Astropolitics and the militarisation of space: The new arms race?

Challenges of astropolitics

Outer space, as an extraterrestrial environment, is very hostile to human beings and carries far more challenges than the three terrestrial ambiences (water, air, land). Exploiting space for military, economic, or social needs is not an easy task. Outer space has no certain boundaries, which means it can be a difficult area to explore. A qualitative distinction needs to be drawn very clearly between space and atmospheric conditions. Outer space and the environment in which aircraft could fly provide different conditions and require different technological solutions to operate in them. Commonly, this imprecise boundary that separates Earth into space and atmosphere is marked at an altitude of between 80 and 100 km above sea level by defining this marker as the Kármán line. According to the current norms of international law, airspace falls under the jurisdiction of states and their sovereignty, unlike outer space. A state can also protect its airspace militarily if it so requires, and this is guaranteed by the norms of international law, while flying over a state in space would leave it untouched from the perspective of international norms. In other words, no one could prohibit flying over any terrestrial state at an altitude above the Kármán line. The first man-made object to cross this line and enter space was the German V-2 ballistic missile at the end of the Second World War. The following important events in the conquest of outer space were the launch of the first artificial satellite ‘Sputnik-1’ into Earth’s orbit (1957); the launch of the first living creature, the dog Laika, into space (1957); the launch of the first man, Yuri Gagarin, into space (1961), and the American mission ‘Apollo 11’ when men landed on the Moon (1969).

The lack of gravity, vacuum, hazardous objects, solar and galactic radiation create obstacles to the human desire to subordinate outer space to their own intentions. Controlling artificial objects in space requires a high level of knowledge, the most sophisticated technology, and huge amounts of money. Thus, any potential space arms race would be reserved exclusively for the most capable nation-states. This does not negate the fact that there are many man-made objects in the cosmos. As of 19 June 2024, the count stood at 10,019 active satellites, of which two-thirds (6,646) were Starlink satellites, belonging to Elon Musk’s SpaceX. The vast majority (9,254) occupy low-Earth orbits, mainly between 400 and 1,200 kilometres from the Earth. Artificial objects above our heads whip around the Earth at high speed. Currently, the biggest challenge in conquering space is space debris, including dead satellites, spent rockets, and other space junk. Scientific models approximate the overall quantity of space debris particles in Earth’s orbit to be in the order of: 29,000 objects larger than 10 cm; 670,000 particles larger than 1 cm; and more than 170 million particles larger than 1 mm. All of these objects pose a threat if one were to impact satellites or other man-made space configurations.

Space already offers services without which it would be difficult to imagine everyday life. Apart from the scientific importance for the analysis of climate change, deforestation, atmospheric conditions, or measurement of radiation levels, outer space is indispensable for the global communication system, accurate weather forecasting, navigation, and military early warning systems. The rapid development of technology, the lowering of the price of access to space, and the increasing commercialisation make space, in a way, increasingly become a common place of human activities.

From militarisation to weaponisation

The concepts of militarisation and weaponisation of outer space are not synonyms, although they constitute two phenomena, both important in terms of international security and law. Militarisation, for example, could mean the use of outer space for military missions without the actual deployment of weapons, such as reconnaissance, communication, and navigation. Weaponisation, on the other hand, means the actual deployment of weapons in outer space, making it a potential battlefield. The militarisation of outer space has been a gradual process since the onset of the Space Age. It becomes obvious that space development and the application of technologies could be used for military purposes like satellite systems for obtaining military reconnaissance, now a part of the classical warfare techniques among spacefaring nations.

A quintessentially early instance of space technology in military operations occurred during the Gulf War (Operation Desert Storm), in which the United States highly relied on satellite systems to create an integrated battle platform. Using GPS (Global Positioning System), the United States Army was able to keep track of the Iraqi army manoeuvring through a sandstorm, something that happened for the first time in modern warfare. Along the same lines, space technology allowed not only real-time intelligence gathering but also comprehensive effectiveness of military strategies in the conflict. The United States Department of Defense has even adopted a policy (still classified as the Space Strategic Review) inclining towards its ‘space dimension of military operations’ in favour of gaining an upper hand in the sphere of military operations through space capabilities.

With the establishment of the U.S. Space Force, along with the revival of the U.S. Space Command, the Russian Federation is making sure to enhance its own space capabilities as a countermeasure. Russia has integrated space systems into its nuclear deterrence strategy. The fighting in Georgia (2008) and the continuous clashes in Ukraine (from 2022) highlight the role of space-based assets in the mix of Russian war-fighting techniques. The Russian military’s modernisation efforts, particularly under Dmitry Medvedev’s ‘New Look’ reform (2009), emphasise the need for advanced technological capabilities, including those related to outer space. Outer space has greatly contributed to the Russian campaign in Ukraine, for example, by making Russian fire support more precise, enabling encrypted communications at the tactical-operational level, and providing reconnaissance and navigation support for ground, air, and even naval units. Russian forces have also selectively employed counterspace capabilities, jamming, and cyberattacks to degrade Ukrainian C4ISR-T (Command, Control, Communications, Computers — C4, Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance – ISR).

In contrast to the omnipresent militarisation of space, weaponisation is transforming outer space into a potential combat zone. Weapons of mass destruction are explicitly prohibited by the 1967 Outer Space Treaty, which intends to ensure that celestial bodies are utilised for peaceful purposes: the placing of nuclear weapons and other weapons of mass destruction in space is forbidden. It remains unclear whether or to what extent conventional weapons are prohibited, thus creating a legal grey area. This grey area is used to their advantage by the most powerful states. The treaty said, no weapons of mass destruction in space, but it seems all other weapons are allowed.

Space arms race – science fiction or reality?

There are roughly 60 countries that can be grouped under a common header termed ‘space presence’ with at least a weather satellite or an astronaut in the International Space Station, but only a few are capable of building offensive weapons in space. The only operational space weapon so far is an anti-satellite (ASAT) weapon, developed for the express purpose of incapacitating or destroying satellites. During the Cold War, both the United States and the Soviet Union (USSR) invested energy in systems that would bring them strategic advantages through the deployment of space weapons. The US ‘Program 437’ was developed in the 1960s, which included provisions for nuclear strikes against enemy satellites. The early 1960s was the time during which the ASAT programme of the Soviet Union began. The USSR realised that space could be utilised not just as a bulwark but also as an area of relative vulnerability for American satellites. The first Soviet ASAT system was called ‘Istrebitel Sputnikov’ (Satellite Destroyer) and was developed to intercept and destroy enemy satellites in low Earth orbit. The most recent accomplishment of the Soviet ASAT programme was the successful test of the ‘Nudol’ system, which demonstrated the ability to destroy orbiting satellites. In 2007, China also conducted an anti-satellite weapon test by destroying its own weather satellite and sending space debris into Earth’s orbit. The reconnaissance and weather satellites, as well as manned space missions including the International Space Station, flying below 2,000 km altitude in low Earth orbit, are very vulnerable to the increasing amount of debris. Even the destruction of a rather insignificant weather satellite could disrupt the state’s activities in outer space. This indicates that future more sophisticated space weapons could be much more devastating to the state’s infrastructure. Apart from the ‘cosmic triangle’ (USA-Russia-China), India performed an ASAT weapon test in March 2019, by the code name ‘Mission Shakti’, making India the fourth country in the world to have demonstrated the ability to destroy a satellite in orbit.

Many types of space weapons are still theoretical or experimental, like plasma weapons, kinetic bombardment, laser weapons, electromagnetic weapons, particle beams, heliobeam, or different types of orbital weapons. The first weapon in space was found on ‘Almaz’, the first Soviet space station. This was a 23 mm cannon, which could fire using an optical sight. To date, the R-23M on the Almaz station was the only armed military spacecraft ever to fly into space. In the 1960s, the U.S. Air Force launched a military programme known as ‘Project Thor’, with the idea of dropping a 6-metre tungsten rod from orbit to strike targets on Earth and achieve the force equivalent to a nuclear weapon without the radioactive fallout.

Although still in the experimental phase, the emergence of directed-energy weapons (DEWs) as a new line of military equipment, especially with reference to high-energy lasers (HELs) and high-power radio frequency (HPRF) weapons, has had a profound effect on the conduct of modern warfare. High-energy lasers are capable of combating attacking missiles with such precision as to cause a single one of them to explode. Another characteristic of DEWs — the skill of interfering with electronic systems without apparent physical destruction, which identifies new distortion in the application of combat strategies, where the emphasis is placed on disabling rather than destroying the adversary. Such a radical deviation from the hitherto understanding of the essence of wars can largely change the way risks of warfare are managed – enhancing efficacy and reducing long-term effects. Significant space technology for future warfare includes electromagnetic weapons, leveraging the principles of electromagnetism to disrupt the target systems and disable enemy electronics. A high-altitude electromagnetic pulse (HEMP) detonation to blind satellite antennas and disable communication systems poses a real future threat. During his first term, US President Donald Trump recognised this threat and issued an executive order on ‘Coordinating National Resilience to Electromagnetic Pulses’.

The struggle to establish a legal framework that effectively addresses the weaponisation of outer space seems futile. A UN Security Council resolution, formulated by Russia, which opposed one that had the support of the United States and Japan, was not adopted (2024). The competing drafts emphasised various categories of armaments, with the USA and Japan concentrating on weapons of mass destruction, while the Russian proposal addressed a ban for all categories of space weapons. The USA and its allied nations asserted that the terminology under discussion by the 15-member council was merely intended to divert global attention from Russia’s genuine objective to weaponise outer space. The space arms race is slowly moving from Hollywood movies and video games to the reality of international politics, so we are sure to see more of this topic in the future.