The United States federal government should pursue a defensive space control strategy that emphasizes satellite hardening, replacement, redundancy and situational awareness
***SOLVENCY*** Extend Solvency - Deterrence
Download 1.07 Mb.
|
- Navigate this page:
- Extend Solvency – Arms Race
***SOLVENCY***Extend Solvency - Deterrence[ ] US space militarization deters attacks on American space assets – Chinese ASAT tests demonstrate threats O’Brian 2007 - Washington, DC correspondent for Wired News [Luke, Fanning Fears of a Space War, Wired, http://www.wired.com/science/space/news/2007/01/72563, Accessed June 22, 2011] For advocates of a more aggressive American posture in space, the anti-satellite test -- the first since the United States conducted one in 1985 -- confirms long-held suspicions about China's military ambition in space, and justifies the need for increased spending on space-based weapons programs that recall the star-wars aspirations of the Reagan presidency. "I hope the Chinese test will be a wake up call to people," said Hank Cooper, a former director of the Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI) program and the chairman of High Frontier, a missile defense advocacy group. "I'd like to see us begin a serious anti-satellite program. We've been leaning on the administration. This argument to prevent weaponization of space is really silly." Cooper isn't alone in his views. In 2001, then-defense secretary Donald Rumsfeld unveiled a report that predicted a "space Pearl Harbor" if America didn't develop "the means both to deter and to defend against hostile acts in and from space." And last week, the government-appointed U.S-China Economic and Security Review Commission issued its own dire-sounding report (.pdf). Among its many warnings, the commission described how the Chinese military might use plasma weapons, laser beams and commando units to attack GPS satellites and ground stations in order to disrupt the U.S. economy. [ ] Weaponizing space is key to deter conflict In space – they patrol space Kyl 2007 – US senator and Attorney. [Jon Kyl. Published on February 1, 2007. Delivered on January 29, 2007. China's Anti-Satellite Weapons and American National Security. The Heritage Foundation. http://www.heritage.org/Research/Lecture/Chinas-Anti-Satellite-Weapons-and-American-National-Security. Accessed June 21] Verification problems aside, military capabilities in space are likely to prove vital to our security in the future, and I do not believe that we should consider forfeiting our right to build them. Why? Space assets are important, first of all, to help preserve peace in space. Few object when the United States Navy deploys hundreds of heavily armed warships in every one of the world's oceans. No one accuses us of contributing to the "weaponization of the sea" because they know that the presence of our weapons ensures free transit for all who pursue their peaceful interests. U.S. systems based in space could similarly patrol the "commons" for the good of all. [ ] Space militarization protects US space assets – the US is committed to space control Wolf 2004 [Jim, staffwriter for Reuters, U.S. Eyes Space as Possible Battleground http://www.indiadivine.org/audarya/world-review/35659-u-s-eyes-space-possible-battleground.html accessed June 24, 2011] WASHINGTON (Reuters) - President Bush's plan to expand the exploration of space parallels U.S. efforts to control the heavens for military, economic and strategic gain. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld long has pushed for technology that could be used to attack or defend orbiting satellites as well as a costly program, heavily reliant on space-based sensors, to thwart incoming warheads. Under a 1996 space policy adopted by then-President Bill Clinton that remains in effect, the United States is committed to the exploration and use of outer space "by all nations for peaceful purposes for the benefit of all humanity." "Peaceful purposes allow defense and intelligence-related activities in pursuit of national security and other goals," according to this policy. "Consistent with treaty obligations, the United States will develop, operate and maintain space control capabilities to ensure freedom of action in space, and if directed, deny such freedom of action to adversaries." No country depends on space and satellites as its eyes and ears more than the United States, which accounted for as much as 95 percent of global military space spending in 1999, according to the French space agency CNES. "Yet the threat to the U.S. and its allies in and from space does not command the attention it merits from the departments and agencies of the U.S. government charged with national security responsibilities," a congressionally chartered task force headed by Rumsfeld reported 10 days before Bush and he took office in 2001. Extend Solvency – Arms Race[ ] Developing space military capabilities are key to peace – they give credibility to political solutions, and they give us back up if negotiations fail Hyten 2001 Director, Space Programs, Office of the Ass Secretary of the Air Force for Acquisition, [4 January 01. Air & Space Power Journal . A Sea of Peace or a Theater of War: Dealing with the Inevitable Conflict in Space. Lt Col John E. Hyten. http://www.airpower.maxwell.af.mil/airchronicles/cc/Hyten.html Accessed June 21, 2011.] Recommendation #5: The United States should begin an aggressive development and test program for a spectrum of capabilities necessary for space control. As history has demonstrated, a concentration on political means without the proper preparation to use military force will almost certainly result in failure. It should therefore be the goal of the United States to aggressively pursue development and test programs for space weapons that will allow future decision makers options to deny, disrupt, degrade, and, if necessary, destroy space systems that could threaten U.S. interests in the 21st century. Space superiority can, at least for some time, be achieved without the use of space weapons. There is currently no specific threat demanding the deployment of such weapons. Therefore, the United States need not make a decision on the need to deploy such weapons at this time. It is possible that through negotiations, peaceful solutions to future threats may be achieved. It is also possible that through the use of terrestrial and air-breathing forces, space superiority can be achieved well into the future. The future threat in space may be handled in a progressive pattern of response that focuses on denial and disruption without having to degrade or destroy. However, at some time in the future, if peaceful negotiations fail, and military planners cannot develop terrestrial means to ensure space superiority, the only alternative may be the deployment of some type of space weapons. If this scenario occurs, the United States must be ready to respond. A full spectrum of capabilities is needed to allow decision makers options for resolving conflict at the lowest level possible. The only way to be fully prepared is to have developed and tested the critical systems and technologies necessary to field such capabilities. Failure to fully develop and test such capabilities and such weapons could make the United States vulnerable to surprises from other nations in the future. Gen. John L. Piotrowski, former commander of the United States Space Command said, on many occasions, that when it came to space weapons the one thing the United States couldn’t afford to be was second.23 [ ] U.S. space militarization prevents space arms race- spurs scientific development, and deters potential rivals Dolman 2005, Associate Professor of Comparative Military Studies at the US Air Force School of Advanced Air and Space Studies [Everett C. Dolman. “US Military Transformation and Weapons.” September 14, 2005. http://www.e-parl.net/pages/space_hearing_images/ConfPaper%20Dolman%20US%20Military%20Transform%20%26%20Space.pdf. Accessed June 24, 2011.] Seizing the initiative and securing low-Earth orbit now, while the US is unchallenged in space, would do much to stabilize the international system and prevent an arms race is space. From low-Earth orbit (LEO), the enhanced ability to deny any attempt by another nation to place military assets in space, or to readily engage and destroy terrestrial ASAT capacity, makes the possibility of large scale space war and or military space races less likely, not more. Why would a state expend the effort to compete in space with a superpower that has the extraordinary advantage of holding securely the highest ground at the top of the gravity well? So long as the controlling state demonstrates a capacity and a will to use force to defend its position, in effect expending a small amount of violence as needed to prevent a greater conflagration in the future, the likelihood of a future war in space is remote. Moreover, if the US were willing to deploy and use a military space force that maintained effective control of space, and did so in a way that was perceived as tough, non-arbitrary, and efficient, such an action would serve to discourage competing states from fielding opposing systems. Should the US use its advantage to police the heavens (assuming the entire cost on its own), and allow unhindered peaceful use of space by any and all nations for economic and scientific development, over time its control of LEO could be viewed as a global asset and a public good. Much in the manner that the British maintained control of the high seas, enforcing international norms of innocent passage and property rights , the US could prepare outer space for a long-overdue burst of economic expansion. Directory: files files -> Answer True False 2 points Question 2 files -> Integer programming and game theory files -> 4 Integer Programming files -> Bpa vehicle Window Repair Scenario #1 task: Procure vehicle window relacement. Objective files -> Pop Warner History files -> North Carolina Inclusion Initiative Mapping Where Children with ieps are Being Served Purpose files -> Fall 2013 Spring 2014 Program Data: Standard 1 Exhibit 4d files -> Hanban – asia society confucius classrooms network 2010 request for proposal files -> Northern England’s set-jetting locations Download 1.07 Mb. Share with your friends:
|