|
Everything You Wanted to Know About Weapons in Space,
But Were Afraid to Ask.
What they want:
The
U.S. Air Force has filed a futuristic flight plan, one that spells out
need for an armada of space weaponry and technology for the near-term
and in years to come. Called the Transformation Flight Plan, the
176-page document offers a sweeping look at how best to expand
America's military space tool kit. Among a roster of projected Air
Force space projects:
- Air-Launched Anti-Satellite Missile: Small air-launched missile capable of intercepting satellites in low Earth orbit and seen as a past 2015 development.
- Counter Satellite Communications System: Provides the capability by 2010 to deny and disrupt an adversary's space-based communications and early warning.
- Counter Surveillance and Reconnaissance System: A near-term program to deny, disrupt and degrade adversary space-based surveillance and reconnaissance systems.
- Evolutionary Air and Space Global Laser Engagement (EAGLE) Airship Relay Mirrors:
Significantly extends the range of both the Airborne Laser and
Ground-Based Laser by using airborne, terrestrial or space-based lasers
in conjunction with space-based relay mirrors to project different
laser powers and frequencies to achieve a broad range of effects from
illumination to destruction.
- Ground-Based Laser:
Propagates laser beams through the atmosphere to Low-Earth Orbit
satellites to provide robust, post-2015 defensive and offensive space
control capability.
- Hypervelocity Rod Bundles: Provides the capability to strike ground targets anywhere in the world from space.
- Orbital Deep Space Imager: A mid-term predictive, near-real time common operating picture of space to enable space control operations.
- Orbital Transfer Vehicle:
Significantly adds flexibility and protection of U.S. space hardware in
post-2015 while enabling on-orbit servicing of those assets.
- Rapid Attack Identification Detection and Reporting System: A family of systems that will provide near-term capability to automatically identify when a space system is under attack.
- Space-Based Radio Frequency Energy Weapon:
A far-term constellation of satellites containing high-power
radio-frequency transmitters that possess the capability to
disrupt/destroy/disable a wide variety of electronics and
national-level command and control systems. It would typically be used
as a non-kinetic anti-satellite weapon.
- Space-Based Space Surveillance System:
A near-term constellation of optical sensing satellites to track and
identify space forces in deep space to enable offensive and defensive
counterspace operations.
This is not a picture from your kid's sci-fi comic. It's an illustration from a report by
Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld's Space Commission.
The
report advocates circumventing the intent of international laws
(notably, the Outer Space Treaty of 1967) that seek to keep space free
from war and urges that the President "have the option to deploy
weapons in space." National Missile Defense, begun as Star Wars under
Reagan, is just one layer of this much larger scheme to "control" space
and "dominate" the earth, in the words of the report. "The United
States is seeking to turn space into a war zone," maintains the Global
Network Against Weapons and Nuclear Power in Space.
(source: http://www.envirovideo.com/starwars.html)
|
Air Force plans for future war in space - Leonard David, Feb. 23, 2004
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4353309/
A few of the most frightening programs have been listed below:
An Air Force space program, nicknamed Rods From God, aims to hurl
cylinders of tungsten, titanium or uranium from the edge of space to
destroy targets on the ground, striking at speeds of about 7,200 miles
an hour with the force of a small nuclear weapon.
A new Air
Force strategy, Global Strike, calls for a military space plane
carrying precision-guided weapons armed with a half-ton of munitions.
General Lord told Congress last month that Global Strike would be "an
incredible capability" to destroy command centers or missile bases
"anywhere in the world."
Pentagon documents say the weapon,
called the common aero vehicle, could strike from halfway around the
world in 45 minutes. "This is the type of prompt Global Strike I have
identified as a top priority for our space and missile force," General
Lord said.
A third program would bounce laser beams off mirrors
hung from space satellites or huge high-altitude blimps, redirecting
the lethal rays down to targets around the world. A fourth seeks to
turn radio waves into weapons whose powers could range "from tap on the
shoulder to toast," in the words of an Air Force plan.
Air Force Seeks Bush's Approval for Space Weapons Programs, NY Times 5-18-05
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2005/051805C.shtml
And he (Bush) is funding the resurrection of laser battle stations in
space, weapons which pass over every city on earth and can incinerate
them much more easily than they can destroy even a few boosters.
Robert M. Bowman, Lt. Col., USAF, ret. http://www.rmbowman.com/ssn/SW2.htm
Why they say they want it:
The Air Force believes "we must establish and maintain space
superiority," Gen. Lance Lord, who leads the Air Force Space Command,
told Congress recently. "Simply put, it's the American way of
fighting." Air Force doctrine defines space superiority as "freedom to
attack as well as freedom from attack" in space.
Air Force Seeks Bush's Approval for Space Weapons Programs, NY Times 5-18-05
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2005/051805C.shtml
Defense
Secretary Donald Rumsfeld has long advocated sending arms into orbit.
Just before taking office in 2001, he chaired a commission on space and
national security that warned that the country could face a "space
Pearl Harbor" in the years to come. This calamity must be avoided, the
commission declared, asserting that the best way to do that is to
"vigorously pursue the capabilities ... to ensure that the President
will have the option to deploy weapons in space."
Pentagon Preps for War in Space Noah Shachtman, Wired News 02/23/2004
http://www.wired.com/news/technology/0,1282,62358,00.html
"We haven't reached the point of strafing and bombing from space," Pete
Teets, who stepped down last month as the acting secretary of the Air
Force, told a space warfare symposium last year. "Nonetheless, we are
thinking about those possibilities."
Air Force Seeks Bush's Approval for Space Weapons Programs, NY Times 5-18-05
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2005/051805C.shtml
“We
are not prepared to negotiate on the so-called arms race in outer
space. We just don't see that as a worthwhile enterprise.”
John R. Bolton, Undersecretary of State for Arms Control and International Security
G8 Senior Group Meeting Geneva, Switzerland, September 10, 2004
http://www.us-mission.ch/press2004/0910BoltonTrans.htm
How much of your money will be spent on it:
The Air Force does not put a price tag on space superiority. Published
studies by leading weapons scientists, physicists and engineers say the
cost of a space-based system that could defend the nation against an
attack by a handful of missiles could be anywhere from $220 billion to
$1 trillion.
Air Force Seeks Bush's Approval for Space Weapons Programs, NY Times 5-18-05
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2005/051805C.shtml
Bush's total concept is still being developed, but it will not cost the
$60 billion to $200 billion the Clinton system would have cost. If ever
built, it will cost more like a trillion dollars, maybe much more.
http://www.rmbowman.com/ssn/SW2.htm
With little public debate, the Pentagon has already spent billions of
dollars developing space weapons and preparing plans to deploy them.
The Air Force's drive into space has been accelerated by the Pentagon's
failure to build a missile defense on earth. After spending 22 years
and nearly $100 billion, Pentagon officials say they cannot reliably
detect and destroy a threat today.
Richard Garwin, widely regarded
as a dean of American weapons science, and three colleagues wrote in
the March issue of IEEE Spectrum, the professional journal of electric
engineering, that "a space-based laser would cost $100 million per
target, compared with $600,000 for a Tomahawk missile."
Air Force Seeks Bush's Approval for Space Weapons Programs, NY Times 5-18-05
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2005/051805C.shtml
What the consequences are of war in space:
Violation of International Treaties - The Outer Space Treaty at a Glance:
The 1967 Outer Space Treaty bans the stationing of weapons of mass
destruction (WMD) in outer space, prohibits military activities on
celestial bodies, and details legally binding rules governing the
peaceful exploration and use of space. Ninety-seven countries are
states-parties to the treaty, while another 27 have signed it but have
not yet completed ratification. North Korea is the only state with
potential space-launch capabilities that has not signed the treaty.
Fueled by concerns about U.S. missile defense plans and space policy,
many countries support negotiation of additional outer space
agreements. China is pressing the 66-member UN Conference on
Disarmament in Geneva to negotiate a treaty on the prevention of an
arms race in outer space. The United States, however, claims no
additional outer space treaties are needed because there is currently
no arms race in outer space.
The treaty's key arms control provisions are in Article IV. States-parties commit not to:
- Place in orbit around the Earth or other celestial bodies any nuclear weapons or objects carrying WMD.
- Install WMD on celestial bodies or station WMD in outer space in any other manner.
- Establish
military bases or installations, test "any type of weapons," or conduct
military exercises on the moon and other celestial bodies.
Other
treaty provisions underscore that space is no single country's domain
and that all countries have a right to explore it. These provisions
state that:
- Space should be accessible to all countries and can be freely and scientifically investigated.
- Space and celestial bodies are exempt from national claims of ownership.
- Countries are to avoid contaminating and harming space or celestial bodies.
- Countries exploring space are responsible and liable for any damage their activities may cause.
- Space
exploration is to be guided by "principles of cooperation and mutual
assistance," such as obliging astronauts to provide aid to one another
if needed.
—Researched by Ben Rusek, September 2003
http://www.armscontrol.org/factsheets/outerspace.asp
Despite such… hurdles, space-based arms are legal. The Outer Space
Treaty of 1967 only bans nuclear weapons and other weapons of mass
destruction from orbit.
Pentagon Preps for War in Space, Noah Shachtman, Wired News 02/23/2004
http://www.wired.com/news/technology/0,1282,62358,00.html
The Threat of Space Debris:
What effects could introducing weapons into space have on the largely benign uses of space?
Debris is paramount—because of the high speeds in orbit, a collision
with even a tiny particle can devastate a satellite. Both
destruction's of satellites and missiles in space can create lots of
little particles that would have a negative impact on other users.
Especially for space-based ballistic missile defense cluttering up
space at valuable altitudes are problems. I remind you that space-based
BMD would require deployment hundreds or thousands of satellites in
orbits near earth. Such clutter would have an impact on other users,
but requiring a more complicated space traffic system to make sure
satellites did not collide during launches and while orbiting.
Drastically increasing the number of satellites in low-earth orbit
would increase interference on communications systems. We want to be
very sure that we want to go down this road. There is a lot to lose.
Dr. Laura Grego, Union of Concerned Scientists October 21 , 2004
http://www.ucsusa.org/global_security/space_weapons/page.cfm?pageID=1716
An issue that affects both the military and the civilian sectors is
space debris, which results from all space activities. A failure to
mitigate the accumulation of debris will have devastating effects on
both communities. With more than 9,000 objects over 10 centimeters in
size already being tracked in various orbits by U.S. Space Command, the
debris problem is an increasing concern. The expected overall growth in
space activity, and possible U.S. and foreign ASAT tests, will further
heighten the danger of collisions that could be fatal to satellites or
spacecraft. Even the United States lacks the capability to track
"micro-debris"--particles that can do considerable damage but are less
than 10 centimeters in length (and which may now number more than
100,000).
Arguably, the lack of enforceable international debris
mitigation rules represents the most serious long-term threat in space.
There are emerging domestic and international efforts to address this
problem, which--in contrast to almost all other areas of proposed space
regulation--are supported by the Bush administration and the Pentagon.
A domestic effort to create new rules governing license holders for
commercial satellites would require them to de-orbit old satellites (or
boost them into parking orbits) once their service lives have been
completed, as well as practice other debris mitigation techniques as a
condition of gaining a license to launch a commercial satellite. Given
U.S. dominance in the satellite market, these rules would contribute
significantly to minimizing debris from commercial satellites. A second
effort is taking place in the U.N. Committee on the Peaceful Uses of
Outer Space (COPUOS). A draft convention is being crafted that may be
available for approval within the next two years. This agreement would
help to create international rules for debris mitigation, but would
apply to peaceful activities only, leaving a potentially dangerous
loophole for military programs.
Reining
in the space cowboys - James Clay Moltz January/February 2003 pp.
61-66 (vol. 59, no. 01) © 2003 Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists
http://www.thebulletin.org/article.php?art_ofn=jf03moltz
The Beginning of an Arms Race in Space:
"I don't think other countries will be taking this lying down," said
Theresa Hitchens, the vice president of the Center for Defense
Information. "This will certainly prompt China into actually moving
forward" on space weapon plans of its own, she added. "The Russians are
likely to respond with something as well."
http://www.defensetech.org/archives/000783.html
Senior military and space officials of the European Union, Canada,
China and Russia have objected publicly to the notion of American space
superiority.
They think that "the United States doesn't own
space - nobody owns space," said Teresa Hitchens, vice president of the
Center for Defense Information, a policy analysis group in Washington
that tends to be critical of the Pentagon. "Space is a global commons
under international treaty and international law."
No nation
will "accept the U.S. developing something they see as the death star,"
Ms. Hitchens told a Council on Foreign Relations meeting last month. "I
don't think the United States would find it very comforting if China
were to develop a death star, a 24/7 on-orbit weapon that could strike
at targets on the ground anywhere in 90 minutes."
Air Force Seeks Bush's Approval for Space Weapons Programs, NY Times 5-18-05
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2005/051805C.shtml
"…(P)ursuing such a strategy may actually put the United States in
greater jeopardy, argues David Wright, with the Union of Concerned
Scientists. "You're opening a door you might rather not have opened,"
he said.
"America is the country with the most satellites, he
explained. By developing anti-satellite weapons, "it legitimizes
systems that the U.S. has the most to lose from." Other countries could
start pursuing long-taboo space weapons efforts. And while countries
like China don't have the technical sophistication of the United
States, they already have the capabilities to hurt us in space --
medium range missiles, and nuclear warheads. Wright added, "This could
trigger a backlash that actually leaves the U.S. worse off." Pentagon Preps for War in Space, Noah Shachtman, Wired News 02/23/2004
http://www.wired.com/news/technology/0,1282,62358,00.html
But General Lord said such problems should not stand in the way of the
Air Force's plans to move into space. "Space superiority is not our
birthright, but it is our destiny," he told an Air Force conference in
September. "Space superiority is our day-to-day mission. Space
supremacy is our vision for the future."
Air Force Seeks Bush's Approval for Space Weapons Programs, NY Times 5-18-05
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2005/051805C.shtml
The great irony is that, while "Star Wars" weapons are useless against
terrorists (in fact useless as a defense of any kind), by increasing
apparent U.S. military superiority and invulnerability, these weapons
actually increase the fear and hatred of people in the developing
nations toward our government and therefore increase the terrorist
threat.
Robert M. Bowman, Lt. Col., USAF, ret. Star Wars Weapons Jeopardize the War on Terrorism
http://www.rmbowman.com/ssn/SW-Terror.htm
This does not mean that Star Wars II won’t do anything. It will. It
will ensure the Pentagon the mastery of space it desires. It will line
the pockets of the weapons manufacturers for decades to come (at the
expense of "optional" domestic programs like education, health care,
social security, the environment, and the rebuilding of our crumbling
infrastructure). It will guarantee the multinational corporations and
banks the protection of an unconstrained gunboat foreign policy, backed
up by absolute military superiority. It will reverse decades of
progress in arms control with the Russians. It will cause the Chinese
to greatly increase their nuclear capability. It will drive a wedge
between the United States and our allies. It will enormously increase
the terrorist nuclear threat to the people of this country. And it will
practically guarantee eventual nuclear disaster.
STAR WARS II: GEORGE II REINVENTS NATIONAL MISSILE DEFENSE by Dr. Robert M. Bowman, Lt. Col., USAF (ret)
http://www.rmbowman.com/ssn/SW2.htm
The inescapable conclusion:
Space weapons are expensive, unproven and could lead to a new pursuit
by nations across the globe to develop their own space weaponry. In
the end, weapons in space will not make us safe. Only dialogue,
diplomacy and the outlaw of all WMD worldwide will let all human beings
live in peace.
To demand NO WEAPONS IN SPACE and to keep all uses of outer space peaceful, please contact these organizations:
|
E-mail: info@stpeteforpeace.org
