Podvig: Russia Cannot Compete in a Space Arms Race
May 27, 2005 :: Analysis
Pavel Podvig, author of Russian Strategic Nuclear Forces, argues that Russia has lost the ability to compete with the U.S. in space. On RussianForces.org, he refers to the remarks of a low-level Russian diplomat at a recent conference in Virginia, who was quoted by the Financial Times as saying, “Russia could respond with force if the US put a ‘combat weapon’ into space.” Podvig disagrees: “Russian diplomats like to think they live in the world where this rhetoric works … The reality is quite different.” He argues the Russian military space program “has lost its capability to carry out serious development projects in military space and is very unlikely to recover it.”
Opponents of U.S. space-based military assets often warn about the dangers of a space arms race between the U.S. and Russia. According to this argument, the “weaponization of space” would lead to new forms of brinkmanship and perhaps even military conflict. Yet if Podvig is correct and Russia has truly lost the ability to compete with the U.S. in space, then the U.S. need not worry about going head to head with the Russians, if such a race even occurs. Either the U.S. will win the space arms race, or the Russians will decline to challenge the U.S. due to their current lack of resources, technology, and expertise. (Article, Link)
» More stories on: Russia, Space-Based Systems
National Review on the Weaponization of Space
May 20, 2005 :: National Review Online :: Analysis
The editors of National Review respond to the increasing attention to the weaponization of space controversy, weighing in on the side of the advantage of such systems.
The debate over such technologies is closely related to the debate over missile defense. Critics of the Air Force’s space aims get especially upset about space-based interceptors, which, unlike ground- and sea-based interceptors, could target a missile during its slow ascent over enemy territory.
…Any notion that space is now a pristine, weapon-free zone is pure fantasy. The irresistible power of our military depends, to a large extent, precisely on its use of space. What is a GPS satellite that guides a precision bomb to its target, if not the component of a weapon system?…In any case, further weaponization of space is probably inevitable…It’s naïve to think that today’s powers won’t compete for control of space in much the same way. Does anyone doubt that China, for example, will have moral scruples about deploying space weapons as it is becomes able to do so?
…Now is the time to channel that advantage toward a benevolent American domination of space. Doing so may not be popular, but it will make us—and the world—safer.
(Article, Link)
» More stories on: Analysis, Space-Based Systems
Spring on Weaponization of Space
May 11, 2005 :: The Heritage Foundation :: News
Baker Spring of the Heritage Foundation publishes remarks delivered at a debate on the subject of the weaponization of space, in which he outlines five attributes of the “make-believe world” of arms controllers who advocate curtailing space-based capabilities. It is a very fine summary of the arguments typically made by those who oppose using space as the next, logical extension of America’s defense.
Space is a place. It is part of the geographic constant with which militaries have had to contend from the dawn of civilization. As with any piece of geography, space possesses unique characteristics that can provide distinct advantages to the military that is able to exploit them. Through its persistence and creativity, the United States now finds itself in a favorable position relative to other states regarding the use of space for military purposes. Its lead, however, should not be taken for granted. If the United States rests on its laurels and squanders this advantage, it will certainly regret it.
(Article, Link)
» More stories on: Space-Based Systems
Dinerman on Space Weapons and Brilliant Pebbles
May 10, 2005 :: The Space Review :: Analysis
Taylor Dinerman, writing for The Space Review, notes that while the Bush administration has been making headway on a number of salutary missile defense programs, it has not restarted the space-based defenses, such as the Brilliant Pebbles which had been killed by the Clinton administration. Despite this fact, critics of the administration from the left continue to insinuate that space programs are being pursued. In fact, notes Dinerman, the administration is in a very difficult place:
Curiously, Bush has had to take all the political pain involved in withdrawing from the ABM Treaty and building an operational missile defense system without being willing to go all the way and make that system fully effective, or at least as effective as possible given the limits of today’s technology. On this issue it is striking how much more conservative and bold his father’s administration was.
The potential for Brilliant Pebbles was its ability to intercept missiles while they were still in their boost phase, when they are most vulnerable. The technology was available in the early 1990s, in fact in the 1980s, and it has only improved since:
Since Brilliant Pebbles (BP) was canceled in 1993, the Department of Defense has made some limited progress on technology that is directly applicable to space-based boost phase systems. More important has been the ongoing improvements in computer processing power and in the ability of uncooked thermal imagers to detect targets. A 2005 model of a Brilliant Pebble would be smaller and have a better electronic brain than the 1993 one. Not only that, but there are now cheaper and more reliable in-space propulsion systems, such as pulsed plasma thrusters, which would keep the BPs in orbit and operation for far longer than the older version.
(More »»»)
» More stories on: Space-Based Systems
» Missile system details for: Brilliant Pebbles
Kennedy and Garwin Debate Weaponization of Space
April 20, 2005 :: Events
Brian T. Kennedy, President of the Claremont Institute, will debate Richard L. Garwin, IBM Fellow, on the subject of the weaponization of space. The debate will be held 12-1p.m. tomorrow, April 21, at the World Affairs Council in Portland, Oregon. (More »»»)
» More stories on: Space-Based Systems
Russia “Categorically” Against Weapons in Space
April 13, 2005 :: News
Russian Defense Minister Sergei Ivanov has said that Russia is “categorically against the deployment of weapons in space,” reports Interfax. His remarks come days after a related comment by Missile Defense Agency Director Henry Obering, that the U.S. should consider experimental testing space-based missile defenses.
Obering had (correctly) noted that “Emerging threats round the world indicate the need for developing a space-based layer of defensive systems.”
Although Russia has nominally opposed the deployment of American space-based defenses—significant for the capabilities to destroy missiles much earlier in their trajectory—in fact their own policies clearly emphasize the importance of a military presence in space. And Ivanov, even while opposing American deployment, indicated in the same press conference that such a presence remains a priority for Russia. “There are currently about 100 spacecraft in our space military group, and the role of space will only go on increasing,” ITAR-TASS quoted Ivanov as saying. The strategic high ground of space makes it only reasonable that Russia would desire such basing—as well as that the U.S. should pursue space-based defenses. (Article, Link)
» Sergei Ivanov emphasizes importance of Russian space presence
» More stories on: Russia, Space-Based Systems
Obering: Time May be Right for Experiments With Space-Based Defenses
April 12, 2005 :: News
“Emerging threats round the world indicate the need for developing a space-based layer” of defensive systems, said Missile Defense Agency Director Lieutenant General Henry Obering yesterday at the 3rd Annual Missile Defense Conference in Washington, reports Defense News. The MDA, Obering said, would like to “maintain options for a space-based test bed” to begin experiments by fiscal year 2007. “There is a lot of attraction to space-based interceptors.”
Obering noted, however, the ideological opposition which such tests will likely provoke: the subject is fraught with “a lot of emotionalism and religious argument” associated with weaponizing space.”
The Aerospace Daily & Defense Report reported on April 12 that the MDA currently plans to award one-year concept design contracts to two to four industry teams in FY 2008, and that in FY 2009, one or more teams would be picked for a development and test phase that would extend to FY 2015 and include several space-based intercept tests, with a decision on whether to build a constellation of some 50 to 100 satellites possibly taking place 2014-2015. The MDA is not even seeking money for the project, however, until FY 2008, with some $45 million.
Speaking also of the Space Tracking Surveillance System (STSS) satellite system, Obering expressed, “I believe this is critical, by the way, to the future of the missile defense program…I believe we have to get to space as it relates to our sensing capability because we don’t know where the threat is going to be emerging from so we have to be able to provide global coverage and this is the only way to do it really, is from space.”
MDA is also reportedly planning to begin the Near Field InfraRed Experiment (NFIRE) in FY2007, an experimental satellite that would collect data on ballistic missile plumes. (Article, Link)
» More stories on: Space-Based Systems
» Missile system details for: Near Field Infrared Experiment (NFIRE), Space Tracking and Surveillance System (STSS)
Possible Space Interceptors
April 9, 2005 :: Inside Defense :: News
Inside the Pentagon reports on April 7 that the Bush administration is considering the deployment of a limited constellation of space-based kinetic energy interceptors to protect the United States. Plans for such an initial capability, at the cost of some $673 million, are reportedly included in a set of Missile Defense Agency long-term budgetary assessments recently made public. The projects call for a limited capability of 50-100 satellites for a “thin boost/ascent defense against intercontinental range ballistic missiles.” Testing for such a program is reported to possibly begin in 2008 if it were funded by Congress, with possible deployment no sooner than 2016.
Space-based boost-phase interceptors are of course one of the most important elements of a layered missile defense, providing the most technically effective basis from which missiles can be destroyed. The report of plans for testing, however, is sure to provoke sharp criticism by those ideologically opposed to the weaponization of space. (Link)
» More stories on: Space-Based Systems
Kennedy/Coyle Debate Weaponization of Space
March 4, 2005 :: Events
Brian Kennedy, President of the Claremont Institute, yesterday debated Philip Coyle III, Senior Advisor of the Center for Defense Information and former Assistant Secretary of Defense, on the subject of the weaponization of space. The debate sponsored by the World Affairs Council of Ventura, California was held on March 3. The Ventura County Star reports on the debate. Kennedy made the case for space-based missile defenses, and Coyle the case against.
An excerpt:
Imagine ships linked to al-Qaida secretly docked at the Port of Long Beach, waiting for the opportunity to launch a short-range ballistic missile into Los Angeles.
Would the United States have the ability to intercept this weapon of mass destruction?
According to Brian Kennedy, president of Claremont Institute, the U.S. Department of Defense could have that capability. The institute is dedicated to the study of statesmanship and political philosophy.
The best line of defense, however, would not be from land or sea, but in space, Kennedy said.
“Space-age weapons are part of that solution,” Kennedy said. “In war, one is always seeking the high ground. In traditional warfare, it is from the high ground that you have the greatest advantage.”
(Article, Link)
» More stories on: Space-Based Systems
Musharraf’s Space Ambitions
February 4, 2005 :: News
In a speech to scientists and engineers near Karachi, Pakistan President Musharraf has identified space as the next level of Pakistan’s strategic ambitions, following naturally after their established missile and nuclear capabilities, according to various Pakistani news reports. Musharraf declared his confidence that Pakistan would in the near future emerge on the space map of the world.
Musharraf’s comments follow upon recent reports that Russia will be launching two satellites for Pakistan’s neighbor Iran, in the coming months. (Article, Link)
» More stories on: Pakistan, Space-Based Systems
