United States

Photo Source:
   NIAS Course on Global Politics
National Institute of Advanced Studies (NIAS)
Indian Institute of Science Campus, Bangalore
For any further information or to subscribe to GP alerts send an email to subachandran@nias.res.in

CWA # 34, 26 June 2018
United States
The Idea of an US Space Force: Strategic Calculations

  Harini Madhusudan

Though it is still unclear on how such a force will come about and under what authority and terms they would function, it will successfully set grounds for a stronger debate over the reformation of the Outer Space Treaty

Project Associate, NIAS

On 18 June 2018, President Donald Trump signed a space policy directive, and said, “When it comes to defending America, it is not enough to merely have an American presence in space. We must have American dominance in space.” “We are going to have the Air Force, and we are going to have the Space Force- separate but equal.”

The idea of a separate wing of the military for Space has been around since the time of Eisenhower, immediately after the USSR launched its first satellite Sputnik in 1957. Why has it taken so long? What is the relevance of such a space force today? What can other space-faring nations take away from this announcement? The US has the highest number of satellites in space and is also known to invest over 35.9 billion dollars on space-related activities. A designated space force as such, would not change a lot in the US activities in space, it would transfer the role played by the Air Force onto a separate, but specific branch.

Over five decades, the debates for the formation of a space force have always been met with bureaucratic resistance. It may not be the case this time. Firstly,  it is because the stakes today are different from the time of the cold war for the USA. Secondly, the consistent emergence of a private sector in space-related activities. These private players want to introduce space tourism, asteroid mining of minerals and a range of other fascinating stuff. Thirdly, the number of players in space has significantly increased and this not only puts US assets in space at risk but also its dominance. With the growing technology and the ambiguity of the laws that govern nations’ activities in space, the vulnerability of these assets is too high. A space force would hence, make so much sense not just for the USA but for everyone with a space programme.   

 

Time is right

The “Space Force” could help fuel a 1 trillion dollar economy, said Morgan Stanley after Trump’s announcement. The bank is roughly tracking 100 private companies that are involved in commercial activities related to space. It is not just an idea, it represents the need. "Our conversations with various actors (current and retired) in the US government, military, and intelligence communities overwhelmingly indicate that space is an area where we will see significant development," a team of analysts led by Adam Jonas, the bank's autos analyst, wrote to Reuters. "This development could enhance US technological leadership and address vulnerabilities in surveillance, mission deployment, cyber, and AI."

However, the President can simply not create a force like that, he needs the approval of the Congress. Despite the statistics and positive take on the possibility of such a force, there is a lot of technical and financial barriers to it. But why do they want such a force, (knowing that they are at least 10 years ahead of all other space-faring nations out there) what threatens them?

 

The US Grand Plans

The US has slowly started to look inward. Many of Trump’s policies indicate a sense of protected behaviour towards everything American. The Space Force is an extension to this attitude. We have our assets, our prized possessions, our pride and we would want to protect them. Not long ago, in 2016, the US Airforce released an interesting piece on why America should strengthen its first strike capability in space, and its central argument was based on the concept of ‘Weaponization of Everything.’ This is what America fears (at least that is what they say)

Weaponization of everything can be used to explain the behaviour from a lot of cases in the past few years. The concept is simple words mean that weapons are no longer simply the traditional tools of war—guns, missiles, warplanes, naval ships and so forth—but everyday objects that can be adapted to damage, destroy or kill. Take the example of a number of truck-related incidents or the fact that one small piece of debris can cause irreversible damage to any satellite on orbit if carefully directed; it makes it tough to even trace the origins of such damage. The threats are real and so are the plans to counter them.

First strike capability would mean that anyone could cause damage and label it as a threat to their assets. It would also mean, launching and placing the unbanned weapons in orbit, to not just attack stuff in space, but to target FROM space. This is going to be the inevitable outcome of such a force. First, they protect their assets and eventually it moves towards their interests. One such example is the floating discussions on placing kinetic impactors in orbit. They do not fall under the criteria of the weapons of mass destruction from the Outer Space treaty (1967). These Kinetic impactors, for example, “Rods from Gods,” is capable of penetrating hundreds of feet into the earth when launched from a higher altitude, and make it possible to destroy hardened bunkers or secret underground sites- giving the impact that a nuclear weapon gives sans the fallout.

 

Space Force: What about the other countries?

There is a significant role played by the Air Force wing of space-faring nations in their space activities, however, the idea of a separate wing for space-related activities may be relevant to everyone's programme. It not only conveniently divides the roles played by them but also provides significant space for specialisation. Eventually, it moves on to help to create a whole industry around it. Right from education to the smallest things like the spare parts industry or the astronaut suits industry. A specified force that would defend these interests and businesses would give an irrevocable edge to the USA.

Though it is still unclear on how such a force will come about and under what authority and terms they would function, it will successfully set grounds for a stronger debate over the reformation of the Outer Space Treaty. Along with the three rogue satellites launched by the private players from the USA, this will strengthen their dominance in space and also give them an opportunity to dictate terms in their favour. The takeaway here is the strategic farsightedness from the side of USA.    

Print Bookmark

PREVIOUS COMMENTS

NIAS Global Politics Database
March 2024 | CWA # 1251

NIAS Africa Team

Africa This Week
NIAS Global Politics Database
February 2024 | CWA # 1226

NIAS Africa Team

Africa This Week
The World This Year
December 2023 | CWA # 1189

Hoimi Mukherjee | Hoimi Mukherjee is an Assistant Professor at the Department of Political Science in Bankura Zilla Saradamani Mahila Mahavidyapith.

Chile in 2023: Crises of Constitutionality
The World This Year
December 2023 | CWA # 1187

Aprajita Kashyap | Aprajita Kashyap is a faculty of Latin American Studies, School of International Studies at the Jawaharlal Nehru University New Delhi.

Haiti in 2023: The Humanitarian Crisis
The World This Year
December 2023 | CWA # 1185

Binod Khanal | Binod Khanal is a Doctoral candidate at the Centre for European Studies, School of International Studies, JNU, New Delhi.

The Baltic: Energy, Russia, NATO and China
The World This Year
December 2023 | CWA # 1183

Padmashree Anandhan | Padmashree Anandhan is a Research Associate at the School of Conflict and Security Studies, National Institute of Advanced Studies, Bangaluru.

Germany in 2023: Defence, Economy and Energy Triangle
The World This Year
December 2023 | CWA # 1178

​​​​​​​Ashok Alex Luke | Ashok Alex Luke is an Assistant Professor at the Department of Political Science at CMS College, Kottayam.

China and South Asia in 2023: Advantage Beijing?
The World This Year
December 2023 | CWA # 1177

Annem Naga Bindhu Madhuri | Annem Naga Bindhu Madhuri is a postgraduate student at the Department of Defence and Strategic Studies at the University of Madras, Chennai.

China and East Asia
The War in Ukraine
October 2023 | CWA # 1091

Annem Naga Bindhu Madhuri

Issues for Europe
IPRI Quarterly Forecasts I Triggers, Trends, and Trajectories
July 2023 | CWA # 1012

Bibhu Prasad Routray

Myanmar continues to burn
2022: The World This Year
December 2022 | CWA # 879

Padmashree Anandhan

The Ukraine War
Europe: Heatwaves, Wildfires, Droughts, and Ice Melt in Alps
November 2022 | CWA # 838

Rishma Banerjee

Tracing Europe's droughts
NIAS Africa Weekly
March 2022 | CWA # 705

NIAS Africa Team

In Focus: Libya
The World This Week: 150th Issue
December 2021 | CWA # 630

GP Team

Europe in 2021
Pakistan Reader
October 2021 | CWA # 588

Abigail Miriam Fernandez

TLP is back again
NIAS Fortnightly on Science, Technology & International Relations
August 2021 | CWA # 528

STIR Team

Space Tourism
Science, Technology and International Relations
September 2019 | CWA # 162

Lakshman Chakravarthy N

5G: A Primer
South Asia Monthly Brief (Nov 2018)
December 2018 | CWA # 71

Mahesh Bhatta | Centre for South Asian Studies, Kathmandu

Nepal
South Asia Monthly Brief (Nov 2018)
December 2018 | CWA # 70

Nasima Khatoon | Research Associate, ISSSP, NIAS

The Maldives
South Asia Monthly Brief (Nov 2018)
December 2018 | CWA # 69

Harini Madhusudan | Research Associate, ISSSP, NIAS

India
South Asia Monthly Brief (Nov 2018)
December 2018 | CWA # 68

Sourina Bej | Research Associate, ISSSP, NIAS

Bangladesh
South Asia Monthly Brief (Nov 2018)
December 2018 | CWA # 67

Seetha Lakshmi Dinesh Iyer | Research Associate, ISSSP, NIAS

Afghanistan