The Inevitability of the Weaponization of Space: Technological Constructivism Versus Determinism

The concept of national security is based on the need to maintain the safety and security of the population. In 1957, the Soviet Union was the first state to threaten this safety in space with the launch of Sputnik. Although Sputnik did not pose a credible threat, it was perceived as such by the Western world. As the space race intensified in the 1960s, efforts were made to prevent the development and use of space weapons. With the 1967 Outer Space Treaty, space weapons were effectively made unlawful, with signatories agreeing to forgo these expensive technologies. However, at the beginning of the twenty-first century, factors and efforts are beginning to converge that indicate the inevitability of space weaponization. Based on a new concept of technological development, this article proposes that as technology advances, space weaponization not only is likely, but indeed is inevitable in the near future. Grounded in the competing theories of technological determinism and social constructivism, I offer a new theory that incorporates both and introduces new components to analyze a near-future technological timeline for space weapons. I argue that the development of these weapons is inevitable and should therefore be accelerated in the United States, given the country's position as the lone superpower, to command and control the space commons. If the United States leads this drive for development, then in the end, as with thermonuclear weapons, space weapons will make the world more, not less, secure, and will contribute to the spread of democratic peace and globalized capitalism.     

Perspectives on Space Operations

The debate over military uses of space generally and the weaponization of space in particular is as old as the space age itself. Most recently this debate has been re-invigorated in Canada within the context of Ballistic Missile Defence. This article provides an overview of the legal framework governing the use of force in space, concluding that military activity including, in limited circumstance, the use of force, is not prohibited. The article then addresses the policy debate that arises around issues of weaponization, use of force, and space security. It concludes that while the deployment of certain weapons in space and the employment of force in from and through space might be permitted, a comprehensive analysis of the consequences of such decisions is required to ensure the objective of enhanced security will in fact be achieved.     

Weapons in Space: The Need to Protect Space Assets

Space assets represent the most critical undefended resource of the United States. Though the government has clearly been aware of this weakness for over a generation, little appears to have been done about it. Every day these assets become more critical, and the threats against them are growing in kind. The United States must address these threats in order to prevent potential future issues in regard to military command and control, as well as the American way of life. This article not only outlines threats to space assets but proposes means by which U.S. space assets could be protected. Such protection comes not only from technology, which has been capable for years of doing the job, but from policy choice as well. In regard to policy, increasing research and development for space-based weapons, reevaluating existing treaties, and increasing interagency cooperation are all needed to better protect U.S. space assets.     

Totem and Taboo: Depolarizing the Space Weaponization Debate

The debate over space weaponization is typically cast in simplistic, unidimensional terms, while many participants caricature their opponents as naive pacifists or rabid warmongers. This article redraws the subject more realistically. First, it surveys the question of what systems are truly space weapons and what developments would constitute weaponization. Second, it describes six distinct schools of thought regarding weaponization: idealist, internationalist and nationalist sanctuary theories, and preemptive, utilitarian and hegemonist pro-weaponization perspectives. Third, it analyzes and largely debunks the leading arguments which hold that space weaponization is inevitable. Finally, it suggests reforms to make the debate more sensible and productive.     

Space Weapons: Alternatives for Today

The massive budgets for U.S. military space and missile defense represent the beginning stages of a new arms race in space. But with the United States facing record budget deficits and record defense spending and with the international community expressing increasing concerns about the weaponization of space, the next administration faces some real questions about how hard it wants to push for new attack weapons in space.

No matter how the upcoming U.S. presidential election turns out, the next administration faces dilemmas with respect to the lack of a justifying threat, the technical difficulty and cost of placing weapons in space, how far its international partners want to go with missile defense and with weapons in space, and, finally, the type of international negotiations in which it is willing to engage. Each of these situations creates alternatives for today, alternatives which the next U.S. President will confront and the international community can and should engage.     

Assessing the military utility of space-based weapons

The debate about whether or not to weaponize space is contentious and sometimes heated. Arguments on both sides often ascribe to space-based weapons broad capabilities that are either technologically unfeasible or extraordinarily expensive to develop. Major questions many fail to address include what capabilities space-based weapons provide that land, sea or airborne weapons cannot, and what space-based weapons are likely to cost. This article evaluates the military utility and relative feasibility of space-based weapons to find that there are few missions for which they are uniquely suited. Barring dramatic breakthroughs in technology, land, sea and airborne weapons are more feasible and equally effective.     

Application of a Maritime Framework to Space: Deep Space Conflict and Warfare Scenario

This article considers how Klein’s argument for the use of a maritime framework for space warfare is buoyed by the consideration of deep space conflict both in application to terrestrial wars and in its own right. It describes the greater alignment of Corbett’s work with this deep space medium than with the orbital medium considered by Klein. Through this analysis, it suggests that possible futures need to consider the deep space medium, making Corbett/Klein’s model superior to other possible approaches.     

European Union Space Initiatives: The Political Will for Increasing European Space Power

The European Union (EU) is the newest actor in the European space sector and is cultivating the political will to make Europe a world class space power comparable to the United States (US). The Galileo satellite system and the Global Monitoring for the Environment and Security space program are the most visible manifestations of this will. This article suggests that Europe can approach comparable space power if capabilities are considered rather than just budgets. The paper discusses the catalysts driving EU space initiatives, and assesses the EU's nascent European Space Policy and European Space Program, and EU organization and funding for space. Of importance are the asymmetric means for Europe to increase its space capabilities and the implications this has for the trans-Atlantic relationship with the US. The analysis is directed to the security, civil, and dual-use space sectors within the security aspects of EU space initiatives. This article also provides a baseline to track changes in EU space policy, organization, and funding dynamics.     

Viewpoint: New Ethics for Space Commerce

The space age is likely to be dominated by space commercial activities. As these activities develop, it is important to consider business values, commercial ethics, and trade discipline. The failure to do so could result in space commercial development on the basis of greed for profit and competitive advantage for advancement, as has taken place on Earth. To better prevent this possibility, this article proposes that there is the need to develop a “New Ethics for Space Commerce” based on high standards of business morality and commercial honesty, with moorings in conscious social responsibility and due regard to ecological sustainability.     

Space Traffic Management at the National and International Levels

The number of objects in Earth’s orbit has continued to grow since the space race between the United States and the Soviet Union. The historical “few objects, large space” principle left satellite operations a relatively benign environment, but that construct has shifted significantly due to the advent of the commercial space sector, the small satellite industry boom, and the resurgence of the desire for human space flight. The regulations for space operations both at the international and national level have always been sparse, but there is a large desire for more now that commercial capital is at stake. The purpose of this article is to bring to the surface available regulations for on-orbit operations to identify the gaps to fill and highlight the change for the Department of Defense. The international community and commercial sector recognize the need for a state like the United States to set a standard to influence the international community. This national-to-international framework is a technique used in other arenas, such as maritime traffic management and air traffic management, and the lessons learned from these fields are applicable to the space domain.     

Space Sustainability and the Freedom of Outer Space

The concept of sustainable development states that every nation is free to determine how to meet its own needs and accrue its own benefits as long as it does not prejudice the ability of future generations to do the same. This end is challenging in the space domain as the existing emphasis on national concerns obscures the larger issues of international structural inequalities—lack of access, barriers to capacity building and technology absorption—while simultaneously magnifying issues related to market protectionism, which are then disguised as security issues. This article makes the claim that it is possible to correct this distortion while safeguarding the focus on global issues, such as space sustainability. While the concept of space sustainability is understood differently depending on the forum for discussion, it is clear that the dominant understanding coincides with the logic for space cooperation as “Governance for Global Security,” and this focuses more on the needs of the present space actors. Analytical tools designed with the “Cosmopolitan Approaches to International Law” express forms of cooperation that produce reciprocal obligations to enable all participants, both present and aspirant, in space exploration and use.     

Counterspace Operations and Nascent Space Powers

In twenty-first-century warfare, satellites have become indispensable for gaining dominance in battlespace. This highlights the need to protect space assets while countering the qualitative edge that space can provide to adversarial actions. Hence, “counterspace operations” continue to gain the attention of military planners and researchers around the globe. Although it is the major space powers that have developed requisite capability and are showing more concerns for space security, these concerns are global in nature. As such, there is a need to develop a framework that can be utilized by nascent space powers to ensure protection of their space assets. This research work is intended to draw the attention of policymakers, space-technology protagonists, and military personnel, particularly of nascent space powers, to these global concerns. It gives an overview of counterspace operations and explores the doctrinal view-point of major military space powers for safeguarding their own space programs and negating the advantage of space to the enemy. Based upon this, a step-by-step approach is proposed for nascent space powers for embodying of elements of counterspace operations to remain protected during peace, crisis, or war.     

United Nations General Assembly Resolutions in the Formation of the Outer Space Treaty of 1967

ABSTRACT

The launch of Sputnik in 1957 followed by Explorer in 1958 showcased the potential of space and stressed the need for a robust body of law legislating space as beneficial to all states. Following the launches, a series of resolutions by the United Nations’ General Assembly developed the core principles of international space law. This article conducts an analysis of resolutions passed from 1957 to 1967 to understand the genesis of space law principles as reflected in the Outer Space Treaty of 1967. These principles include sovereign equality, peaceful purposes and international cooperation, non-appropriation of space, common heritage of mankind, environmental protection, and how to address non-governmental entities engaged in space activities.     

Legality of Anti-Satellites Under the Space Law Regime

The term anti-satellite, or in short ASAT, is used to refer to a system designed to destroy or damage satellites. The heightened tendency among the spacefaring nations to develop ASAT technology in the recent past has led to widespread debates as to the legality of ASAT deployment under the space law regime. In this context, I have endeavored to make a detailed analysis of the international legal provisions to find if there is any legal basis at all for the deployment of such ASATs. I have concluded that none of the existing legal provisions in space law, as well as public international law, have sufficient force and clarity to bring about a blanket ban on ASAT weapons. Therefore, the research suggests a slew of reforms to overcome this anomaly. Examples of such proposed reforms include, inter alia, an amendment of the Outer Space Treaty and an enhanced role and influence of the United Nations in treaty making coupled with active diplomatic initiatives.     

Viewpoint: Chinese Anti-Satellite Weapons: New Power Geometry and New Legal Policy

China entered the field of space weapons with the successful anti-satellite test on 11 January 2007. National policies of spacefaring states commit to the principle of peaceful uses of outer space as enshrined in the Outer Space Treaty, but there is no detailed internationally binding regulation on anti-satellite weapons. Since 1981, the United Nations General Assembly passed annual resolutions on the Prevention of an Arms Race in Outer Space. These resolutions call for negotiations in the Conference of Disarmament for establishing an internationally binding instrument about space weapons. However, the Conference of Disarmament is deadlocked. China's weapons test has changed the power geometry. This paper examines the policy impact of the Chinese test, especially on the United States.     

Security Connotations of Space Tourism

This article links the prospects of growth in space tourism to the defense preparedness of the state. It is argued that any significant developments in space tourism attract the attention of strategic planners to check the feasibility of using the transportation platforms that support tourism for strategic purposes. It is likely that the way developments in rail, air, and maritime transportation revolutionized the method of warfighting, developments in the space travel sector will make their impact on warfare in the near future.     

Critique of the International Law on Protection of the Outer Space Environment

Environmental concerns are an issue for the outer space legal regime. Human activities result in insurmountable amounts of debris, chemical effluents, and radioactive waste carried into the domain of space, which poses a serious threat to future generations and uses of space. Sophisticated technology and the amount of funds required to access space complicate the task of addressing orbital debris. To correct this anomaly, regulation of space activities with a view to making them environmentally sustainable is called for in this article. With this aim in mind, I critically analyze the existing international legal framework, examining its relevance in conserving the space environment. Discovering a slew of irregularities, I endeavor to review each legal instrument in the context of environmental conservation and evaluate their effectiveness. I conclude that the outer space legal regime is acutely ineffectual and reforms are an imperative. The research reveals a plethora of suggestions, which include, inter alia, amendment to Article IX of the Outer Space Treaty, harmonization of international environmental law and space law, and the establishment of an international regime for the removal, maintenance, and servicing of satellites. With such proposals in mind, the need to frame a new space policy or modify the existing framework is emphasized herein.     

Workshop Review: Export Controls of Space Systems

Experts from U.S. government agencies that administer export controls of space systems and representatives from non-governmental organizations and think tanks were invited in December 2014 to participate in an invitation-only workshop co-hosted by the Secure World Foundation and Astroconsulting International to discuss export controls with a delegation of industry representatives from The Society of Japanese Aerospace Companies. The underlying question when working on export controls is, with the increased access to space and burgeoning role of the private sector in space, how do you regulate this and encourage industry without harming national security? It is difficult to do this while supporting the space industrial base, as export control is perceived as a necessary part of shoring U.S. national security and assuring a stable and predictable space environment. A serious challenge is determining which technologies should be controlled: where do you draw the line? This is particularly the case for space technologies, many of which are dual-use. Countries also have to be careful of unintended consequences. Export control restrictions are extremely challenging to get “just right” and, as a result, should be undertaken only after a considerable amount of discussion with all stakeholders, including input from industry, and when the government has a solid understanding of what it is trying to accomplish via export control protections. Otherwise, the domestic industry can unduly suffer with very little benefit to national security.     

Adaptation to Space Debris Mitigation Guidelines and Space Law

Space exploration is a mechanism whereby, with the use of astronomy and space technology, humans are able to explore outer space and the universe at large. In this article, the authors address space debris issues with a discussion of future space law issues along with a brief elaboration of how the adaptation took place for space debris mitigation guidelines. The history of space law formulated during the United Nations’ General Assembly is justified, along with the resolutions that took place throughout recent years. The authors also elaborate on the importance of theoretical modeling and how it could be adopted into practice utilizing the established debris mitigation guidelines. Legal and political constraints are also highlighted, along with where the future focus on legal factors should be when considering space debris mitigation.     

Comparative Perspective of the Brazilian and Indian Space Programs

In the early 1960s, India and Brazil started developing space capabilities covering three major complementary areas: (1) satellites; (2) launch vehicles; and (3) ground systems. More than 50 years later, India is among the most active and successful spacefaring countries and is developing cost-effective space technologies. On the other hand, Brazil still does not possess a launch system and has put into orbit only small and non-commercial satellites, several of them built with Chinese cooperation and launched on Chinese launch vehicles. The goal of this article is to compare Brazilian and Indian space programs, which present different levels of accomplishments. This analysis contains three elements. The first part discusses the two space programs’ evolutions and their contemporary features. The second part compares the space programs’ models from two observation variables: (1) the state administrative organization; and (2) international cooperation in the space sector. Finally, the third part of the article compares the strengths and challenges of each program, highlighting that an international partnership between Brazil and India in space opens a window of opportunity for Brazil to take part in a much wider range of projects than is possible if funded alone.