Bush Takes Next Step in Weaponizing Space

The Washington Post reports on the newly released declassified version of the National Space Policy.

The document defines a clear line in the sky, stating that national space policy shall be to develop and maintain systems to enable the United States to deny access to space to anyone we deem hostile to our interests, impliedly abrogating the right to free access and peaceful use of space which are the foundation of the international legal regime laid out by the treaties to which we are party. Despite Administration claims that this new policy, 4 years in incubation, is simply a continuation of existing policy, the tone and intent of this new policy is clearly weighted toward fighting war "in, from, and through" space.

The Bush Administration has said off the record though a 'senior official' that "this policy is not about developing or deploying weapons in space. Period." I think most thinking people have learned that anytime such an emphatic and categorical denial is issued off the record by this White House, it means the exact opposite is true.

In light of these developments, I present a 'classic' BlogForArizona post from 2004 on the topic of the Bush Administration's quest to weaponize space. It is more relevant than ever in light of the new policy:

The Bush Administration is considering changes to defense policy that may destroy our national security, economic well-being, and the stability of the world order. These changes are set to happen way over your head – 50 miles above, to be precise. The Pentagon aims to make outer space the new theater of war. Their blind ambitions threaten to ignite a new and ruinously expensive arms race that could destroy the international norms that have made outer space a vital and growing part of the world’s civilian economy and a lynchpin of America’s long-term security.

Pursuant to the National Defense Authorization Act of 2000, the Commission to Assess United States National Security Space Management and Organization undertook a study of our vulnerabilities and military capabilities in space. Donald Rumsfeld chaired the Commission until a few weeks before their report was issued, when Bush appointed him Secretary of Defense. Given this fact, little about the Commission’s report will surprise you.

The Commission report warned of significant vulnerabilities in both civilian and military space assets that must be addressed. As there have not been any attacks on space borne assets to date, it is difficult to quantify how serious or how likely various threats might be. The Commission supports their recommendations with worse case assumptions out of any proportion to likely threats. They insisting we prepare to meet a possible ‘Pearl Harbor in space’ where no enemy is known to exist. In their estimation, that preparation entails nothing less than the headlong introduction of weapons into space.

The world’s consensus is that spaced borne weaponry is inconsistent with the "peaceful purposes" for which space is reserved by the Outer Space Treaty. However, the current legal regime does not specifically disallow weaponization of space, except for nuclear weapons and other WMD. Thus, this Administration advances an extreme interpretation that space based weapons systems are consistent with "peaceful uses" so long as they are not used for aggressive military operations. This means that development and deployment of first-strike capable anti-satellite and ground targeting weapons systems in orbit would be lawful as long as they are only used in a defensive capacity – and we all now know how flexible the concept of defense can become.

What kind of weapons might we see deployed in space? Anti-satellite weapons to destroy or disable an enemy’s space assets, and systems to protect our own satellites. Space-based weapons platforms carrying lasers, particle beams, kinetic weapons, and other systems to disrupt or destroy targets on the ground or in the atmosphere. Contrary to common conception it does not include "Star Wars", the National Missile Defense (NMD) system. Only sensors and command and control systems of NMD would be in orbit as the system is currently conceived.

The Commission report is unequivocal in its judgment that deployment of weapons in space is purely a winning proposition, enhancing the security of our space-based assets and extending the reach and speed of our military options. Military planners see a golden moment in history and they want to seize it. No other nation can deploy military space systems that could match ours, and being first to the high ground of space allows us to dictate the terms of access. We are presented an opportunity to unilaterally shift the fulcrum of the world’s strategic military balance in our favor. The Commission makes it plain that they believe weaponization of space will assure U.S. military predominance and preparedness for the foreseeable future.

The question we must ask is whether we should allow this. Will the militarization of space enhance or degrade our long-term security? One obvious reason not to place weapons in space is that despite any temporary strategic advantage we might gain, proliferation and an arms race are inevitable, if not necessarily immediate. Consider the obvious military advantages conveyed by the GPS system as an example. Even though it is not a weapons system, the military advantages conveyed by ownership of the system are so great that even our European allies felt compelled to reproduce the system under their own control in the form of the new Galileo system. Europe and Japan may be the only other powers currently capable of deploying equivalent space weapons systems, but our alliances with them will not deter them from competing with us in space; their long-term strategic security will demand it.

Other nations, such as Russia, China, possibly India, or even Canada would soon follow, and there is little we could do to stop them without seriously provoking these major powers. In the long run, we will have achieved nothing but to increase insecurity in the world, and in our alliances. Just as it seems likely that a world free of nuclear weapons is now forever out of reach, the hope of space as a realm of peaceful cooperation among all mankind may recede beyond retrieval. Knowing that some strategic advantages are so alluring that it is beyond our wisdom to willingly surrender them, we must manifest sufficient wisdom to never seek such advantages in the first place.

The ensuing arms race would also be ruinously expensive. Already our military expenditures consume 50% of all discretionary federal spending. In a time of record deficits, a monstrous national debt, and structural trade imbalances with most of the world that threaten the very soundness of our currency, it is madness to invite an arms race we cannot sustain financially. We would also be robbing other nations of needed development capital and ourselves of foreign investment as other nations are compelled by national interest to follow us into space with their own military systems, slowing an already sluggish global economy still further.

The world’s strategic posture is precarious even without orbiting weapons. A nuclear holocaust of unimaginable scope is still only minutes away at all times; an accidental launch, or terrorist with a nuclear bomb could still destroy us all. Space borne weapons systems are inherently vulnerable, leading to a ‘use it or lose it’ mentality. War games involving space assets indicate they are a destabilizing factor. They frequently escalate conflicts that would have been manageable in their absence – often resulting in nuclear exchanges. The fog of war only becomes denser in outer space, leaving us more vulnerable to destabilizing attacks by non-state actors intent on precipitating military conflicts. Weapons in space are an invitation to terrorism, not a solution.

As other nations’ militaries inevitably follow us into space, the basic understandings about free access to space are certain to be compromised, if not destroyed. The core rules of free and open navigation of outer space are indispensable to its productive and peaceful use. It is seldom considered any more, but the over flight regime, which allows even an enemies spacecraft to over fly another nation’s territory, is not a given. It was the result of wise policy and deft diplomacy by the Eisenhower Administration at the height of the Cold War. The ability to over fly a nation in an unrestricted manner, even to the point of spying upon that nation from space, is the bedrock of the commercial, scientific, and military uses of outer space. The over flight regime has also made enormous contributions to world peace. The ability to remotely verify treaty obligations without intrusive inspections is a vital tool of diplomacy. Once spacecraft with ground targeting weapons systems capable of nearly instantaneous and devastating attack are in orbit, the over flight norms will be severely strained.

What other norms that preserve the use of space as the common heritage of mankind might also buckle under the strain? How long before earth’s orbits, the moon, the LaGrange points begin to be carved up, or fought over, surrendering to the de facto territoriality that results from military preparations. Military aviation has steadily enhanced sovereign control of every nation’s airspace for sound and inescapable security reasons, as we saw vividly on 9/11/2001. Military astronautics will likewise force nations to exert greater control over orbital space, limiting or even restricting access for sound national security reasons. Commercial uses of space may become so problematic and expensive that the industry could cease to grow, or even fail. Scientific progress could be irreparably hampered.

There is a need, and considerable merit, in hardening our space systems against malicious disruption or attack by preparing appropriate counter-measures and redundancies. Our economy and our national security rely on space assets more every day. We must prepare and protect ourselves to our vital national interests in space. But we mustn’t rush forward to claim the new frontier at the point of a sword, creating instability, waste, and insecurity in the process. Several new treaties codifying the exclusion of weapons from space have been proposed and it is in America’s best national security interests to lead the effort to ratify such a treaty. The Bush Administration stands ready to take one giant leap of faith that mankind may not be able to retreat from. Our descendants will not thank us for over-reacting to imagined threats, or for over-reaching to snatch at short-term gains while missing the greater chance to ensure that war never achieves escape velocity.

Comments

[Dwight D. Leister: Chair: Committee To Elect]

"As Nations follow us into Space?"

Where did you go to school Russia was first into space and has done many things there we will never know about.

If you think signing Pie In The Sky Space treaties as we did with Alice In Wonderland " North Korea" did anyone any good we are kidding ourselves.

Iam in favor of one last push effort to force the United Nations to put teeth into Space anti weapons treaties but I feel Both Russia and China are way beyond any kind of Space Free Weapons Treaty. The United States is NOT ahead of Russia and China on Space but following as Hughes gave China Gyros through a phoney front Company " with the OK of the Clinton Administration through The Loreal Corportation when found out the CEO resigned but the damage was done.

It is a shame that the American people can not see side by side programs that are playing catch up with Russia and China.

Don't forget they tried a Laser test last week to blind our satellights as they flew over China and Korea.

The ADS system (Active Denial System) and ACDT ( Advanced Concept Developement Technology) are both featured on my web-site; and is where The United States needs to put some serious money and developement to get (7) Seven 747 Lasar Ships deployed and flying 24-7 right now!

When I was in White Sands at Holloman AFB a NATO base and was given a tour by the commander I was amazed at the German Luftwaffe building and its 30,000 man German presence. White Sands National Monument has so many German visitors next door that the White Sands Tourist books and maps are printed in German.

White Sands is testing the new ADS systems and Raytheon is building them now that are being mounted on Humvees and the 747 Lasar Ship. The test are top secret but have been going on for over 10 years.

There is no need to deploy Space weapons into space when a lasar shield can do the job from airships and bouncing from mobile ground systems.

[Designer Handbagsa]

Great site and excellent resource you have. I think it's very cool. I will visit your website again. Thank you!

[Replica watcheshmj]

I wanted to thank you for the time you spent building this page. I will visit your website again. Thank you

[Alex Taylork]

I just don't have much to say lately, but eh. Pretty much nothing notable happening worth mentioning. I've more or less been doing nothing worth mentioning.

[vme]

Wonderful and informative web site.I used information from that site its great.

[vme]

Wonderful and informative web site.I used information from that site its great.

[Alex Tayloru]

Great site and excellent resource you have. I think it's very cool. I will visit your website again. Thank you!