Because THAAD is bad, we Negate

Resolved: Deployment of anti-missile systems is in South Korea’s best interest.

Contention 1: Easing Economic Pressure

North Korea is currently experiencing international economic pressure.

According to Ryan Pickrell of the National Interest on Monday, North Korea offered a rare
admission that international sanctions are having a detrimental effect on society. Petroleum
prices have risen sharply in recent months due to international sanctions [forcing North Korea to
scramble to find alternatives.]

Indeed, Rob Waugh of Metro News in January of this year concludes that Kim Jong-Un’s days
are numbered. The traditional structures of North Korean systems are crumbling and the
country’s elite ‘turned their backs’ on Kim Jong-Un’.

Unfortunately, the recent deployment of US missile systems has motivated Kim Jong Un to lash
out. According to Waldman of CBS, North Korea has sped up at the maximum pace in
bolstering its nuclear deterrence in response to what it considers U.S. provocations.

Seema Mody of CNBC in 2017 explains China has retaliated against THAAD, blocking online Commented [1]: http://www.cnbc.com/2017/03/17/tha
trade in South Korean goods and impeding Chinese tourism to South Korea. Such measures ad-anti-missile-system-makes-china-lash-out-at-south-
korea.html
could reduce the number of Chinese visitors to South Korea by up to 70 percent, resulting in
billions of dollars in lost revenue.

With another deployment of anti-missile systems in South Korea, Scott Snyder of the Council on
Foreign Relations writes China might consider retaliation against South Korea by boosting
China–North Korea relations.

Jeff Kingston of Temple University confirms in July of this year that Seoul's decision to deploy
THAAD has pushed Beijing to loosen whatever trade sanctions it had imposed on the North

It is no surprise that Jane Perlez of the New York Times in April of 2017 confirms China’s trade
with North Korea grew 37.4 percent in the first quarter of this year.

The impact is accelerating North Korean militarization.

Global Security finds that North Korea commits roughly 25% of its GDP to military spending,
compared to South Korea committing only 4%. An influx of trade and revenue from China would
spur North Korean military development.

This is detrimental, as Westscott of CNN in 2017 finds that with North Korea developing and Commented [2]: http://www.cnn.com/2017/03/06/asia/
producing missiles at a faster rate, they will be able to deploy them in ways which potentially north-korea-missile-launch-analysis/index.html
help evade new and existing defenses.
Defense missile systems are insufficient at keeping South Korea safe.

Contention 2: Preserving Regional Influence

Jongryn Mo of Yonsei University in 2015 explains that South Korea has emerged as a new
middle power within East Asia that is influencing a variety of global and regional issues.

However, Bernard Weng of The Conversation writes that for South Korea to remain in this
position of power, it must remain on good terms with both the US and China, to secure the
resources of these superpowers and gain the trust of their regional partners.

Indeed, the RSIS writes that South Korea’s perceived neutrality garners it significant networking
power and influence as it is seen as a credible arbitrator on issues with global implications by
both sides.

THAAD deployment will destroy this. Chris Buckley of the New York Times in 2017 writes that
China adamantly opposes THAAD, and has warned that deployment will cause a break in
diplomatic relations.

The effects are materializing as The Japan Times in 2017 writes that just a week ago, China
called off high level talks with South Korea and Japan, citing THAAD as the barrier to
negotiations.

Thus, Sandip Mishra of the Institute of Peace and Conflict Studies concludes that THAAD’s
propensity to alienate China and its allies will undoubtedly harm South Korea’s influence and
power in the region by diminishing its status as a neutral entity.

The impact is maintaining regional cooperation

Bernt Berger of Focus Asia writes that South Korea is the only nation in Northeast Asia that has
shown initiative in developing regional institutions to foster multilateral cooperation on policy
issues, making it a critical party in creating change.

Indeed, Juliana Velasco of UCF quantifies that regional organizations increase the probability of
durable interstate agreements being created by 6.7 times.

Progress is already being made as Sang Lee of The Sejong Institute writes that South Korea’s
regional organizations such as the NACIP have made meaningful multilateral progress on
everything from disaster management to cybersecurity.

This is critical as the Council on Foreign Relations writes that South Korea’s foreign policy
goals, to become integrated on the global stage and to ameliorate regional problems, are reliant
on it being the nexus of cooperation in the region so it can get its agenda passed.