Mankind has a terrible history of warfare, virtually uninterrupted. So it comes as no surprise that dominance of one nation over another has now moved into low earth orbit space. A scramble is underway to place specially created instruments of destruction above the earth. The battle for space war technology is on.
Use of orbiting equipment to send damage downward to the earth is possible, but unlikely. Perhaps Nuclear explosion generated Electromagnetic Pulses (EMPs) might be an exception, but experts think war will be battles to destroy one another’s orbiting technology.
The specter of a nuclear explosion from space is always a possibility, but at present is being suppressed by a 1967 United Nations Outer Space Treaty (OST). It is meant to be a guard against use of weapons of mass destruction (WMD) in orbit or on celestial bodies such as the moon. However, lawyers say that the treaty is vague and poorly written.
The language can be exploited and may create near-term threats. It is not strong enough to prevent an arms race in space, and that is the case. Russia has already blocked a straight forward UN resolution that would legally forbid a nation from launching WMDs into orbit.
Up to now, space has been used for peaceful purposes such as telecommunications and Global Positioning Systems for navigation. Our country relies heavily upon this equipment. But the OST is being ignored. The author reports that “Countries like China and Russia have developed anti-satellite weapon capabilities, including kinetic kill vehicles and electronic warfare systems aimed at disabling or destroying US satellites.”
China has 650 orbiting satellites, second only to the US. There are 77 space agencies around the world, of which 16 have launch capabilities. Seven countries (USA, Russian Federation, China, Japan, India, Israel and Iran) have demonstrated orbital launches. So space activity is brisk.
There are factors in the space game that will now allow more players to enter, not all of whom will use space for peaceful purposes. Miniaturization of satellites, falling launch costs and commercialization of the space industry are the major ones. So rogue nations may become a threat. Already some in our government are saying that updating the OST may be a waste of time.
A national security lawyer for the US government, Irina Tsukerman, says “I think prohibiting military space activity is futile because it puts law abiding states at a disadvantage before powerful rogue regimes, which under various pretenses can ignore, misinterpret, or withdraw from this treaty and refuse to be bound by international law.”
Our country has long anticipated space-based conflict. Tsukerman says that “any government’s space initiatives will likely mirror its activities on the ground. For some, this is good news. But when it comes to malign actors or authoritarian regimes, expect the same behavior in space. Expecting anything different, such as resolution of disputes through legal action or political deliberations as opposed to military activity, is an exercise in futility. It’s only a matter of time before prohibitions are violated.”
And so, mankind’s sordid history of warfare will almost certainly continue.
Our nation’s current commitment to superior space technology is reminiscent of Ronald Reagan’s foreign policy ,“peace through strength.” Convention of States Action patriots can (and must) nonetheless continue to strive faithfully to align our government with the high ideals embraced at the launch of our nation. This is best accomplished with less government, fewer unaccountable bureaucrats, and the empowerment of private enterprise like Elon Musk’s SpaceX.
For more information about how the states can pare back the size and scope of the federal government, please visit www.ConventionofStates.com.
Spredemann, Autumn., "The Battle for Space Is On," The Epoch Times, October 30-November 5, 2024, No. 536, A11.
