35 years after George Lucas’s Star Wars was released, there
is a greater possibility of a space battle outside the realm of Hollywood.
Two new military satellites, one American, the other
Russian, were recently launched into orbit. There is nothing particularly
newsworthy about this since different satellites are constantly being sent up
into space, but still, the event is yet another indication that space is
becoming more militarised. If we are to prevent space from turning into a new
kind of warzone, it is essential that international agreements to ban space
armaments are developed and signed as a matter of urgency.
Back in 1977, no one would ever have believed George Lucas’s
Star Wars Trilogy could become a reality. But today, 35 years after the film
was first released, there is apparently a greater possibility of a space battle
happening outside the realm of Hollywood fantasy. Space has
become a central part of the military and defence policies in many of the
world’s biggest states.
In the future a country at war will not try to occupy enemy
territory directly. Instead it will concentrate on finding a country’s weak
spots before issuing calculated blows. Ground troops and armoured vehicles will
soon become a thing of the past, and strategic aviation is also set to take a
back seat in the military campaigns of the future. Our understanding of
‘strategic armament’ has shifted from classic ‘nuclear defence triads’ towards
non-nuclear armaments which rely on high-precision weapons systems and various
means of deployment.
Wars of the future are expected to involve a lot of orbiters
to ensure a country’s security: satellite reconnaissance, warning, forecasting
and targeting systems – objects which themselves will need to be defended and
armed.
The US
is making huge investments into satellite technology. Back in 2009 US Defence
Minister Robert Gates convinced Congress to designate a sum of $10.7 billion to
developing this field. His successor in Barack Obama’s administration, Leon
Panetta, clearly has no intention of lowering this sum.
Authoritative military analysts like for example, General
Vladimir Slipchenko (who recently passed away), predict that by 2020 the
world’s leading countries will have between 70,000-90,000 precision weapons. We
can only imagine the number of satellite systems these will require. And
without satellites, the cruise missiles and smart bombs that can be programmed
to wipe out something as small as a mosquito are no more than useless lumps of
metal.
And so it is only a matter of time before orbital systems
are developed that will be able to independently hit targets in space, in the
atmosphere or on the Earth itself. But just because the technology exists (or
soon will do) it does not make it necessary to send military space stations
into orbit, and this certainly should not mean that reconnaissance or
meteorological satellites should have to be armed. In reality, the problems of
satellite defence could be effectively dealt with from Earth.
“Whoever owns space also owns the world,” says the former
Chief of Arms of the Russian Armed Forces, Colonel-General Anatoly Sitnov. But
people in the military are the first to admit that Russia
is lagging far behind the USA
when it comes to space systems…
At the moment the sky is home to around 500 American
orbiters, and just 100 Russian ones. According to Russian experts the American
satellite fleet is more than four times the size of the Russia’s.
Plus which, not all of Russia’s
orbiters are in good working condition. In the middle of June the
experimental space-craft X-37B completed a successful autonomous landing after
more than 15 months orbiting the Earth. X-37B’s Programme Manager Lt Col Tom
McIntyre noted that following the retirement of the space shuttle fleet, the
X-37B OTV programme would bring “a singular capability to space technology
development.” The Americans do not hide the fact that this sort of
technology could first and foremost be applied to create new armament
opportunities.
In this respect Russia’s
position is very different from that of the Americans. In May 2008 Commander of
the Space Forces General Vladimir Popovkin (who is now in charge of Roscosmos)
said: “We are categorically against placing or launching any sort of armaments
into space, because space is one of the few areas where there are no borders.
Introducing arms to space will upset the balance in the world.”
According to Popovkin space systems and complexes are
technically very difficult and could easily fail. “As the Commander of Space
Forces (in this case) I cannot guarantee that the object’s failure was not
caused by the actions of a potential enemy”.
According to military experts, strategic nuclear stability,
i.e. guarantees against a sudden nuclear missile strike, rely heavily on the
efficacy of early warning satellites that detect missile launches, and also on
the constant work of reconnaissance satellites. If one of these orbiters ceases
to function, the security of the state that launched it may end up in jeopardy.
This could in turn create an atmosphere of distrust and uncertainty, which
could ultimately lead to a military catastrophe.
It would seem that Harrison Ford, who played Han Solo, one
of the most important characters in the Star Wars films, was right when he said
that the main secret of the film’s success was that it was “not about space,
but about people; this is primarily a film about human relationships.” It is up
to us humans to decide whether space shall remain as a peaceful realm or
whether it will become another arena for military conflict.
No comments:
Post a Comment