|
|
|
|
Star Wars: Empires strike
back
By Giuseppe Anzera
A series of Pentagon initiatives aimed at
space militarization and the creation of new types
of armament - capable of precisely striking small
targets in every corner of the world and
neutralizing most of today's anti-aircraft
defenses - will likely result in a new power
battlefield in the near future.
While the
implementation of space weapons is likely to
increase the capability gap between Washington and
other powers at first, a broader vision reveals
dangers involved in the move that could affect US
interests, for it will likely trigger determined
reactions by its competitors. Competitor states
could successfully deploy a small number of
low-cost orbital weapons, thus forcing the US to
design an extremely expensive space defense
system.
Thus, a space weaponization policy
may generate more troubles than advantages for
Washington.
Turn toward space
militarization
The Pentagon's plans to
militarize space have definitely emerged. In
mid-May, the US Air Force formally asked President
George W Bush to issue a presidential directive
that allows Washington to deploy defensive and
offensive weapons into orbit. Formally, the new
directive was necessary to replace a precedent
decree (PDD-NSC-49 - National Space Policy) issued
by the Bill Clinton administration, which forbids
the indiscriminate militarization of space. While
the decree has not yet been issued, speculation
over the Pentagon's move already hit the news.
After the 2002 unilateral US withdrawal
from the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty, worries
were raised about Washington's possible start of
such a program, for it could transform space into
a new battlefield. The US Air Force request,
coupled with the April launch of the XSS-11
orbital micro-satellite, increased the concerns of
observers and world powers. XSS-11 is specifically
designed to disturb other states'
military/reconnaissance or communication
satellites.
A discontinuance of US
traditional policy about the restricted (eg
peaceful) use of space could engender a new arms
race - which appears economically and
technologically challenging and way beyond many
states' reach.
Rods from God
On
the technological level, the Pentagon's planning
is in the advanced stage: some projects - aimed at
space weaponization - have already been in place
for some time. Among the (partially known)
Pentagon's new plans, the two most interesting
projects are the "Global Strike" program and the
"Rods from God" program. Global Strike involves
the employment of military space planes capable of
carrying about 500 kilograms (1,100 pounds) of
high-precision weapons (with a circular error
probability less than three meters) with the
primary use of striking enemy military bases and
command and control facilities in any point of the
world.
The main strength of military space
planes is the ability to reach any spot on the
globe within 45 minutes. This is a short period of
time that could provide US forces with a
formidable quick-reaction capability, as opposed
to the enemy's subsequent inability to organize
any effective defense. Such a weapon's primary
target would be the enemy's strategic forces and -
according to US Air Force sources widely quoted in
the news - the Pentagon is inclined to give
priority to this project. One of the main reasons,
these sources say, is that the Pentagon itself -
after spending more than US$100 billion - has
finally admitted its failure to create an
infallible earth-based, anti-missile system to
protect American soil from ballistic strikes.
The US Air Force often underscores the
space plane's wide operational spectrum. In fact,
its utilization encompasses that of a strategic
weapon as well as that of its defensive uses of
neutralizing nuclear missiles; it would have the
ability to target and eliminate militant and
terrorist leaders. The space plane could also be
employed to suppress long-range air defenses,
thanks to its high mobility, hyper-fast deployment
and its immunity to the defenses of its opponents.
Other uses could be envisaged in the Integrated
Air Defense System, as well as surveillance tasks.
Moreover, space planes could be easily deployed to
support the US Army's rapid reaction force and
units of Marines during power-projection
operations and redeployment phases.
"Rods
from God" is the evolution of a 1980s program.
Basically, it consists of orbiting platforms
stocked with metal tungsten rods about 6.1 meters
long (20 feet) and 30 centimeters (one foot) in
diameter that could be satellite-guided to targets
anywhere on the earth within minutes, for the rods
would move at more than 11,000 kilometers an hour
(6,835 miles per hour). This weapon exploits
kinetic energy to cause an explosion the same
magnitude of that of an earth-penetrating nuclear
weapon, but with no radioactive fallout. The
system would function due to two satellites, one
of which would work as a communications platform,
while the other would contain an arsenal of
tungsten rods. Each of the satellites would be
seven meters long and its diameter would be
approximately 30 centimeters.
However,
serious problems would arise if the Pentagon began
the operational phase - especially from a
financial perspective. Some studies maintain that
Rods from God could be fully operational in 10
years. The targets of the rods would be much more
restricted than those of Global Strike. Their main
targets remains ballistic missiles stockpiled in
hardened sites or orbital devices and satellite
systems deployed by other powers - according to
the counter-space operation doctrine. Rods from
God can, however, be employed to strike targets in
desert areas - be they hardened sites or
concentrated hostile forces.
Its
devastating striking power does not allow such a
weapon to be used for other missions, if
unsustainable collateral damage is to be avoided.
Other projects - which often look like a
revisited version of former US president Ronald
Reagan's Strategic Defense Initiative programs -
could also be undertaken, such as space mirrors
satellites redirecting laser beams from earth
against any orbit or surface target and satellites
that send out radio waves with a high range in
power and breadth.
Problems
The
White House will face several problems if it wants
to pursue the ambitious project of space
militarization consisting of both offensive and
defensive weapons.
The first point is the
political issue. International reactions to US
plans have already appeared: Russian Defense
Minister Sergei Ivanov recently gave an immediate
reaction from Moscow, and serious consequences
were threatened should an orbital weapon
deployment be performed by Washington. Such a
reaction could consist of a modified version of
the SS-18 intercontinental ballistic missile,
capable of putting into orbit a remarkable
quantity of space vehicles - which could even
carry military nukes, thus making the US's planned
intercepting efforts much more difficult.
It is easy to imagine that space
weaponization - once in place - could be employed
as well by US rivals at any occasion, as these
latter will develop mutual strategic ties just
like China and Russia are doing in Central Asia.
The second problem is economic. Orbital
weapons - as the Strategic Defense Initiative
showed in the 1980s - are extremely expensive. It
has been estimated that a space defense system
against weak ballistic missile strikes could cost
between $220 billion and $1 trillion. A
laser-based system to be used against ballistic
missiles would cost about $100 million for each
target.
For instance, the Future Imagery
Architecture - a project aimed at the
implementation of new spy satellites, which are
vital to identify targets for space weapons - has
already reached a cost of $25 billion. It is a
legitimate question, therefore, whether Washington
really needs to finance such projects in today's
geostrategic context. Moreover, would these tools
be cost-effective in relation to their real
operational capability? The first question raises
doubts and the second one remains, at the moment,
without answer. Henceforth, such initiatives
resemble more and more Reagan's programs.
The third fundamental problem is of
strategic nature. The implications of space
militarization are enormous, and its consequences
can't be predicted. It is certain that - in the
short term - US financial and technological
superiority would increase the already prominent
gap in military power between Washington and the
rest of the world. In addition, some of the new
weapons could give the White House new effective
tools to fight against symmetrical (states) and
asymmetrical (terror networks) threats. However,
in the long run, a military colonization of outer
space could very well be started by other powers -
which would hardly tolerate Washington's
quasi-private use of space.
The Clinton
administration decided to take the opposite route
and avoid international space militarization, as
it considered a new front useless because of the
US military's overwhelming dominance on land, sea
and air.
Moreover, the orbital deployment
of offensive weapons - even though unequivocally
non-nuclear - can be perilous for various reasons.
First of all, the US is currently obligated not to
deploy atomic or weapons of mass destruction space
weapons, as it signed the 1967 Outer Space Treaty.
Even if Rods from God is not a nuclear
weapon, its impact power is near the magnitude of
a nuke. Hence, it is not certain that the
international community will consider it a
conventional weapon, and a violation of the treaty
could, therefore, be claimed. As a consequence, an
indiscriminate race to space weaponization could
begin - involving the orbital deployment of
weapons of mass destruction and nuclear weapons.
This latter scenario could result in a problem for
the US, a problem that its decision-makers in the
1960s strived to avoid at any cost.
Second, political consequences of a
quasi-nuclear weapon should not be overlooked. If
Rods from God will be used and other powers will
perceive it as the equivalent of a nuclear strike,
many states could change their perception of
weapons of mass destruction and nuclear weapons
standards. A stark decrease in the traditional
refrain from using nuclear bombs could then occur,
thus changing the current strategy behind nuclear
weapons: that of deterrence tools.
Conclusion
The road to space
weaponization is hazardous. The current US
administration appears confident that it can
handle the issue successfully. As usual, when a
new category of weapons sees the light, it is not
clear whether newcomers will suffer from perpetual
disadvantage.
If other powers succeed in
implementing low-cost orbital instruments that
could endanger Washington's sophisticated space
weapons, the US could rapidly find itself in need
of financing hyper-expensive programs designed to
protect the country - a situation that could make
the Pentagon regret having opened the space front
to begin with.
Published with
permission of the Power and Interest News
Report, an analysis-based
publication that seeks to provide insight into
various conflicts, regions and points of interest
around the globe. All comments should be directed
to content@pinr.com |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
All material on this
website is copyright and may not be republished in any form without written
permission.
© Copyright 1999 - 2005 Asia Times
Online Ltd.
|
|
Head
Office: Rm 202, Hau Fook Mansion, No. 8 Hau Fook St., Kowloon, Hong
Kong
Thailand Bureau:
11/13 Petchkasem Road, Hua Hin, Prachuab Kirikhan, Thailand 77110
|
|
|
|
