(March 28, 2019) — Acting US Defense Secretary Patrick Shanahan may claim the US will win any war in space, not realizing that such conflict will forever make humanity prisoners on Earth. Thankfully, his words are just propaganda, analysts say.
“I’m fully confident we could win a conflict in space today” against Russia, China or any other adversary, Shanahan told US senators, who are deciding if he’s fit to take on the job on a permanent basis.
When asked to comment on this ambitious statement, Bruce Gagnon, coordinator of the Global Network Against Weapons and Nuclear Power in Space, remembered the words of US astronaut Edgar Mitchell, who was the sixth person to walk on the moon.
“Years ago, I organized a protest at NASA’s Kennedy Space Center in Florida and one of the speakers was Mitchell. And he said if there’s one war in space – it’ll be the last because so much space junk will be created by blowing up the satellites that we won’t be able to get a rocket off Earth anymore. It just won’t be able to get through this ‘minefield.'”
However, the acting defense secretary’s words“are really not new” as Washington had been talking about controlling and dominating space since the days of President Ronald Reagan back in the 1980s, Gagnon told RT.
“The US sees space as another fighting domain. They have a slogan, reading ‘full spectrum dominance’ and what this means is that the US military should control a conflict at every level – on the ground, in the ocean, in the air and now in space.”
The activist praised Russia and China for their decades-long effort to promote Prevention of an Arms Race in Outer Space (PAROS), regretting that “the US and Israel keep blocking that treaty at the UN.”
“Russia and China have been saying: ‘Let’s close the door to the barn before the horse gets out.’ But the US refuses as its weapons corporations are committed to making huge money off a new arms race in space.”
Military expert from the Russian magazine Arsenal Otechestva, Aleksey Leonkov, said Shanahan’s bravado is nothing but a “propagandist move.”
“The question is – with what hardware exactly is the US going to achieve this victory?” he wondered.
The analyst recalled that US Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) marked three perspective directions in developing military space technologies back in 2002. “They were space interceptors, which would eliminate ballistic missiles; space platforms with powerful lasers, most likely nuclear powered, to protect the US territory; and special systems to strike targets on Earth with space-to-surface missiles.”
According to Leonkov, “none of these American projects is even close to practical implementation” at the moment.
Unlike the US, “Russia has recently developed a real military laser system and possesses technologies to deliver it to orbit,” he said. And if Soviet experience in the field is restored,“it’ll all be fine” for Russia.
“The USSR produced several space military systems and even tested them. One of them was the R-36ORB missile, which was able to remain in orbit as a satellite and hit a target on the ground on command from the control center. This system was even on combat duty until 1993. We also had Almaz space battle stations that could tackle spacecraft and ballistic missiles.”
China is also a strong competitor, as it already has “anti-satellite and anti-missile systems in orbit,” while actively developing its manned space program, Leonkov said.
The US is only trying to “start catching up” in the race of space war systems development, as their own technologies are in “infant stage,” former Pentagon official Michael Maloof told RT.
“The technology in many respects still needs to be developed … The US does not have an anti-missile system that can be launched from Earth that would be capable of hitting missiles or satellites that are in orbit beyond 150 miles,” he said.
“There’s an open discussion of trying to get the next-generation technology going because they’re watching, primarily, the hypersonic missile development of Russia and China and also an increase in technology breakthroughs that China is achieving.”
Maloof explained that Shanahan’s statement, more than anything, was about bringing attention to the Pentagon’s need to develop space war capabilities – a process which could drag on for years.
“They’re trying to get the dialogue going now because it’s going to take forever to get Congress [to] go along with it and start appropriating money for it. There’ve got to be hearings, there’ve got to be discussions, it’s got to be budgeted for — and research and development, it’s going to take years.”
Weaponizing Space & Dreams of New Tech: US Missile Defense Review in a Nutshell
(January 17, 2019) — A bombastic speech by President Donald Trump marked the publication of a new missile defense strategy for the US, which seeks to eliminate all constraints, weaponize space, and conjure an impunity shield through new technology.
“We will ensure that enemy missiles find no sanctuary on Earth or in the skies above,” Trump declared, speaking at the Pentagon on Thursday. How, exactly, the US intends to do that is unclear, however. Neither the 100-page Missile Defense Review (MDR), nor the 24-page executive summary offer much in the way of details, only hand-waving and talk of new, better technology.
Oh, and weaponizing space.
“We will recognize that space is a new war-fighting domain with the Space Force leading the way,” Trump said. “My upcoming budget will invest in a space-based missile defense layer technology. It’s ultimately going to be a very, very big part of our defense and obviously of our offense.”
Before anyone brings up the 1967 Outer Space Treaty and how it precludes the deployment of weapons in earth’s orbit and beyond, the MDR is quite explicit about how the US “will not accept any limitation or constraint on the development or deployment of missile defense capabilities,” whether to protect the homeland – or allies and US troops deployed all over the world.
The announcement comes a day after the US confirmed it would initiate withdrawal from the 1987 INF treaty, which sought to de-escalate the Cold War by limiting intermediate-range missile deployments in Europe. The pretext is US accusing Russia of developing a missile system in violation of the treaty, offering no evidence to support the claim. Visiting Moscow in October, however, Trump’s national security adviser John Bolton openly spoke about the INF treaty being just as obsolete as the anti-ballistic missile (ABM) treaty that Washington repudiated in 2002.
Anyone thinking that Washington, whether under Trump or someone else, will have reservations about trampling the Outer Space Treaty next has clearly not been paying attention.
Though the MDR prioritizes threats from what it calls “rogue” countries – specifically naming North Korea and Iran – it also brings up Russia and China, daring to consider US military operations a threat to their security, and their growing missile capabilities as preventing Washington from acting like a global hegemon. Or as the MDR summary puts it at one point:
“The United States and allies can no longer assume the capacity to concentrate forces in secure, forward locations and launch military operations against adversaries from these secure locations.”
So, how is the Pentagon planning to counter this and preserve what it terms US and allied “freedom of action”? Through a combination of existing weapons systems, theoretical new tech advances, and nothing less than changing the way the Pentagon thinks and operates.
Much has been made from Trump’s announcement that the US would be deploying 20 additional interceptor missiles at the main Ground-Based, Mid-Course Defense (GMD) facility in Fort Greely, Alaska. The under-reported detail is that this expansion will begin “as early as 2023.”
Another tidbit from the MDR concerned arming the missile facilities in Romania and Poland – part of the European Phased Adaptive Approach (EPAA) – with new Aegis SM-3 missiles. Although the facility in Romania is currently operational, the one in Poland is not yet complete. Moreover, the SM-3 Block IIA has not yet been tested against an intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) – the first test is planned in 2020, according to the MDR. Of the two SM-3 tests last year in the Pacific, only one was successful.
Ultimately, the Pentagon hopes to develop “scalable, efficient, and compact high energy laser technology” to destroy missiles in the boost phase – the capability envisioned in the 1980s ‘Star Wars’ missile defense program that remained largely on the drawing board.
Until these magical new weapons appear, the Pentagon intends to place its hopes on the F-35 stealth fighter. Lockheed Martin’s trillion-dollar boondoggle can supposedly “track and destroy adversary cruise missiles today,” and could be equipped with “a new or modified interceptor capable of shooting down adversary ballistic missiles in their boost phase” in the future. If it stops suffocating pilots and sorts out fatal computer errors, that is.
The final bit of wishful thinking involves having the Department of Defense “adopt processes and cultures” that would enable the Missile Defense Agency and service branches to “streamline and refine acquisition processes, ensure flexibility in the development, testing, and fielding of missile defense,and swiftly adapt systems once fielded.” Nothing less than changing the culture of how the Pentagon interacts with the US military-industrial complex – piece of cake!
In the meantime, the MDR makes is clear that Washington reserves the right of mounting “attack operations to defeat offensive missiles prior to launch.”
Russia Warns US Against Arms Race on Earth & Space After Missile Defense Plans Revealed
(January 18, 2019) — “Years ago, I organized a protest at NASA’s Kennedy Space Center in Florida and one of the speakers was Mitchell. And he said if there’s one war in space – it’ll be the last because so much space junk will be created by blowing up the satellites that we won’t be able to get a rocket off Earth anymore. It just won’t be able to get through this ‘minefield.'”
However, the acting defense secretary’s words“are really not new” as Washington had been talking about controlling and dominating space since the days of President Ronald Reagan back in the 1980s, Gagnon told RT.
“The US sees space as another fighting domain. They have a slogan, reading ‘full spectrum dominance’ and what this means is that the US military should control a conflict at every level – on the ground, in the ocean, in the air and now in space.”
The activist praised Russia and China for their decades-long effort to promote Prevention of an Arms Race in Outer Space (PAROS), regretting that “the US and Israel keep blocking that treaty at the UN.”
“Russia and China have been saying: ‘Let’s close the door to the barn before the horse gets out.’ But the US refuses as its weapons corporations are committed to making huge money off a new arms race in space.”
Military expert from the Russian magazine Arsenal Otechestva, Aleksey Leonkov, said Shanahan’s bravado is nothing but a “propagandist move.”
“The question is – with what hardware exactly is the US going to achieve this victory?” he wondered.
What they have in space is only surveillance satellites. That’s it.
The analyst recalled that US Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) marked three perspective directions in developing military space technologies back in 2002. “They were space interceptors, which would eliminate ballistic missiles; space platforms with powerful lasers, most likely nuclear powered, to protect the US territory; and special systems to strike targets on Earth with space-to-surface missiles.”
According to Leonkov, “none of these American projects is even close to practical implementation” at the moment.
Unlike the US, “Russia has recently developed a real military laser system and possesses technologies to deliver it to orbit,” he said. And if Soviet experience in the field is restored,“it’ll all be fine” for Russia.
“The USSR produced several space military systems and even tested them. One of them was the R-36ORB missile, which was able to remain in orbit as a satellite and hit a target on the ground on command from the control center. This system was even on combat duty until 1993. We also had Almaz space battle stations that could tackle spacecraft and ballistic missiles.”
China is also a strong competitor, as it already has “anti-satellite and anti-missile systems in orbit,” while actively developing its manned space program, Leonkov said.
The US is only trying to “start catching up” in the race of space war systems development, as their own technologies are in “infant stage,” former Pentagon official Michael Maloof told RT.
“The technology in many respects still needs to be developed … The US does not have an anti-missile system that can be launched from Earth that would be capable of hitting missiles or satellites that are in orbit beyond 150 miles,” he said.
“There’s an open discussion of trying to get the next-generation technology going because they’re watching, primarily, the hypersonic missile development of Russia and China and also an increase in technology breakthroughs that China is achieving.”
Maloof explained that Shanahan’s statement, more than anything, was about bringing attention to the Pentagon’s need to develop space war capabilities – a process which could drag on for years.
“They’re trying to get the dialogue going now because it’s going to take forever to get Congress [to] go along with it and start appropriating money for it. There’ve got to be hearings, there’ve got to be discussions, it’s got to be budgeted for – and research and development, it’s going to take years.”
Posted in accordance with Title 17, Section 107, US Code, for noncommercial, educational purposes.
