A2: Saudi Arabia Advantage
 
%epartment o$ &omeland Securit". 'Whatis US-VISIT?" Department of Homeland Security. '00(.
http:l/www.dhs.
gov/dhspublic/interapp/content~multi~imagelcontent~multi~image~0006
US-VISIT is a top priority for the U.S. Department of Homeland Securitv because it enhances securitv for our citizens and visitors while facilitatinq legitimate travel and trade
across our borders. US-VISIT helps to secure our borders, facilitate the entrv and exit process, and enhance the inteqrity of our immiqration system while respecting the
privacv of our visitors.
US-VISIT is part of a continuum of security measures that begins overseas and continues through a visitor'sarrival in and departure from the United States. It incorporates
eligibility determinations made by both the Departments of Homeland Security and State.
US-VISIT is hel
 
pinn us demonstrate that we remain a welcoming nation and that we can keep America'sdoors open and our nation secure.
US-ISIT is ke" to e)ecti*e +order control and com+atin terrorism.
eit!l",Beth, Editor of Friday FYI. "Department of Homeland Security Unveils US-VISITProgram" Friday FYI, October31,'00.
~http://www.utdallas.edu/research1frida
The US-VISIT program-- United States Visitor and Immigrant Status Indicator Technology-- is a cornerstone of the Department'sqoals to improve border mananement at
our ports of entrv./" capturing more complete arrival and departure data for those who require a visa to enter the United States, the US-VISIT program will enhance the
securitv of our citizens and visitors while ex
 
US-VISIT uses scannin
 
g equipment to collect "biometric identifiers," such as fingerprints, in an inkless process, along with a digital photograph of the visitor. Together
with the standard information gathered from a visitor about their identity and travel, the new program will verify the visitor'sid en tit and compliance with visa and
immi
 
gration policies. The new procedures are expected to add iust seconds to the entw and exit process.
All data obtained from the visitor is securely stored as part of the visitor'stravel record.This information is made available onlv to authorized officials and selected law
enfor
 
 
At exit points, visitors will check out at kiosks by scanning their visa or passport and repeating the simple inkless fingerprinting process. The exit confirmation will be added
 
2006.
The law requires that an automated entrylexit system be implemented at air and seaports by December31,2003;the50 most highly trafficked land ports of entry by
December31,2004;
DHS i
 
s workinq closelv with the air and sea industrv to explain the requirements of the US-VISIT program. In addition, the US-VISIT Proiect Team will partner with industry
 
 
SDI 05 NSEERS NEG
US ISIT IS #1U#/12 T3 US &3421#% S26U7IT8 T&73U9& ITS US2 3F /I342T7I6S.
US %2:#7T42T 3F ST#T2 '005 (''safetyand Security ofUS Borders/Biometrics," J U I ~13,http:Iltravel.state.o*l*isalimmirants;in$o;in$ol<html).
The use of these identifiers is an important link in U. S. national security, because
fingerprints taken will be compared with similarly collected fingerprints at US ports of
entry under the US-VISIT program. This will verify identity to reduce use of stolen and
counterfeit visas, and protect against possible use by terrorists or others who might
represent a security risk to the U. S. These two important programs (collecting
fingerprints for visa issuance and verifying travelers' fingerprints when they enter the
United States) will make travel to the U.S. safer for legitimate travelers, and also improve
safety and national security for all Americans.
T&2 US2 3F /I342T7I6S I T&2 US ISIT :7397#4 IS IT#1 T3 SU662SS T&2 =#7 3 T27737.
&#7T8 '00 (Maura, Assistant Secretary of State for Consular Affairs, "A Look at the Goals and Challenges of the US-Visit Program,"Before theHouse Committee on Government
Reform,
March 4 , !ttp>l!ra*el.state.o*!wlleal#estimon"!eimon"?@A.!tml).
The inclusion of biometries in international travel documents is an important step in
continuing to improve our ability to verify the identity of prospective travelers to the
United States. especially individuals who might be terrorists, criminals. or other aliens
who present a security risk to the United States. The Department of State is working
hand in hand with our colleagues at the Department of Homeland Security to ensure that
we have a system that facilitates legitimate international travelers and properlv identifies
those who pose a threat to prevent them from entering our country. The continued
commitment to ensuring the sanctity and securitv of our borders and our nation is the
number one priority.
CRIME.
Subcommittee,"  March B@, http://web.lexis-nexis.com/universe/document?_m=98 
1d084M)488a45e05e0748272304388&-dmum=  1 l&wchp=dGLbVl b-~Skvb&-
 md5=d!b"2#383#6d2#8ab7$)2546756~1).
The US-VISIT vromam has intemated well into the CBP's existing programs to
accomplish this mission. CBP has been a full working partner with the US-VISIT
promam office. and we continue to work with the Department of Homeland Security
on this important issue. We have also been working with the Department of State, the
Department of Justice, and other federal agencies and have made great strides in
improving overall border management.
We do this through the collection of pre-arrival, and departure information on
international travelers. To this end, CBP has been able to intemate US-VISIT with
other CBP processes to increase the effectiveness of border management. which
includes biometric and biographical checks against law enforcement databases.
 
In the fall of last year, in anticipation of US-VISIT implementation. 2,100 new
workstations and document readers were deployed to each of the 115 airports and 14
sea ports where US-VISIT is in place. In the fall of 2003. CBP trained over 4.700
CBP officers in the use of US-VISIT and the process and implementation changes
needed to make this an effective program.
Since the initiation of US-VISIT on January 5th. 2004. CBP has processed over 2
million travelers through the US-VISIT with no interruption in the facilitation of
legitimate travelers into the United States. The US-VISIT process of capturing
biometrics. two-finger scans and a digital photo, takes less than 15 seconds. The
automated biometric identification system that stores this data called Ident. takes only
seconds to capture the person's information.
There have been over 195 verified lookout matches since January 5th. 2004. Those
matches have enabled CBP to intercept rapists. drug traffickers, perpetrators of
credit card fraud and convicted armed robbers. Others who had been previously
deported or denied entry and attempted to re-enter using another alias have been
intercepted and prevented from entering the country.
 
Racial profiling is okay in dealing with criminals.
Meeks, Larry G, Multiracial Activist. "Profiling ok sometimes, taking action may not be." The Detroit
News. July 3,2002. ~http://www.detnews.com/2002/detroit/O2071161s06-528047.htm~
Let'sbe practical. If one is trvinq to catch a likelv criminal. I see nothinq wrong with profilinq. The
qovernment targeted organized crime, especially the Mafia. If one is trvinq to break up this group
and catch the "wise guvs," police should look for likelv sus~ectswho are Italian. It makes
no sense to question Chinese people to see if thev belonq to the Mafia, iust to make it appear
fair.
In my opinion, law enforcement should look closelv at people who fit the likelv profile--  age, race, religion, etc. Looking is one thing while taking action is another. As with the Japanese Americans, let'sbe careful and not tread on innocent people'srights. Not everyone who fits the profile is a terrorist.
Racial profiling is acceptable.
Williams, Walter E, Ph.D. in Economics. "Racial Profiling" Capitalism Magazine. April 21,2004. <http://capmag.com/article.asp?lD=3639>
What about using race or ethnicity as proxies for some unobserved characteristic? Some
racial and ethnic groups have a higher incidence of mortality from various diseases than the national averaqe. In1##8,mortality rates for cardiovascular diseases were approximately
30 percent higher among black adults than among white adults. Cervical cancer rates were almost five times higher among Vietnamese women in the United States than among white
women. The Pima Indians of Arizona have the highest known diabetes rates in the world. Prostate cancer is nearly twice as common among black men as white men.
Would one condemn a medical practitioner for advising greater screeninq and monitoring of black males for cardiovascular disease and prostate cancer, or greater screeninq and monitorinq for cervical cancer amonn Vietnamese American females, and the same for
diabetes amonq Pima Indians? It surelv would be racial profilinn-- usinq race as an indicator of a higher probability of some other characteristic.
You might say that'sdifferent and that using racial profiling as a proxy for potential criminal
behavior is indeed racist. Just as race and ethnicitv are not perfect indicators of the risk of
certain diseases, neither is race a perfect indicator of criminal activitv, but thev are
associations, and people act on those associations.
A Washington. D.C., taxicab commissioner, who is black, issued a safetv advisorv urqing D.C.'s 6.800 cabbies to refuse to pick up "dangerous looking" passengers. She described
 
We seriousiv misunderstand the motives of a taxi driver who passes up a black customer if we
use racism as the sole explanation for his behavior. It might be racism, but it might iust as easily
and more probably be a fear of robberv, murder or being taken to a danqerous neiqhborhood.
There are other examples and greater detail of this phenomenon in my recent Cornell Law
and Public Policy Journal article "Discrimination: The Law vs. Morality".
Needless to say, the law-abiding black person who'srefused a taxi ride or pizza delivery or pulled
over by the police is justifiably annoyed and offended. The rightful recipients of his anger should be
those blacks who have made black synonymous with high crime and not the taxi driver or pizza
 
 
 
Racial profiling is a worthy tool. The time and accuracy that it can provide could prevent
another act of terrorism such as 911 1 and save countless lives.
ew 8ork  :ost, Staff Writer Heather MacDonald, January<,'00'
I have drawn the following conclusions from my experiment: First, these self-described
policing experts know absolutely nothing about police work. Anv police investiqation has to
use known facts to narrow the scope of the inauiry, since manpower is finite.
In this case, the FBI would be nuts not to use the nationalities and religious identities of
the 19 hiiackers to search for their co-conspirators amonq flight school alumni, since the
hiiackers themselves define their mission in religious terms.
Yet despite their obvious iqnorance, the police critics in mv canvass and others like them
have controlled the public discourse about law enforcement for the last half-decade,
creating a public relations and policy nightmare for cops.
I also conclude from my experiment that if these professional police-bashers exert the same
influence over counter-terrorism as thev have over domestic policina, we'reall in trouble.
Indeed, we mav have missed an opportunitv to avoid the terror of 911 1 because of their
baneful effects.
Racial profiling does not exist except as a statistical analysis of
probability of crimes
Robert/ork  Solicitor General in the U S . Department of Justice from 1972 to 1977, and as acting Attorney General of the United States from 1973 to 1974 ,circuit judge for the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit from
1982 to 1988, and was nominated by President Ronald Reagan to the Supreme Court in 1987 "Robert Bork on Civil
Liberties after
9111" FrontPage Magazine
?;;'00 ACCORDING TO Ibrahim Hooper, a spokesman for the Council on American-Islamic Relations, American Muslims have already
lost many of their civil rights. "All Muslims are now suspects," Hooper has protested bitterly. The most salient outward sign of this
is said to be the ethnic profiling that now occurs routinely in this country, particularly at airports but elsewhere as well-a form of
discrimination widely considered to be self-evidently evil.
For most of us, airport security checks are the only first-hand experience we have with countermeasures to terrorism, and their intrusiveness and often seeming pointlessness have, not surprisingly, led many people to question such measures in general. But minor vexations are not
the same as an assault on fundamental liberties. &for  ethniLProk1ing, ;hat is another matter, and a serious one. It is serious,-however,not because it is rampant but because it does not exist.
That profiling is w i & doer se is an idea that seems to have originated in connection withblack- civil-ri&s spokesmeFbeganto allege that officers were relying on race as the sole criterion for suspecting someone of c e
Profiling, in other words, equaled racism bv definrfion. =as Heather Mac Donald has5TmmimfatedInAre Cops Racist?,file. rests on a false assumption-namely, that crime rates are constant across evmv racial and ethnic component of our societt Thus, if
blacks, who make up 11 percent of the population, are subject to 20 percent of all police stops on a particular highway, racial
bias must be at fault.
U
 
But the truth is that (to stick to this particular example) blacks do speed more than whites, a fact that in itselfjustifies a heightened
awareness of skin color as one of several criteria in police work. Of course, there is no excuse for blatant racism;but,as Mac
Donald meticulo~~slydocuments in case after case around the country, there is by and large no evidence that police have-relied
 
 
ew 8ork :ost, Staff Writer Heather MacDonald, January 6,'00'
SO far, Attorney General Ashcroft appears admirably indifferent to the hyperventilating
anti-cop crowd as he plots his post-9111 strategy. But don'tassume that some corners
of the government are not second-guessing themselves about potential political fallout.
The lmmiqration and Naturalization Service, for example, has made no effort to
track down Middle Eastern visa violators unless asked to do so by the FBI, for fear
of the racial profiling charqe, reports the New York Times.
A stereotype is nothing more than a compilation of facts that serve to focus American
efforts on protecting national security.
ew 8ork :ost, Staff Writer Heather MacDonald, January 6,'00'
IN 1996, Vice President Al Gore chaired a commission to strengthen airline defenses against terrorism. When word leaked out that the commission was considerinq a profiling system that would take into account an air passenqer'snational oriain and ethnicity, among other factors, assessinq the securitv risk he posed, the anti-law
enforcement, as well as the Arab, lobbywent ballistic.
The counsel for the ACLU fired off an op-ed to the Washington Post complaining that
"profiles select people who fit the stereotype of a terrorist. Thev frequentlv
discriminate on the basis of race, reliqion or national oriqin."
But a stereotvpe in this case is nothinq more than a compilation of facts about who has attacked
American interests in the past and who, qiven what we know about the networks that promote
anti-American terrorism, is most likelv to do so in the future. It is al Qaeda and its brethren that
have defined themselves by reliaion and regional interest, not American law enforcement.
Muslims and Arabs are detained more frequently because their
countries of origin breed more terrorism
Robert<0rk  Solicitor General in the %S.Department of Justice from 1972 to 1977, and as acting Attorney General of the  United States from 1973 to 1974 ,circuit judge for the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit from 1982 to
1988, and was nominated by President Ronald Reagan to the Supreme Court in 1987 "Robert Bork On Civil Liberties after
911 1"Front Page Magazine ?;;'00
 
An irony here is that the procedures being deplored are hardly new, although they are being imposed with greater rigor.
The current system has its roots in the 1950's in the first of a series of statutes ordering the Immigration and
Naturalization Service (INS) to require aliens from countries listed as state sponsors of terrorism, as well as from
countries with a history of breeding terrorists, to register and be fingerprinted, to state where they will be while in the
U.S., and to notify the INS when they change address or leave the country.
- Historically, however, the INS has been absurdly lax about fulfilling its mandate.When a visitor with illegal status-
someone,for
example, thought to have overstayed a student visa or committed a c r i m e s apprehended, the usual practice of
immigration judges has been to release him upon the posting of a bond, unless he is designated a "person of interest."
In the latter case, he is held for deportation or criminal prosecution and given a handbook detailing his rights, which
include access to an attorney. It is a matter of dispute whether the proceedings before an immigration judge can be
closed, as authorities prefer, or whether they must be open; the Supreme Court has so far declined to review the
practice.
w d u r e s are now being adhered to more strictly, and this is what has given rise to accusations of ethnic or relic-g.
But such charges are as beside the point as in the case of domestic police work, if not more so. There is indeed a
correlation
LxEuXL
detention and ethnicitv or religion, but that is because most of the countries identified
as state sponsors or breeders of m n
fact, populated by Muslims and Arabs.
 
SECURITY MEASURES TAKEN BY INS OFFICIALS.
ARCOS 2004 (Crecensio, Director of International Affairs in the Department of Homeland
Security, "The Role of the Department of Homeland Security Overseas," June 7,
http://www.e'i(ae.*'+eea'!+*me/andeen~S40.!m).
Each year, we welcome nearly600 million workers, tourists, students, business travelers, and
families at our air, land, and sea ports of entry. DHS is implementina United States Visitor and
lmmiarant Status Indicator Technoloav (USVISIT)-a continuum of securitv measures that
benins overseas at the Department of State'svisa-issuina posts and continues throuqh arrival
in and departure from the United States. Usina biornetrics such as diaital, inkless finaerscans
and diaital photonraphs, the identity of visitors reauirina a U.S. visa is now verified upon entrv
in order to ensure that the person crossina our border is the same person who received the
visa. Upon exit, a visitor will check out bv scanninn his or her two index fingers--verifvinn his
or her departure and enablina us to know that he or she comdied with the terms of admission.
For travelers, the process is fast and simple and the biornetrics h e l secure~ their identities in
the event that their travel documents are lost or stolen. US-VISIT entry procedures are
currently in place at115 airports and14 seaports. This year, US-VISIT will be expanded to the
50 busiest land ports of entry. Since the oroaram beaan,209 individuals (out of some2.4 
million entrants processed) have been matched aaainst the FBI'swatch lists.
7#6I#1 :73FI1I9 4#2S ST#TISTI6#1 S2S2.
4#6%3#1% '005 (Heather,contributing editor to City Journal, a conse~ativeNew York City publication, and the author of Are
Cops Racist?, "Antitemrism Efforts Targethg Arab Americans are Justified," ((++a/ene(.a/e'*u.!*m+e~/e(/"
v'n=224&~/b=S%&1*~=mu~main&~~!(=ba~i~&!=l&st e=
17&tbst=ts_basic&tab=1 &(b='a!ia/'*i/in&d*!9um=:30 10269234&fail=O&bConts=79).
The debate around racial profiling is ultimately a debate about how to interpret numbers--specifically,
the high stop and arrest rates of minorities. The people screaming about racial profiling hope to
persuade the public that i the police stop and arrest proportionally more blacks than whites, for
example, it's because officers are racist. But there's obviously another possible explanation: Blacks are 
stopped and arrested more than whites because they commit more crime; racism has nothing to do with 
i t To see how this debate plays out in practice, let's look at a beloved statistic of anti-police activists in
New York. Blacks are 25 percent of New York City's population but a'e the subject of 50 percent of
the stop-and-frisks conducted by the New York Police Department. Now this statistic provides clear
evidence of police bias, as the activists claim, only if  a// groups commit crime at equal rates. But the
facts are these: Blacks in New York are 13 times more likely to perpetrate a violent assault than whites,
according to victim identifications of their assailants. Blacks commit about 62 percent of the assaults in
New York City, so they are actually being frisked less than what their level of crime would predict.
Crime data and community complaints about crime, not racism, send the police to minority
 
most people on the street a'e of the same race. Instead, the police look at suspicious behavior and
location-a known drug corner, say-in determining whom to stop. This is just good police work. The
result of the campaign against the police has been officer demoralization and unnecessarily strained
policecommunity relations in minority neighborhoods. In those cities where the anti-police rhetoric has
 
D'SOUZA 2005 (Dinesh, "Some Racial Discrimination  is Justified,"  ((++dene(.de'*u.!*m/e'v/e(+"
v'n=224~b=S%&1*~=mu~main&'~(=bai!&!=26& (e= 17&(b(=(~-bai&(ab=/&&b7a- 
!ia/'*i~&d*!9um=:3"/"/2523#&ai/="&b*n(=7#).
At this point, sociologists are prone to launch into tortuous speculations about how
historically victimized groups "internalize" their white oppressors' bigotry. But the
explanation for the actions of the nonwhite cabdriver can far more simply and
plausibly be attributed to two key facts. First, black males are six to ten times more
likely to be convicted of violent crimes than white males. Second, more than 25
percent of black males between the ages of fifteen and thirty-five are. at any given
time, in prison, on probation, or on parole. (For whites, the comparable figure is about
5 percent.) Far from being a myth. the reality is that voung black males are. by far.
the most violent arouu in U. S. society. These are uncomfortable social facts. but they
are facts. Consequently, the treatment accorded young African American males by
police officers. cabdrivers, storekeepers. and others cannot be attributed to irrational
prejudice. It is more likely the product of rational discrimination. In a situation in
which we have limited information about individuals (cabdrivers, for instance, are not
in a position to know their clients personally), we must make woup judgments based
on probability. The concept of rational discrimination is easier to grasp if we look
outside the racial context. Insurance companies, for example, charge teenage boys
higher car insurance rates than teenage girls (or older drivers, for that matter). The
reason isn't sexism or antimale prejudice; the statistical reality is that, on average,
teenage boys are far more likely than teenage girls to bash their cars. So the insurance
company is treating groups differently because they behave differently.
 
Max/oot. Contributing editor, The Weekly Standard. The Kay findings point to its importance, not its demise. The Weekly Standard. February16,2004.  http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content~Public/Articles10001000/003/699czboz.asp.
In the first place, preemptive war--or even preventive (some say preventative) war where no
threat is imminent--was hardly invented bv the Bush administration. It has long been an a~cepted option not only for the United States, but for other nations as well. In his new book,
"The Breaking of Nations," Robert Cooper, a career British diplomat who is now a senior European Union official, writes that "the War of the Spanish Succession, fought to ensure
that the crowns of France and Spain were not united. . . was a preventative war. No one attacked Britain; but if Britain had allowed the two countries to unite it would by then have been unable to deal with an attack from the resulting superpower."
You don'thave to reach back to the 18th century for instances of preventive military action.In  1#62 the Kennedy administration seriously considered a military strike to take out the Soviet missiles in Cuba, even though it was hiqhlv unlikely they would ever be fired against the United States. Kennedy wisely refrained from launching World War Ill, but he did undertake a naval blockade (he called it a "quarantine"), which is regarded under international law as an act of war.
Recent U.S. history is replete with smaller-scale instances of preventive action, from the
invasion of the Dominican Republic in1#65 to the invasion of Grenada in1#83.In neither
case had there been a direct attack on the United States; the threats being addressed Ithe rise of communism in the Dominican Republic, the cultivation of Grenada as a Soviet and Cuban base) were laraely speculative, and many critics charged that they were being blown
out of proportion.m Presidents Johnson and Reaqan, respectively, thouqht the dangers grave enough to risk American lives.
More recently, in1##3-#4,the Clinton administration seriously considered launching a war to prevent North Korea from acquiring nuclear weapons. Clinton didn'tact that time, but in 1##8 he did launch strikes against al Qaeda training bases in Afghanistan, a pharmaceutical factory in Sudan. and various Iraqi military installations. The attack on Afghanistan might be seen as a punitive strike since it came after al Qaeda had bombed two U.S. embassies in Africa. But the Sudan strike was mainly preemptive. As recounted by former National Security Council staffers Daniel Benjamin and Steve Simon in their book "The Age of Sacred Terror," the pharmaceutical plant was targeted because it was suspected of makinq chemical weapons for al Qaeda. National Security Adviser Sandy Berqer said he wanted to take it out before nerve gas showed up on the New York City subway.
The Clinton administration launched another preventive war the following year by attacking
Serbia in cooperation with its NATO allies. When the military operation started, the ethnic
cleansinq of Albanian Kosovars was only iust beginninq. The NATO action, as Gen. Wesley
 
destabilization" (italics added). We are today keeping thousands of soldiers in Bosnia and
 
 
 
Preemptive strategies are key to defense of the United States against unpredictable
attacks and increase our ability to act multilaterally
Los Angeles Times3 - 1 # - ;(http://www.commondreams.org/headlines05/03I9-01 .htm)
WASHINGTON -Two-yearsa$ter-t!e-U.S.-in*aion-o$-lr-aqt!e-:entaqon-
!as$ormallincluded-in-kev ~-~ strategic plans provisions for launchina preemptive strikes against
nations thouqht to pose a threat to the United States.The doctrine also now stipulates that the U.S. will use
"active deterrence" in concert with its allies "if we can" but could act unilaterally othetwise, Defense officials said.The
changes codify the more assertive defense ~ o l i c vadopted bv the Bush administration since the
Sept. 1 1 attacks and are included in a "National Military Strategy" and "National Defense Strategy," reports that are part
of a comprehensive review of military strategy conducted every four years."The president has the obligation to 
protect the country,"said Douglas J. Feith, the Defense Department'sundersecretary for policy. "And I don'tthink that there'sanything in our Constitution that says that the president should not protect the country unless he gets some non-
American'sparticipation or approval of that." Pentagon managers use the strategic plan to guide such decisions as where
to place bases, which bases to eliminate, what weapons to buy and where to position them. The heads of the United
States'regional commands across the globe, in turn, use the strategy to prioritize spending and form strategies for
eliminating threats in their regions."The potentiallv catastrophic impact of an attack aqainst the United
States, its allies and its interests mav necessitate actions in self-defense to preempt adversaries
before thev can attack,"the National Military Strategy states. A previous version, compiled in 1997, did not include
plans for preemptive attacks.However. Feith said that the United States would for the first time invite
close allies such as the United Kingdom to review classified portions of U.S. defense strategv as
part of the Quadrennial Defense Review,a four-year military policy and spending plan. But the new strategy document further shifts the nation from the Cold War strategy of containing Eastern Europe to a global strategy of taking
on enemies that emerge unexpectedly-as the administration argues Afghanistan did after the Sept. 11 attacks-and even terrorist organizations within friendly nations.It appears to move the nationfurther from reliance on such
international coalitions as NATO and more towardwhat Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld has called"coalitions
of the willinq" under clear American leadership,analysts said. "NATO is kind of missing in action now in their strategy," said Loren Thompson, a military analyst with the Lexington Institute, a public policy group in Arlington,Va.  "During the Clinton years coalition warfare with the other members of NATO was a centerpiece to our strategy, and now
the administration is expecting almost nothing from the Europeans." In some cases, respected global organizations seem
to be viewed with suspicion. In describing the vulnerabilities of the United States, the document uses strong language to
list international bodies -such as the International Court of Justice, created under a treaty that the United States has
declined to sign-alongside terrorists. "Our strength as a nation-state will continue to be challenged by those who employ a strategy of the weak using international [forums], judicial processes and terrorism," the document states. The concern,
Feith explained, was that some nations would try to criminalize American foreign policy by challenging it in international
courts. During the Cold War, the United States used the United Nations and the North Atlantic Treaty Alliance in an effort
to build world consensus against anticipated threats from the Chinese and the now dissolved Soviet bloc.The new
strategy highlights the United States'increasing inability to predict where the next conflict will
occur, Feith said. "I don'tthink that the world gives us the luxury of pickina areas," Feith said. "We
have interests all over the world. Idare say that if anvbodv before Se~tember11,2001, was listing
places that we would want to focus on as a matter of prioritv, Afghanistan would have been rather
low on the list."
 
NSEERS NEG
Preemptive strategy is necessary to prevent crisis from escalating into war and to securing the
homeland in general
- ------
- -
The Pentaaon on Fridav released its annual National ~ e f e n s Strateav that em~hasizesaailitv to
deal with strateaic uncertaintv and ~reventativeactions, includinare-em~tive strikes, to deal with
~ o t e n t i acrisesl. Undersecretary of Defense Douglas Feith said at a news conference that
three _of the main ideas concernina the defense strateav are: the need to deal with strateaic
uncertaintv: the value of early measures to Drevent Droblems from becomina crises, or crises
from becomina wars; and the im~ortanceof buildina ~ a r t n e r s hca~acitv~The. unclassified
National Defense Strategy is the guidance for the Pentagon to implement the National Security
Strategy issued in Sept. 2002.It also serves as the foundation for the Quadrennial Defense
Review (QDR) process, expected to be completed by early next year. Feith said the new defense
strategy reaffirmed the key concepts that were the framework for the QDR of 2001, and also
"incorporate lessons learned over the last four years." "The world has changed very substantially
since the end of the Cold War," he said." The kinds of structures that existed during the Cold War
don'tnow exist. That'spart of the reason that we're emphasizing strategic uncertainty." Feith said
"earlv measures," or ~reventivemeasures. were a critical com~onentof active. lavered defense.
"These are all actions that are taken to prevent Droblems from becomina crises. as Isaid, and
crises from becomina wars," he said. Feith said the term "preventive" is not the same thing as
preemption, but he defended the pre-emptive policy adopted by the Bush administration. "Under
the most dangerous and compelling circumstances, prevention might require the use of force," he
said. The new defense strateav defines four strateaic obiectives, Feith said. The first is securina
the United States from direct attack. The second is securina strateaic access and retainina
freedom of action for kev reaions and lines of communication and the alobal commons. The third
objective, he said, is strengthening alliances and partnerships. And the fourth is establishing
security conditions conducive to a favorable international order. At the news conference, Rear
Admiral William Sullivan, vice director of the Pentagon'sStrategy, Plans and Policy Office, also
unveiled the parallel National Military Strategy. The military strategy makes operational guidance
for implementing the National Defense Strategy."It talks about ~rotectinathe homeland, about
~reventinaconflicts and s u r ~ r i s eattacks. and about ~revailina,in the event that we actuallv
need to aet into conflict," Sullivan said. "The principles that are espoused stress agility, the ability
 
 
Us-Saudirelations are !i! now
:&3UST3 6&73I612 2=S S27I62S 05("AROUND THE REGION" May 19
!ttp>;;we+.leDis-neDis.com;uni*erse;documentE me+a$<@?cec050@a+A0@5??@aed@AGdocnu m''Gwc!pd91+l+- HSk+Gmd505B5@B$'0aeBed+d5a'?BA?de<'e)
ENERGY -  ------- ---
Houston meeting for Saud~Aramco
I n a siqn thatU.S.-Saudi relations may be improvina, the board of Saudi Arabian Oil Co..
or Saudi Aramco, will convene in Houston this week, revivina an annual tradition that had been
suspended.
The board of Saudi Aramco had until recently met once a year in Houston. But the company canceled theU.S. meeting in2004 because of difficulties obtaining visas and in2003  because of the Iraq War.
Both gatherings were instead held in Europe, where Saudis say they aren'tstigmatized upon
entry.
The ambiguous status of the Houston event has been a proxy for the chill in overallU S -  Saudi relations since the2001 terrorist attacks.
The visa issue was highlighted in Saudi Crown Prince Abdullah'svisit last month to President
Bush'sranch in Crawford, when the two leaders pledged "great efforts to overcome obstacles
facing Saudi businessmen and students who wish to enter theU.S."
US- Saudi relations !i! on oil prices
%I4372, 05 (9U8 Staff writer, "Saudis,USseek to calm oil markets"Financial TimesApril 26, http://web.lexis-nexis.com/universe/document?
~m=a8074a32a18327alf82b726b19439a92&~docnum=3&wch p=dGLbVlb-zSkVb&- mdS=fc3f44d95ae9bebOlOaa2~3dcl le7562)
TheUS and Saudi Arabia, the world'slargest consumer and exporter of oil respectively,
sought to calm markets yesterday as Crown Prince Abdullah and his ministers laid out their
kingdom'sinvestment plans to President George W. Bush.
"Both nations pledae to continue their co-operation so that the oil s u ~ p l vfrom Saudi Arabia
will be available and secure," a ioint statement declared, celebratinq six decades ofrelations
between the two nations.
Stephen Hadley, the US national security adviser, told reporters at the president'sTexas ranch that plans to increase capacity should be "good news" for the markets.
Analysts said the figures presented were not new, and that Saudi Arabia alone could not have
a major impact on markets. Nonetheless. crude oil prices fell for the first time in five sessions
as the two leaders discussed a broad ranae of issues, including Saudi Arabia'spolitical reform
 
 
who last metin 2002 at the ranch, had develo~eda "very Mr Hadley said, with "a very good spirit
in the room".
 
 
BBC,05 ("Saudi TV discusses crown prince'strip to US" Kingdom of Saudi Arab~aTV1, May6 !ttp>;;we+.leDis- neDiscom;uni*ers;documentEeDis.com;uni*ers;documentE.m+@ec<aBm
 b8e!6a611237!8!72e!a34b1#680682&~d*!nu
mGwc!pd91+l+-Sk+Gmd5$ad3a?Aa5c?e5++$a3??@'<a5A@dd)
Saudi Crown Prince Abdallah'sv i s ~fort talks with US President George W. Bush was the topic discussed on Saudi TV's"Face to face" programme on 30 April2005. The 35-minute episode was entitled "A political and economic analysis of Crown Prince Abdallah'svisit to the
United states".- - - - - - -
The guests in the studio were introduced as writer and political analyst Salih Bin-Abd-al-
Rahman al-Mani, Saudi Consultative Council Member Usamah Bin-Muhammad Makki al-Kurdi
and Virginia Golden executive manager Muzhir Samman, from Washington via satellite.
Overview
The presenter first asked Al-Mani for a brief overview ofUS-Saudi relations. Al-Mani began
by describing therelations as "historic and strategic" dating back to the meeting between the late
King Abd-al-Aziz and former US President Roosevelt. Theserelations, he went on, developed in
many ways and theUS-Saudi friendship developed into a strategic partnership" but were strained
following the September 11 attacks. However, he said, two major events last year opened a window of
opportunity: first was the conqress report on the September 11 attacks that "clearlv stated that the
Saudi qovernment was not involved in the September attacks" which "exonerated the Saudi
aovernment and officials". Secondlv the US courts dismissed all cases aqainst the Saudi aovernment.
Asked about the economic aspects ofUS-Saudi relations, Al-Kurdi said US companies have clreatlv helwed the Saudi economy and the level of trade between the two countries rose to 26bn dollars in2004. He added that Saudi Arabia is one of the main economic partners of the
-US.
The presenter then asked about the main political issues discussed during the meeting. Al-Mani said the visit was "successful" becauseit was well-timed and had been well prepared. He said the meeting was "strategic" becauseit came at a time when theUS administration had started to rethink policies adopted during its first term. Now, he said, there seems to be "more rationality and wisdom" in US foreign policy, especially as the State Department had appointed two
 
 
NSEERS NEG
The United States doesn't see the piracy in the Malacca Straits as a priority
CHARLES GLASS, The London Independent, January11,2004
Although the shipping world is demanding '*(e!(ii*nn,- nei(e'(e%ni(ed9a(i*nn*~(&
United States sees piracy as a priority. The American Government's concern for seafarers'
security is no greater than its attention to the health and safety of industrial and mining workers in the
United States, where protective regulations are vanishing in the quest for easier profits. The only way to
make Washington, and thus the rest of the maritime world, take notice is to project a connection
between the pirate enemy and global terrorism. The connection is not far-fetched.
Private security firms. such as Tim Spicer's Aegis in London and British- American Defence Ltd in
Dubai, have been warning for the past few years that a seaborne terrorist attack is inevitable. The IMB 
and the US Coast Guard, charged with protecting American ports from attack, concur. Air and land
transport routes have come under tighter scrutiny since I 1 September 2001, but improvements to
maritime security are few. An oil tanker can carry a load that is far. far more explosive than any civil
aircraft. And most piracy, including the seizure of oil tankers, takes place near countries with powerful
Islamist movements-Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines, Yemen and Somalia. Lloyd's List reported
on 4 November that Indonesia is "the global black spot" with 87 attacks in the first nine
months of this year-"the number of attacks in the Malacca Straits leaped fi-om 11 in
2002 to 24 this vear." .
Indonesia, which consists of two thousand islands: is the world's most populous Muslim country.
It has experienced decades of repression by a kleptocratic military, conlmunal violence and the
degradation of a once vibrant economy. Radical Islamists have made it the focus of their
activity and recruitment in Asia.
Poor Indonesians who want money may become thieves on land or sea, while those who want
change become Muslim fundamentalists-lndonesia put an end to secular dissent in 1965 when
General Suharto massacred at least half a million suspected Communists and leftists. There are
already indications that a major terrorist incursion against the West or one of its satellites will
come from the sea. The use of  machne-puns, mother shivs and attack craft suggests that
modern pirates are either in the military or have had military training. Naval patrols
from Indonesia's more remote islands. where the Navy has traditionally complained
that the Army takes all the spoils, have participated in pirate attacks. Some pirates
have abseiled down from helicopters onto ships. The business has become too
lucrative to leave to amateurs, and the targets are too tempting for anyone to assume
tel~oristswill ignore them.
 
 
NSEERS NEG
The commander of the US Pacific Fleet says there will be no troop assistance in
the Malacca Strait
Donald Urquhart, Business Times, May 9,2005
In an apparent nod to the art of diplomacy, the US has sai-dthifhxl'Ittor&taks&
Malaysia, Indonesia and Singapore can do a 'very adequate' job of safeguarding
security in the Malacca Straits.
'The straits are important and I believe, first and foremost, the responsibility for
security of the straits belongs to the nations that occupy the littoral lands andI 
believe that's exactlv the way it should be,' newly appointed Chief of the US Pacific
Command, Admiral William Fallon. said in Jakarta.
'I believe the nations of the region can do a very adequate job in taking care of this 
without ow help,' he said, according to a Bloomberg report. 'I would encourage
them to continue to do so.'
US canJtsa*e Indonesia Rajan 4enon, SW, The National Interest. Another  Year of Living Dangerously, Fall '00B, PS
But the United States should not delude itself. To think that American actions can avert Indonesia's
collapse is hubris or folly, possibly both. The problems gnawing away at Indonesia are numerous and
complex. They may prove beyond the control of Indonesians, let alone Americans and other outsiders. If
Indonesia breaks apart despite efforts at preventive diplomacy, the United States and its partners must
develop plans to act on several fronts, together with international organizations. The challenges will include
evacuating foreign nationals; keeping the Malacca Strait and the Lombok Strait open in the face of threats
that could close them; protecting shipping from sabotage, a((a!k and piracy; guarding and transporting
refugees to predesignated safe stations; stockpiling and conveying supplies for their care; organizing
economic aid for post-war reconstruction; promoting ceasefires between government forces and separatist
guerillas; and, perhaps, interposing forces between combatants so that ceasefires last and subsequent
political negotiations have a chance to succeed.
 
 
Lah
U.S. Indonesian relations will remain resilient as long as the U.S. sees Indonesia as a key ally
Huhtala, 05 (Marie T., Deputy Assistant Secretary of State, Committee on International
Relations Subcommittee on Asia and the Pacific U.S. House of Representatives, March 10,
2005, ((++~iaka'(a.uemba~*v+i'!+u-ind*-'e/a(i*n.(d)
The United States views Indonesia as the cornerstone of regional security in
Southeast Asia and a key trade partner. U.S. interests in the region depend on
Indonesia's stability and economic growth.
Indonesia's path to peace and prosperity leads only through democracy, the United
States believes. Although establishing lasting democratic institutions in a country as
large and diverse as Indonesia may entail many initial struggles, it is the best way to
ensure that government makes its decisions based on the interests of the people, not
 just the interests of the leaders.
The United States considers Indonesia a valued f?iend in Asia and supports its efforts to
recover its national balance. Indonesia's success will enhance security and economic recovery
in the entire Southeast Asian region. The United States strongly supports Indonesia's political
reforms and pledges its cooperation and assistance as the prwess of chawe continues so that the
world's fourth largest nation can make permanent its status as the largest democracy in East
Asia, and the third largest democracy in the world.
The U.S. has good relations with Indonesia
Johnston, 05 (Tim, writer and publisher for the Turkish Weekly, 7 May 2005,
"US-Indonesia Relations Take Turn for the Bettery', Turkish Weekly)
This is expected to include talks on restoration of full military ties. Cooperation was suspended
 
Since then. Indonesia has allowed East Timor to vote for indaendence and has also itself 
become a democracy with the ouster of the authoritarian former resident  Suharto in
1998.Indonesia has been pushing-for better ties for some time. Andi Mallarancen~,is
spokesman for President Yudhovono."We are hawwy to have a good relationship
with the United States." Andi Mallarangenn said. "I think our relationships are
improving and we would like to have more cooweration with the United States.
economically esuecially but in other fields as well like militan coor>eration."TheU.S.
military provided massive help in response to the  December 26 Indian Ocean tsunami, which
devastated Indonesia's Ace11 Province and left 165,000  people dead there. Since then,
momentum has been building for full military ties which the United States has argued will also
help combat terrorism. Indonesia has suffered major attacks by its homegrown Islamic terrorist
group, Jemaah Islamiyah.
 
 
Indonesia's economy is strong making it a strong democracy
AFX, 05 (AD(-Asia, May 6,2005, "Indonesia central bank sees rupiah firmness sustained by
stable economy")
The rupiah's firmness following a recent rebound against the US dollar is expected to -.
continue gven Iidonesia's stable economic f k n d a ~ u s i t i v e c u r r e n t a e e o ~
m d political stability. Bank Indonesia deputy governor Aslim Tadiuddin said.
'Today the rupiah reached 9,450 (to the US dollar) and I expect in the future it
will be stronger,' Tadjuddin told reporters.
'Whv? Because fundamental factors are stable, the current account is still positive,
and our government now is strow and democratic,' he said.
At the midday break, the rupiah was at 9,47219,478 against the dollar, gaining strength from
Wednesday's level of 9,500/9,5 10. The financial markets were closed on Thursday for a
public holiday. The rupiah has been steadily rising since rebounding from a low of 9,700 last
week.Foreign exchange dealers attributed the recovery to <ank Indonesia's move to mop up
excess liqujdity from the system and curb dollar demand. in order to defend the local
currencv.These measures include raisin^ its key interest rates and resuming the  weekly 
auction of  its <ank Indonesia Certificates (SBI), instead of once every two weeks as held
~reviously.
Indonesia can combat terrorism on its own and is stable
Agence France-Presse, 02 (August 1,2002, "Indonesia 'Can Handle Terrorism
Alone"', www.whywar.com)
Indonesia does not need US military assistance in its campaign against terrorism since the
country's armed forces are pow& enough to canv out the task. Defence Minister Matori Abdul
Jalil said today.
"America knows exactly how powerful our armed forces are." Jalil  told a Dress brief in^
before this week's visit b US Secretary of State Colin Powell.
He was commenting on whether Powell's visit should be seen as additional pressure on
Indonesia to increase its efforts to combat terrorism.
 
Jalil said Jakarta's war on terrorism was "not because of the result of demands by the US
but it is because of the ~overnment'sdetermination."
 
 
US-:akistan 7elations 7emain Sta+le
repon J0(Michael, President Emeritus at the Henry L. Stimson Center, August8,2003, "US-Pakistan Relations: Preventing a Second Divorce")
. -- -
secu r~tyIn-t h*-pastJh - e e n n a t i o r i a - l i n t e r e s t h a s k e n - e p k transfers, and by the use of proxies to shape the future of Kashmir and Afghanistan. Have these policies advanced Pakistan'sdomestic security and foreign policy?
Like General Zia before him, President Musharraf might believe that
Pakistan'snational interest requires shading or denying the truth. He would not be
the first Pakistani leader to believe that Washington will forgive much t o maintain
the benefits of military cooperation. Nor would he be the first to be surprised by
faulty assumptions.
I n the future, any one or a combination of these three issues could bend US ties
to the breaking point. The shift could be quite sudden, sparked by a catastrophic
act of terrorism, tumultuous regional developments, or the discovery of another
illicit nuclear transaction.
US-Pakistan relations will r e m n steady only as long as our national
interests r - . Pakistan's leaders have every right to pursue policies that place
;elations with the United States at risk. To do so, however, increases the likelihood
of a second divorce. Alternatively,if Pakistan'sleaders could begin to view national
security in a different light, and to jettison policies that have injured Pakistan in the
past, Washington needs to respond by providing far more help than President Bush
has pledged.
US-:akistan 7elations are Stron and1on-Term
:owell J0(ColinL.,Secretary of State, US Dept. of State, "The Promise of OurPartnership,"htt~://usinfo.state.sov/sa/Archive/2004/Mar/l7-389897html)
Boldly confronting a host of difficult challenges, Pakistan is poised to build
a better future for its citizens. With conviction and courage, Pakistan has pressed
forward in the fight against global terrorism and has taken strong steps to prevent
the further proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. The Pakistani people
have reached out a hand of reconciliation to their neighbors. On the domestic
front, Pakistan is battling extremism and forging ahead with the difficult task of
economic reform and democratic institution building.
Any one of these efforts could serve as the defining challenge of a
 
stability. Ln all of w e critical efforfS, the United States stands with Pakistan in
partnership, With you, we look forward to the day when you and your children will
taste the full fruits of democracy, prosperity, and peace. Sme3 d - a nG-P~ at ~ m p g r a r v
convenienc~7llt t b q u n r
d u
 
 
NSEERS NEG
6ommandos in t!e U.S. and India are read" to make sure $undamentalists in :akistan donJtet control o$ nuclear weapons
9lo+al Securit" ewswire 0B (a subsidiary of the National Journal Group, "Pakistan:Pentagon Unit Trains to Disarm Pakistani Nuclear Weapons," 10/30/01, online, nti.org, accessed through googIe.com on 7/17/05)
An elite Pentagon unit trained to find and disarm nuclear weapons in foreign countries has
explored plans for an operation inside Pakistan in case of a fundamentalist takeover in the
country, journalistSe"mour &ers! reported in this week'sNewYorker. The unit has
"apparently" received assistance from the Israeli special operations unit Sayeret Matkal since
Sept.11, Hersh said.
U.S. intelligence officials said they believed an Indian commando unit was also preparing to neutralize the Pakistani nuclear arsenal in case of an imminent threat (see GSN, Oct. 22)
T!ere is no daner o$ a $undamentalist takeo*er in :akistan
United :ress International 0 (via ClariNet, "Strong-minded General to Visit Washington,"9/23/03, online, quickstart.clari.net, accessed through google.com on 7/17/05)
Pakistani authorities arrested more than a dozen military officials for allegedly having ties to the al-Qaida terrorist outfit. The arrests encouraged speculations in the Western media that Muslim militants have a stronger influence in the Pakistan army than the government admits.
But at that critical juncture, the U.S. State Department came to Pakistan'srescue.A State Department official, when asked to comment on the arrests, said the United States believed,
"Pakistan has a professional army...and there'sno danger of a fundamentalist takeover."
Musharraf is taking extensive actions to prevent a coup.
Source: Burgess 2003, (Stephen F., Professor of Poli. Sci.@ Hofstra University,
Struggle for the Control of Pakistan, 2003, ONLINE, au.af.mil, accessed via google 7-
15-
A third danger is for Islamists to join forces with sympathizers in the military in 
overthrowing the Musharraf government and moving Pakistan back in an anti-U.S.
 
the U.S. war against terrorism, intensify operations in Kashmir that could lead to
nuclear war, and help the Taliban to return to power in Afghanistan. An Islamist
regime in Pakistan would most likely proliferate WMD and become part of the "axis
of evil."
President Musharraf has done everything to prevent such a scenario, purging the
military and ISI, clamping down on Islamist leaders and groups, and fortifying his own
position as president and commander-in-chief of the armed forces. He has also moved
carefully on the Kashmir issue, trying not to inflame public opinion against him.
Musharraf will manage the October elections and the aftermath so that Pakistan does
not return to the cormpt and divisive politics of the 1990s and Islamist groups are kept
 
Source:Pradesh 2005, (Andhra, sw, The Hindu, "India-US relations at "all-time
high", Jan. 29 2005, ONLINE, accessed via google 7-17-2005)
-
HYDERABAD, JAN.28. The Bush administration is likely to firm up its position
on restructuring the U.N. Security Council after receiving a report from the U.N.
Secretary-General in March, the U.S. Ambassador to India, DavidC. Mulford,
indicated here today.
To a question on India seeking permanent membership in theU.N. body, he said the
U.S. had not made any policy decision whether the Security Council should be re-
structured.
He said the India-U.S. relations were at an "all-time high" and expected to improve
significantly in the next three to four years. The U.S. President, George Bush, was
likely to visit India later this year.
On Kashmir, he said theU.S. over the years had been very supportive of the peace
initiatives between India and Pakistan and encouraged the two sides to come
together.
Ehsan#!rari, 'TheImmutable Zero-sum Nature of the Indo-Pak
Rivalry":!.%., Norfolk, VA-based strategic analyst, January23,
2002,:S, http:llwww.nautilus.orqlarchiveslfora/Special-Policv-
Forum/44#!rari.!trnl,
 
 
Sc!aer, 2002.
Teresita.-.-  C. Is the directorof the South Asia Program atCSIS and aretired U.S. ; ambassador. TheWashington Quarterly, Spring
~ 0 t thelona-&rmhealth ofU.S.r e l a a m Xndla ands!ort-term concern
Asia amue for a more active%S. dlglomatic ent on the Issueof relations betweenIndla and Pakistan. indudinq
Kashmir. -ent with Paki- the buildup ofties withIndia has
setof bllat.edUS. rdat cated but persistent effort to press the
partidpants to develop a peace process Is needed. Neitherside willgreet these attempts
with unalloyed enthusiasm. Pakistantraditionally welcomes international Involvement, butIts government will have to acknowledgethat the firstU.S.demand is likely tobe a real crackdown on violent militantgroups. Jndia'slona-standing l - c h ' buta auietdmmmxffOffort;airnod
 
 
- - tY 
4e!ta & 6!ot!ani, ( Cyrus %.,G  Poorvi,a  graduate of Bombay University, CambridgeUniversity and Columbia Law School, practices immigration law in New York City. He is First Vice Chair of the Board of Trustees of the American Immigration Law Foundation & Correspondent Attorney in Mumbai, India for Cyrus D. Mehta "FINGERPRINTING I NTHE
UNITED STATES: NECESSARY FOR NATIONAL SECURITY OR NEEDLESS INVASION OF PRIVACY?", 5 u n W 7Po, lido.\)
htt~://cvrusmehta.com/news cvrus.as~?news id=943&intPaae=ll
Brazil is one country that has retaliated bv fingerminting U S . nationals who visit it, after a Brazilian
iudge dramatically proclaimed,"Iconsider the act brutal. threatening human rights, violating human
dignity, xeno~hobic,and worthy of the worst horrors committed bv the Nazis." Other public officials,
includmg a mayor of a Polish city, have refused to visit the US unless it scram the fingerprinting
procedure. It is likely that US-VISIT will result in cases of mistaken identity, where innocent people's
names will be matched with those on watch lists. Although US-VISIT is ostensibly not as repugnant than
the earlier NSEERS program, it remains to be seen whether it is truly an effective security measure,
without being a deterrent for the millions around the world ;* wish to visit, study, do business and
work in the US.
2. They will repeal their program if we repeal
 
This was the first incident since the enhanced immigration checks on foreign tourists 
were put in force by the Brazilian government 14 days ago. However, these checks are
being specifically targeted at US visitors, in retaliation for the US decision to photograph
and fingerprint tourists entering the US. The incident with the US pilot happened only
one day after a meeting between the presidents of the two countrieq during the Summit
of the Americas. President Lula da Silva suaaested to Georae W. Bush that both
countries should
 
 
1. U.S.1 Brazil relations are low in the Status Quo
.Hills 2005 ( Ben June 25, The Brazilian connection" Sydney Morning  Hearald  ((++;;;.m.!*m.auine;+buine+(e-  b'a?i/im-!*nne!(i*n+20051061241111#321#06577.('n/ *ne!/i!k=('ue@)
The extraordinan, case even threat~nedto damage US-Brazil relations-already
- --.- - --
2- ~ o ~ s u l t a t i isonkey to good U.S.  /Brazilian relations - --- - --- - - - - -
Hakim, 04 (Peter, president of the Inter-American dialog, ''The Reluctant Partner:
Foreign Affairs", Jan/Feb, www.foreignaffairs.org)
So far, trade has been the only issue to provoke oven and potentially damaging fiction between
the two countries. They have been able to cooperate, at least minimally, on thorny issues such as
Venezuela and Colombia, and thev have managed to swallow harsh rhetoric and avoid vublic
quarrels on others, such as Cuba and the Iraq war. And although thev have strilcinglv different
backgrounds. personal styles, and political perspectives, the two presidents have apparently
developed sincere respect for each other.
To sustain constructive ties. Washington must keep its expectations realistic. Some analysts
and US. officials have advocated a far tighter relationship between the two countries. with
more regular and structured collaboration. But Brazilians have traditionally preferred
pragmatic and opportunistic cooperation with the United States on specific issues. Still
somewhat distrustful of Washington, Brasilia is warv of creating the expectation that it will
quasi-automatically support U.S. positions, compromise its ability to set an independent
course for itself, or diminish the diversitv of its other international relations. Brazil, in other
words, has little interest in developing a privileged relationship with the United States of the
type Argentina once sought. That leaves Washinfion with having to earn Brasilia's
cooperation issue by issue, without presuming it will be manted. Still, the relationship has
been remarkably stable and consistent over the years. The two countries have not been
steady allies or continuing adversaries, but they have usually worked ~roductivelvtogether.
Today the United States can usuallv count on Brazil for an important measure of
collaboration on most issues and can usually avoid its outrinht: opposition on others.
The Bush administration should continue its good start, bolstering friendly US.-Brazil relations.
Lula's administration welcomed the White House's two invitations and U.S. recognition of
Brazil's special role in South America. Washington must remain attentive to Brasilia's interests. It
 
to the hemisvhere and take serious account of them. That will require Washington to vursue a less
unilateral approach. particularlv in South America, and be willing to acceut compromises on its
policies and programs. No U.S. administration yet has been able to do this on a sustained basis,
and it may be particularly difficult for the Bush White
House. - -- - -
 
 
Samuels/Topp/ Faunon
3. Without consultation FTAA won't pass
Gutr'erez,OS (BeWand M.. isa staff writer for The News Virginian in Waynesboro,Virginia. "FREET7#%2 I N THE AMERICAS? Stalled negotiations have
stopped talkof
Gables:JanFeb 2005. pg.50) http:llproquest.umi.com/pqdweb? index=l7&did=812383141&SrchMode=l &sid=l &Fmt=3&Vlnst=PR 
OD&VType=PQD&RQT=309&VName=PQD&TS=l121261550&clientld=3552
The big idea: Integrate the economies of the Westem Hemisphere'sdemocratic nations by slashing tariffs and removing trade barriers. But a decade and eight ministerial meetings later, negotiations are deadlocked, and the initial launch date of January 2005 has expired.
Althouqh FTAA nations have moved toward consensus, calendars must be reset and
neaotiators must kick-start a new round of trade talks.
"It'lltake political will, first of all, on behalf of the Mercosur countries," says trade
expert Ana Casanova, a vice president with Arlington, Virginia-based firm Carana
Corp.
In play are the disparate economies of 34 nations. Plus, several regional trade blocs, including
the Andean Group, Mercosur, Caricom, Central American Common Market and members of
the North American Free Trade Agreement, have their own synergies. But the rival interests of
the United States and Brazil, a Mercosur member boastina South America'sbicinest economy,
have emeraed as the biaqest stumbling block.
"There'sbeen definitely a Dower struaale between the two reaions," Casanova says. In the
meantime, Mercosur nations were brokering a separate trade pact with the European Union in
2004.
"They basically put the EU-Mercosur negotiations on the front burner as their No.1 priority
and the FTAAon the back burner," says Casanova.
Despite the apDarent snub, the Office of the US. Trade Representative says that Mercosur
should return to the neaotiatinci table.
 
 
 
4.Free trade is critical to preventing global nuclear war
Free trade is critical to prevent global nuclear war
For decades, many children in America and other countries went to bed fearing annihilation by nuclear war. The sDecter
of nuclear winter freezing the l i e out of la net Earth seemed v q real. Activists protesting the World Trade Organization's
meeting in Seattle apparently have forgotten that threat. The truth is that nations ioin together in w o u ~ s like the
WTO not just to iu(e' their own prosperity, but also to forestall !*n/i!( wit! other nations. In a way,
planet has ('aded  in the ('ea( of a worldwide nuclear war for the benefit of cooDerative global economics.
Some Seattle protesters clearly fancy themselves to be in the mold of nuclear disarmament or anti-Vietnam Aa' 
protesters of decades past. But they're not. They're special-interest activists, whether the cause is environmental,
labor or paranoia about global government. Actually, most of the demonstrators in Seattle are very much unlike
yesterday's peace activists, such as Beatle John Lemon or philosopher Bertrand Russell, the father of the nuclear
disarmament movement, both of whom urged people and nations to work together rather than strive against each
other. These and other ;a' protesters would probably approve of 135  AB" nations sitting down peacefully to
discuss economic issues that in the past might have been settled by bullets and bombs. #s lone as nations are
trading ~eacefull~and. their economies are built on exoorts to other countries they have a maior disincentive to 
waee war. That's why bringing China, a budding superpower, into the WTO is so important. #s exports to the
United States and the rest of the world feed Chinese prosperity, and that prosperity increases demand for the
goods we produce, the threat of hostility diminishes. Many anti-trade protesters in Seattle claim that only
multinational corporations benefit from global trade, and that it's the everyday wage-earnerswho get hurt Thafs
 just plain wrong. First of all, it's not the military-industrial complex benefiting. It's U.S. companies that make
high-tech goods. And tbose companies provide a growing number of jobs for Americans. In San Diego, many
people have good jobs at Qualcomm, Solar Turbines and other companies for whom overseas markets are
essential. In Seattle, many of the 100,000 people who work at Boeing would lose their livelihoods without world
trade. Foreign trade today accounts for 30 percent of our grass domestic product. Thafs a lot of jobs for
everyday workers. Growing global ~romeritohas h e l d counter the !"e#ter of nuclear winter. Nations of the
world are learning to live and work together, like the singers of anti-war songs once imagined Those who care
 
 
Republicans like racial profiling: plan action would make them angry
Wendland4-6-2005(Joel, managing editor of  Political   Affairs, Civil Liberties Group Brings Racial Profiling Issue
to UN, ((++;;;.*/i(i!a/aai'.ne(~a'(i!/e+a'(i#13+1+87+)
On civil rights and ~rotectionsfor ethnic and racial minorities from discrimination, about the most  
significant t h i n ~ thes administration has undertaken are a failed effort to overturn affirmative action
policies t h r o u ~ hits support for anti-affirmative action lawsuits and appointments of Republican Par@
loyalists to the US Commission on Civil Rights who view civil rights protections against racial
discrimination, includinp affirmative action, as antiquated and will likelv use the prestige of that body to
try to undermine protections. Meanwhile, no initiatives -half-hearted or sincere-have been forthcoming
to expose or reverse the documented institutional racism that pervades the criminal
 justice system, espeaally the use of the death penalty. Calls for a moratonum on the death penalty based part~allyon the rac~ally
b~asedmanner m wh~ch(( 1s used have fallen on deaf ears
Democrats hate racial profiling- they introduced a bill to stop it
Manatos 3-4-2004(Tom, Advisor to House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi, ((++dem*!'a(i!/eade'.*ue.*v/(*m+"33"44"4.(m)
The End Racial Profiling Act of 2004, introduced by Congressman John Convers Jr. (D-MI) and co-sponsored
by House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi 0 - C A ) is a bipartisan bill that seeks to end racial profiling in our  country. According to Leader Pelosi, "numerous recent studies have demonstrated that African Americans and Hispanics are stopped  in traffic
and searched far in excess of their share of the population. Since September 1lth, many Arabs, Muslims, and Asians have been
subjected to searches and seizures at airports and other locations based upon religion and national origin, without any credible
information linking specific individuals to criminal conduct."Pelosi continued, "While the Bush Administration has issued  
guidelines on racial profiline. these do not go far enough and are not binding on all levels of law enforcement. We must
make racial profiling illepal." The bill prohibits racial profilin~at all levels of law enforcement --federal, state, and
local. The bill also states that monies that go to state and local governments are conditioned on their adoption of
policies that prohibit racial profiline.
Democrats don't like NSEERS
Morahan 2-11 - 2 0 0 3 (Lawrence, CNSNews.com Senior Staff Writer, Democrats' Efforts to DeFund Irnrnimation Law 'Short-
Sighted', ((++;;;.!nne;.!*m9ie;9a(i*n.aPae=~a(i*n+a~ivd200302~$B2003021ld.html)
(CNSNews.com) -Efforts by prominent Democrats to cut f u n d i n ~for a federal program that would keep 
tabs on visitors to the United States is "short-sighted" and ultimately harmful to national security, domestic
security analysts said Monday. Lawmakers are working on compromise legislation that would  monitor the
movements of visitors entering and leaving the United States after Democratic Sens. Ted Kennedy (Mass.)
and Hillarv Clinton (N.Y.) added a last-minute amendment to the fiscal 2003 omnibus spending bill to de-
fund the National Security Entry-Exit Registration System (NSEERS).
 
 
Congress did act on some panel recommendations, approving last year's intelligence
bill and making permanent a House Homeland Security Committee. And the cabinet
department has taken steps, including setting up US-VISIT. a border program that checks
5 Stewart Verdery, a former assistant secretary at the agency, said the vroelain has
identified 650 criminals at the border and "no doubt frightened away countless others."
He said it's critical that Congress continues fimding the program.
Congress supports programs like US-VISIT that tighten border security
Robert O1HanowJr. and Scott Higham, The Washington Post, May 23,2005
Congress demanded chanpes in border controls and tight deadlines for building a
computer network that would screen foreign visitors as they seek to enter or leave the
country by scanning their fingerprints and matching them against databases of suspected
terrorists.
Pressing to meet that goal, the Homeland Security Department last year awarded one of
the most ambitious technology contracts in the war on terror--a 10-year deal estimated
at up to $10 billion--to the global consulting firm Accenture. In return, the company
and its subcontractors promised to create a "virtual border" that would electronically screen millions of foreign travelers.
Documents and interviews with peovle familiar with the uroeram. called US-VISIT,
show that eovernment officials are betting on speculative technology while neglecting
 
 
interests conservatives that rely on immigrant labor, destroying Bush's base
Shailagh Murray, The Washington Post, March 25,2005 --- ------
- -- ---
Republican lawmakers are headed for a showdown over illegal immigration. an issue
that exposes a deep and bitter rift within the GOP.
The drama will unfold when Congress returns early next month and turns to finish an emergency
spending bill to fund the Iraq war. The House version. approved before the Easter break,
carries t o u d  immigration restrictions, reigniting a long-simmering battle with the
Senate over how to deal with the growing illegal population.
It is a conflict that President Bush scarcely needs as he tries to unite his party behind
contentious Social Security changes and judicial nominations. Meeting Wednesday with Mexican
President Vicente FOX,Bush promised to continue pushing Congress for a program
allowing temporary guest workers. That accommodation is the opposite of what House
conservatives are seeking with the crackdown on asylum seekers and state driver's-
license requirements for illegal immigrants that they attached to the Iraq bill. Bush
acknowledged the limits of his influence: "I'm not a member of the legislative branch,"
he told Fox.
The immigration debate pits one core GOP constituency (law-and-order
conservatives) against another (business interests that relv on immigrant labor). One
camp wants to tighten borders and deport people who are here illegally; the other seeks to bring illegal
workers out of the shadows and acknowledge their growing economic importance.
Bush does not support giving driver's licenses to illegal immigrants, but he wants to address the
problem of undocumented workers by expanding temporary-worker programs for the millions who
are already here. The president ranks illegal immigration as one of the "big problems" he wants to
tackle in his second term. White House Chief of Staff Andrew H. Card Jr. has called the issue a greater
immediate threat than Social Security. "This elephant is sitting at the table right in front of us," Card said
at a U.S. Chamber of Commerce meeting in January.
The public doesn't like US-VISIT
Knight Ridder Tribune Business News 6 - 1 0 - r n (Pproquest)
A new studv reiterates what some local officials say they've been saving for almost two years --that the
border securitv program US-VISIT is ineffective. The U.S. Government has already poured billions of dollars  into
the United States Visitor and Immigrant Status Indicator Technology or US-VISIT, an exitlentry system that tracks foreign visitors
at land, sea and airports along the southern and northern borders. The studv, Real Challenges For Virtual  Borders:
 
US-VISIT can onlv be a small part of the country's defenses against terrorism --t may be better to scale
back the requirements and expectations of US-VISIT rather than develop a system that cannot accomplish the unrealistic goals set
out for it." "I would agree,  I think it is a colossal waste of resources," said McAllen
Chamber of Commerce President Steve Ahlenius, who has lobbied against the tracking program.
Ahlenius, along with Rio Grande Valley officials, have spoken against the program because of its potential to slow
crossings at already backed-up borders. The US-VISIT program requires foreigners who want an 1-94 visa in order to
travel north of the 25-mile border zone to present a passport or citizenship document, have their picture taken and offer
up their two index fingers for a digital scan.
 
 
5 ? *
Leading Democrats hate US-VISIT -the plan is a concession to them
ERIC LICHTBLAU, The New York Times, August 17,2004
The program, known as U.S.-Visit. is a cornerstone of the administration's domestic
security efforts-. It seeks to create a "virtual border" around the United States by
using biometric identifiers for travelers anaOther new te~~ologyto - bolstere c u r i t
y 7 The Department of Homeland Security has begun instituting some major security
components at airports and elsewhere, and in June it named Accenture as the prime
contractor for a project that could be worth as much as $10 billion in coming years.
Representative Jim Turner of Texas, ranking Democrat on the House domestic
security
cormnittee, wrote in a letter on Monday to Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge
that an investigation by his staff showed deep flaws. Mr. Ridge said that h s
department was relying on outdated technology and that the program's central goal,
linking the databases of American intelligence. law enforcement, transportation and
border agencies, appeared unrnet despite three years of effort and $700 million.
"They're building a system that is not ~ o i n gto achieve that goal, and they're
building a system here that's destined to fail," Mr. Turner said in an interview. "It
appears that in their rush to get something out there quickly, they've gone down a path
that's basically a repeat of our old teclmology systems."
"These facts lead me to the conclusion that the administration has allowed three years
to pass without making virtually any progress toward building the type of integrated,
interoperable entry-exit system that the 911 1 commission has determined is necessay
to protect America from the threat of global terrorism," he wrote. "This striking
failure establishes the need for far more vigorous Congressional oversight."
Mr. Turner said a number of other leading Democrats shared his concerns. His harsh
criticism suggested that the administration. which has included $350 million for the
program in its current budget plan, could run into political and financial resistance
from Democrats in Congress as the plan proceeds.
Asa Hutchinson, Gder secretary to Mr. Ridge for border security, said in an
 
information." "It's certainly not an accurate appraisal of the U.S.-Visit promam,"
Mr. Hutchinson added.
Even with some opposition, inmigration reform will still be effective in Congress
Cinnamon Stillwell, The San Francisco Chronicle, APRIL 20,2005
As for George W. Bush, he has little in common with his fellow Republicans when it comes to illegal
immigration. Although more than a few Republican politicians and business Ieaders
support his policies, he's in danger of losing touch with his base on this issue. Many people are
puuled as to why Bush signed the U.S. Terrorism Reform and Prevention Act in 2004, which called for
2.000 more Border Patrol agents per year, and then proposed only enough funding in 2006 for a measly 2
10.
Due to the appalling lack of leadership on the matter, many Republicans feel left out in the cold.
However, they may have found a politician who represents their interests in Republican
Congressman Tom rancredo, a leading voice in the effort to battle illegal immigration. Another
front-runner is U S . Rep. James Sensenbrenner of Wisconsin, sponsor of the federal Real ID Act,
which would effectively end the quest to grant driver's licenses to illegal immigrants. Although
the bill has its opponents on both sides of  the political fence. the growing alarm of the
open-borders lobby is a testament to its potential effectiveness.
 
Eunice Mosooso, The Atlanta Journal-Constitution, June 30,2005
More-recentLy,Bushsaid_the_UIiteddStatesneeds the foreign workers and suggested
that a group of citizens known as the Minutemen. who patrolled the Arizona border to
highlight the problem of illegal immigration earlier this year, were "vigilantes."
His rhetoric differs sharply fi-om that of some lawmakers in the right wing of the
Republican party, who praise the Minutemen as heroes and say illegal immigrants are
lawbreakers who deserve to be punished and who pose a threat to national securit~. "The
president is more sympathetic with business and Latino interests. This leads to angst and
opposition from those of the nativist side of the argument and a possible rupture in the
Bush/Republican coalition," he said.
Larry Sabato, a political scientist at the University of Virginia, said there was a building
anger in parts of the Republican base about Bush's stance on immigration, and not just
in the Southwest.
"Many conservatives are fnlstrated because Bush and the Democrats have many of the same positions on immigration, especially on illegals from Mexico. That's because both
Bush and the Democrats are battling over the critically important Hispanic and Latino .  
vote," he said. He said Bush had "a dangerous high-wire act to perform, and parts of his base are
starting to pluck the wire."
Bush's original proposal would be the most dramatic change in immigration policy since
1986. It would give illegal immigrants already in the United States a chance to register
for legal permission to w-ork for three years with a chance at renewal. after which they
would have to return to their home country. Companies would have to prove that the
 jobs offered to the foreign workers could not be filled by Americans. Bush has not
specified whether his plan would include any path to permanent legal residency.
Rep. Charlie Nonvood, an Augusta area Republican, said Bush's temporary worker
plan was not a good idea.