and are part of a condition that frames American strategic engagement through a transatlantic perspective. In many ways, cooperating with Europe has almost become an a priori issue of diplomatic protocol and a pillar of politically correct behavior. If America is to succeed in Afghanistan it must begin to think beyond how Europe fits into the equation and start a process of better integrating emerging powers, particularly China into its strategic process. One just needs to look at a map of the region to understand how instability in Afghanistan and Pakistan can destabilize the entire region. Transnational terrorist groups who enjoy safety in the lawless frontiers of Central Asia have exploited weaknesses in Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan which has spilled over into the hinterlands of China. This fear has not gone unnoticed in China where its leaders have taken unprecedented acts (afforded by their autocratic system) to counter radical groups and separatists in its Uighur dominated provinces. Witness the rigidity of Chinese counter-terror policies in the run-up to the 2008 Beijing Summer Olympic games. Perhaps most worrisome to Beijing is the prospect of Pakistan’s weak central government being unable to secure its nuclear weapons --- a strategic concern not only for America but the world. China also views Afghanistan as a promising future business partner. To date, China has linked the largest foreign direct investment project in the history of Afghanistan by winning rights to develop the Aynak copper field. The contract valued at $3.5 billion USD not only demonstrates Chinese willingness to invest in Afghanistan but also its deep pockets and capital. Moreover, Chinese investments could compliment coalition efforts to jumpstart Afghanistan’s economy. Jonathan Landay, an award winning journalist with the McClatchy group notes, “China's investment in Aynak dovetails with the administration's emerging strategy for ending the war in part by delivering on unfulfilled vows to better the lives of the poor Afghans who constitute the vast majority of the Taliban's foot soldiers.” Beijing also sees vast opportunities in developing roads, bridges, and other critical infrastructure projects in Afghanistan. China – as evinced by recent stories highlighting its tremendous capital wealth – is a potentially prime partner in footing the bill for expensive reconstruction operations which hold the key for the future of Afghanistan’s stability. The global financial crisis, however, has made it evident that resource scarcity and domestic political will in the U.S. will eventually limit the amount of assistance the U.S. and Europe can pledge overseas. As the focus turns to support internal economic development in both Europe and the United States public support for Afghanistan is decreasing.