Space policy institute elliott school of international affairs george washington university



Download 99.63 Kb.
Date02.02.2017
Size99.63 Kb.
#15718
TENTATIVE SYLLABUS—WILL BE UPDATED PRIOR TO COURSE

SPACE POLICY INSTITUTE

ELLIOTT SCHOOL OF INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS

GEORGE WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY
International Affairs 6148.10 1776 G, Room 148

Fall 2014, CRN: 84291 Tuesdays 7:10-9:00PM


Space and National Security
Instructor
Peter L. Hays, Ph.D.

Professor of Space Policy and International Affairs

email: peterlh2@dni.gov (o); hayspl@yahoo.com (h); hayspl@gwu.edu (h)

phone: (703) 275-3157 (o); (703) 250-3209 (h); (703) 864-9413 (m)



office hours: by appointment
Course Description
Recent military operations in Libya, Afghanistan, and Iraq indicate space capabilities have become a foundational enabler of most U.S. military actions and an increasingly important component of U.S. national security. Worldwide, there is growing recognition and focus on the broad and ubiquitous contributions space capabilities make to global prosperity and security. The 2001 Space Commission Report found that because U.S. military and economic security has become so dependent on space capabilities, the nation could face a “space Pearl Harbor.” The U.S. National Space Policy from October 2006 stated: “In this new century, those who effectively utilize space will enjoy added prosperity and security and will hold a substantial advantage over those who do not. Freedom of action in space is as important to the United States as air power and sea power.” And the National Space Policy of the United States of America released in June 2010 indicates: “Space systems allow people and governments around the world to see with clarity, communicate with certainty, navigate with accuracy, and operate with assurance.”
The National Security Space Strategy of January 2011 emphasized that space is becoming an increasingly congested, contested, and competitive environment. Given this changing strategic context and the accelerating pace of Chinese and Russian counterspace capability development and testing, the United States must reassess the best ways to assure delivery of space capabilities and improve their resiliency in this complex and fragile environment. This new space security strategy should consider a range of novel and innovative approaches including leveraging state-of-the-world commercial and international capabilities, rebalancing modernization priorities, and deploying distributed architectures. The United States and other major space actors also face tensions between the growing efficacy of space capabilities in delivering unilateral advantages and the inherently global and multilateral dimensions of space capabilities in advancing stability, sustainability, and assured use by all responsible parties for peaceful purposes. These tensions inform dialogue about the need for and consequences of employing counterspace capabilities as well as debates on the wisdom and feasibility of stationing force application systems—“space weapons”—in orbit. This course examines these and other issues associated with U.S. strategy, policy, management, and organization for the national security uses of space.
Course Goals
The overarching objective of this course is for each student to be able to articulate and defend their understanding of space security. This requires discernment in evaluating and integrating a range of materials including background readings, written assignments, and a mixture of lectures and discussion designed to cover each week’s topic. This course is a seminar; students are expected to read and come to class ready to discuss the substantial amount of assigned material for each week. At the beginning of the course, the instructor will lecture during most of the seminar time; by the end of the course, it is expected that student-led discussions will predominate and directly contribute to the overarching course objective.
Learning Outcomes
Students will be able to understand both historic and current factors and trends shaping the development and implementation of U.S. national security space strategy and policy including the global security environment, domestic politics, and technology. Based on this understanding, students will be able to articulate and support policy-relevant assessments about the prospects for developing and successfully implementing major current national security space initiatives.
Grade Computation
The quality of your seminar contributions in advancing course goals (not the quantity of your participation) will account for 25 percent of your final grade. There are three written assignments for the course: an essay worth 25 percent, an Op-Ed piece worth 10 percent, and a research paper worth 40 percent. The due dates for the writing assignments are 30 September, 28 October, and 2 December. Specific instructions for each written assignment are provided below.
All written assignments should be typed, double-spaced and consistently use any major style guide such as Turabian or Chicago; the first and third assignments should include citations and a bibliography of works consulted. Submit each assignment to your instructor in two formats: email an electronic copy and turn in a suitably bound paper copy, both by the beginning of class on the due date. Your instructor will provide feedback on the paper copy of the first and second assignments and on the electronic version of the third assignment. Any students who wish to receive comments and recommendations on a draft of their written assignments should submit a complete electronic version to their instructor no later than one week prior to the due date; this is entirely voluntary and there is no requirement to submit drafts on any assignment.
Reading Materials
Students with limited background in national security space policy issues are encouraged to familiarize themselves with information from the following excellent resources:


  • Tamar A. Mehuron, “2009 Space Almanac: The US Military Space Operation in Facts and Figures,” Air Force Magazine (August 2009): 52-65 http://www.airforce-magazine.com/

MagazineArchive/Magazine%20Documents/2009/August%202009/0809SpaceAlm.pdf

  • Air Command and Staff College Space Research Electives Seminars, AU-18: Space Primer (Maxwell AFB, AL: Air University Press, September 2009) http://space.au.af.mil/au-18-2009/index.htm

  • Lieutenant Colonel Michael P. Gleason, Ph.D., Space Policy Primer: Principles, Issues, and Actors (USAF Academy: Eisenhower Center for Space and Defense Studies, February 2010) http://web.mac.com/rharrison5/Eisenhower_Center_for_Space_and_Defense_Studies/Space_Policy_Primer.html

  • Space Sustainability: A Practical Guide (Washington: Secure World Foundation, 2014) http://swfound.org/media/121399/swf_space_sustainability-a_practical_guide_2014__1_.pdf

  • Space Security 2013 (Waterloo, Ontario: Project Ploughshares, August 2013) http://www.spacesecurity.org/publications.htm

The following books are available for purchase:




  • Walter A. McDougall, . . .the Heavens and the Earth: A Political History of the Space Age (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1997)

  • Peter L. Hays, James M. Smith, Alan R. Van Tassel, and Guy M. Walsh, eds., Spacepower for a New Millennium: Space and U.S. National Security (New York: McGraw-Hill, 2000)

  • Benjamin S. Lambeth, Mastering the Ultimate High Ground: Next Steps in the Military Uses of Space (Santa Monica: RAND, 2003) http://www.rand.org/pubs/monograph_reports/2005/MR1649.pdf

  • Michael E. O’Hanlon, Neither Star Wars nor Sanctuary: Constraining the Military Uses of Space (Washington: Brookings Institution, 2004)

  • James Clay Moltz, The Politics of Space Security: Strategic Restraint and the Pursuit of National Interests, 2nd ed., (Palo Alto: Stanford University Press, 2011)

  • Charles D. Lutes and Peter L. Hays with Vincent A. Manzo, Lisa M. Yambrick, and M. Elaine Bunn, eds., Toward a Theory of Spacepower: Selected Essays (Washington: National Defense University Press, 2011) http://www.ndu.edu/press/spacepower.html

Course readings are in the assigned books or are freely available on the Internet. Your instructor will provide to all students a compact disk containing all electronic materials for the course.


Course Schedule
Week 1: 26 Aug Course Overview: The Nature of Spacepower
Week 2: 2 Sep National Security Space Activities from 1950s to the 1980s

Week 3: 9 Sep National Security Space Trends in the 1990s


Week 4: 16 Sep Taking Stock at the Turn of the Century: The Space Commission
Week 5: 23 Sep Space and the New American Way of War
Week 6: 30 Sep Space Situational Awareness, Debris, Threats, and Prospects for a Space Pearl Harbor
Week 7: 7 Oct Interactions between the National Security and Commercial Space Sectors
Week 8: 14 Oct Space Deterrence, Control, and Force Application
Week 9: 21 Oct Space Weaponization and Global Stability
Week 10: 28 Oct Space and Missile Defense
Week 11: 4 Nov Is Conflict in Space Inevitable? Transparency- and Confidence-Building

Alternatives


Week 12: 11 Nov Organizing for National Security Space
Week 13: 18 Nov Current Global Space Security Issues
Week 14: 25 Nov No Class
Week 15: 2 Dec Future National Space Policy and Strategy – Finding a Focused Consensus
University Resources and Policies
Class Policies: Attendance and active participation in each seminar is expected of all students. Please inform your instructor in advance if you cannot attend a seminar. Unless there are extenuating circumstances, late written assignments normally will not be accepted. If you run into difficulties completing a written assignment, at least one week prior to the due date coordinate a new submission date with your instructor. Academic Integrity: Academic dishonesty is defined as cheating of any kind, including misrepresenting one’s own work, taking credit for the work of others without crediting them and without appropriate authorization, and the fabrication of information. For the remainder of the code, see: http://www.gwu.edu/~ntegrity/code.html. Support for Students Outside the Classroom: Disability Support Services (DSS): Any student who may need an accommodation based on the potential impact of a disability should contact DSS at 202-994-8250 in the Marvin Center, Suite 242, to establish eligibility and to coordinate reasonable accommodations. For additional information please refer to: http://gwired.gwu.edu/dss/. University Counseling Center (UCC; 202-994-5300): The UCC offers 24/7 assistance and referral to address students’ personal, social, career, and study skills problems. Services for students include: crisis and emergency mental health consultations; confidential assessment, counseling services (individual and small group), and referrals http://gwired.gwu.edu/counsel/Counseling

Services/AcademicSupportServices. Security: In the case of an emergency, if at all possible, the class should shelter in place. If the building that the class is in is affected, follow the evacuation procedures for the building. After evacuation, seek shelter at a predetermined rendezvous location.


Assignments
First Written Assignment (due 30 September)
Write an 8-10 page essay (approximately 2500-3000 words) that examines recent U.S. employment of space capabilities, uses this analysis to address the nature of spacepower, and compares the ways in which spacepower is similar to and different from other forms of national power such as seapower, airpower, or cyberpower. Your analysis should build from and integrate discussions about the attributes and nature of spacepower in your course materials (and elsewhere as appropriate) but should emphasize your own position. The essay should also assess the relative importance of spacepower to the United States today and its likely importance during the next 15-20 years. Your paper should conclude by briefly presenting specific policy recommendations that flow from your analysis on the nature of spacepower and its relative importance.
Reading Assignments: (O) is optional reading; (Sk) is a reading you should skim to learn the main points
Week 1: 26 Aug Course Overview: The Nature of Spacepower


  • McDougall, Heavens and Earth, read book by 30 September

  • Barry D. Watts, The Military Use of Space: A Diagnostic Assessment (Washington: Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments, February 2001), pp. 1-46 http://www.csbaonline.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/2001.02.01-Military-Use-of-Space.pdf

  • Peter L. Hays, United States Military Space: Into the 21st Century (Maxwell AFB, AL: Air University Press, September 2002), pp. 5-40 http://www.usafa.edu/df/inss/OCP/OCP42.pdf

  • (Sk)“National Space Policy of the United States of America,” (Washington: The White House, 28 June 2010) http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/ files/national_space_policy_6-28-10.pdf

  • (Sk) Secretary of Defense and Director of National Intelligence, “National Security Space Strategy: Unclassified Summary,” (Washington: Department of Defense, January 2011) http://www.defense.gov/home/features/2011/0111nsss/docs/NationalSecuritySpaceStrategyUnclassifiedSummary_Jan2011.pdf

  • (O) Jon T. Sumida, “Old Thoughts, New Problems: Mahan and the Consideration of Spacepower,” NDU Spacepower Theory Study (Washington: National Defense University Press, 2011) http://www.ndu.edu/press/space-Ch1.html

  • (O) Harold Winton, “On the Nature of Military Theory,” Spacepower Theory Study http://www.ndu.edu/press/space-Ch2.html

  • William J. Lynn, III, “A Military Strategy for the New Space Environment,” The Washington Quarterly 34, no. 3 (Summer 2011): 7-16 http://www.twq.com/11summer/docs/11summer_Lynn.pdf

  • Madelyn R. Creedon, “Space and Cyber: Shared Opportunities, Shared Challenges, ” Strategic Studies Quarterly 6, no. 1 (Spring 2012): 3-8 http://www.au.af.mil/au/ssq/2012/spring/spring12.pdf

  • David Christopher Arnold and Peter L. Hays, “Strategy and the Security Space Enterprise,” in Eligar Sadeh, ed., Space Strategy for the 21st Century (New York: Routledge, 2013), pp. 120-158

Week 2: 2 Sep National Security Space Activities from the 1950s to the 1980s




  • (O) Curtis Peebles, High Frontier: The United States Air Force and the Military Space Program (Washington: Air Force History and Museums Program, 1997), pp. 1-72 http://www.dtic.mil/cgi- bin/GetTRDoc?AD=ADA442844&Location=U2&doc=GetTRDoc.pdf

  • Joshua Boehm et al., “A History of United States National Security Space Management and Organization,” Space Commission Staff Background Paper, (Washington: Commission to Assess National Security Space Management and Organization, 2001) http://www.fas.org/spp/eprint/article03.html

  • Lambeth, Mastering the Ultimate High Ground, pp. 1-50

  • (O) Roger D. Launius, “History of Civil Space Activity and Spacepower,” Spacepower Theory Study http://www.ndu.edu/press/space-Ch10.html

Week 3: 9 Sep National Security Space Trends in the 1990s




  • (O) Peebles, High Frontier, pp. 73-79

  • Lambeth, Mastering the Ultimate High Ground, pp. 50-59

  • (Sk) “National Space Policy Fact Sheet,” (Washington: The White House, 19 September 1996)

  • (Sk) “Department of Defense Space Policy,” (Washington: Department of Defense, 9 July 1999) http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/dod-spc/dodspcpolicy99.pdf

  • (Sk) Report of the National Commission for the Review of the National Reconnaissance Office (Washington: Commission for the Review of the National Reconnaissance Office, 2000), pp. 21-39 http://www.fas.org/irp/nro/commission/nro.pdf

  • (Sk) Report of the Independent Commission on the National Imagery and Mapping Agency (Washington: Independent Commission on the National Imagery and Mapping Agency, 2000), Executive Summary http://www.fas.org/irp/agency/nima/commission/report.pdf

  • Moltz, Politics of Space Security, pp. 1-123

Week 4: 16 Sep Taking Stock at the Turn of the Century: The Space Commission




  • Marc J. Berkowitz, “National Space Policy and National Defense,” in Spacepower for a New Millennium, pp. 37-59

  • Howell M. Estes, III, “The Aerospace Force of Today and Tomorrow,” in Spacepower for a New Millennium, pp. 165-74

  • Dana J. Johnson and Kenneth J. Reynolds, “Shaping the Battlespace,” in Spacepower for a New Millennium, pp. 175-98

  • Keith R. Hall, “Organizing for Space-Based Intelligence Gathering,” in Spacepower for a New Millennium, pp. 199-208

  • Ronald Fogleman, “Spacepower for a New Millennium,” in Spacepower for a New Millennium, pp. 285-89

  • (O) Center for Security Policy, “Space Power: What is at Stake, What Will It Take?” (Washington: Center for Security Policy, 11 December 2000)

  • (Sk) Report of the Commission to Assess United States National Security Space Management and Organization (Washington: Commission to Assess United States National Security Space Management and Organization, 11 January 2001), Executive Summary and Chapter II http://www.dod.gov/pubs/space20010111.html

  • Peter Hays and Karl Mueller, “Going Boldly—Where? Aerospace Integration, the Space Commission, and the Air Force’s Vision for Space,” Aerospace Power Journal 15, no. 1 (Spring 2001): 34-49 http://www.airpower.au.af.mil/airchronicles/apj/apj01/spr01/mueller.pdf

  • (Sk) Joint Staff, “Joint Publication 3-14: Joint Doctrine for Space Operations,” (Washington: Department of Defense, 9 August 2002)

  • Senator Bob Smith, Congressional Record, 20 November 2002

  • Lambeth, Mastering the Ultimate High Ground, pp. 61-95

Week 5: 23 Sep Space and the New American Way of War




  • Brian J. Sullivan, “Spacepower and America’s Future,” in Spacepower for a New Millennium, pp. 259-284

  • Michael Ignatieff, “The New American Way of War,” New York Review of Books 47, no. 12, 12 July 2000 http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/2000/jul/20/the-new-american-way-of-war/

  • (Sk) Space-related parts of Department of Defense, Quadrennial Defense Review Report (Washington: Department of Defense, September 2001, February 2006, February 2010, and March 2014) http://www.defense.gov/pubs/pdfs/qdr2001.pdf

http://www.defense.gov/pubs/pdfs/QDR20060203.pdf

http://www.defense.gov/qdr/images/QDR_as_of_12Feb10_1000.pdf

http://www.defense.gov/pubs/2014_Quadrennial_Defense_Review.pdf


  • Michael E. O’Hanlon, “A Flawed Masterpiece,” Foreign Affairs 81, no. 3 (May/June 2002): 47-63

  • (O) Vice President Dick Cheney, “A New American Way of War,” Remarks by the Vice President to the Heritage Foundation, Ronald Reagan Building, Washington, 1 May 2003

  • Max Boot, “The New American Way of War,” Foreign Affairs 82, no. 4 (July/August 2003): 41-58

  • (Sk) Report of the Defense Science Board/Air Force Scientific Advisory Board Joint Task Force on Acquisition of National Security Space Programs (Washington: Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics, Department of Defense, May 2003) http://www.acq.osd.mil/dsb/reports/ADA429180.pdf

  • (Sk) “U.S. National Space Policy,” (Washington: The White House, 6 October 2006)

  • (O) James Andrew Lewis, “Neither Mahan nor Mitchell: National Security Space and Spacepower, 1945-2000,” Spacepower Theory Study http://www.ndu.edu/press/space-Ch14.html

  • (O) John B. Sheldon and Colin S. Gray, “Theory Ascendant? Spacepower and the Challenge of Strategic Theory,” Spacepower Theory Study http://www.ndu.edu/press/space-Ch15.html

  • (O) Benjamin S. Lambeth, “Airpower, Spacepower, and Cyberpower,” Spacepower Theory Study http://www.ndu.edu/press/space-Ch16.html

  • (O) M.V. Smith, “Security and Spacepower,” Spacepower Theory Study http://www.ndu.edu/press/space-Ch17.html

  • Barry D. Watts, The Maturing Revolution in Military Affairs (Washington: Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments, 2011) http://www.csbaonline.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/2011.06.02-Maturing-Revolution-In-Military-Affairs1.pdf

  • (Sk) Joint Staff, “Joint Publication 3-14: Space Operations,” (Washington: Department of Defense, 29 May 2013) http://www.dtic.mil/doctrine/new_pubs/jp3_14.pdf

Week 6: 30 Sep Space Situational Awareness, Debris, Threats, and Prospects for a Space Pearl Harbor




  • Ashton Carter, “Satellites and Anti-Satellites: The Limits of the Possible,” International Security 10, no. 4 (Spring 1986): 46-98

  • Tom Wilson, “Threats to United States Space Capabilities,” Space Commission Staff Background Paper http://www.globalsecurity.org/ space/library/report/2001/nssmo/article05.html

  • (Sk) Challenges to US Space Superiority (Wright-Patterson AFB, Ohio: National Air and Space Intelligence Center, NASIC 1441-3894-05, March 2005)

  • Brian Weeden, “The Numbers Game: What’s in Earth orbit and how do we know?” The Space Review, 13 July 2009 http://www.thespacereview.com/article/1417/1

  • Brian Weeden, “Space Situational Awareness Fact Sheet,” (Washington: Secure World Foundation, 23 November 2010) http://swfound.org/media/1800/ssa_fact_sheet.pdf

  • Tiffany Chow, “SSA Sharing Program: SWF Issue Brief,” (Washington: Secure World Foundation, 22 September 2011) http://swfound.org/media/3584/ssa_sharing_program_issue_brief_nov2011.pdf

  • Brian Weeden, Going Blind: Why America is on the Verge of Losing Its Situational Awareness in Space and What Can Be Done About It (Washington: Secure World Foundation, 10 September 2012) http://swfound.org/media/90775/going_blind_final.pdf#


Second Written Assignment (due 28 October)
Craft a 750-word Op-Ed piece that argues persuasively that the United States either should or should not develop and deploy weapons in space in the near future. Briefly address foundational and definitional issues such as what constitutes a space weapon or deployment in space before developing the rationale for or against weaponization in greater detail. Students should decide whether to develop the arguments from the perspective of domestic or global politics, or a combination of the two.
Week 7: 7 Oct Interactions Between the National Security and Commercial Space Sectors


  • Frank G. Klotz, Space, Commerce, and National Security, (New York: Council on Foreign Relations Press, 1998) http://www.cfr.org/content /publications/attachments/Space_Commerce_NationalSecurity.pdf

  • Lt Gen Bruce Carlson, “Protecting Global Utilities,” Aerospace Power Journal 14, no. 2 (Summer 2000): 37-41 http://www.airpower.au.af.mil/airchronicles/apj/apj00/sum00/carlson.pdf

  • Watts, The Military Use of Space, pp. 47-95

  • (O) Patrick Rayermann, “Exploiting Commercial SATCOM: A Better Way,” Parameters 33, no. 4 (Winter 2003-04): 54-66 http://www.carlisle.army.mil/usawc/parameters/Articles/03winter/rayerman.pdf

  • (Sk) NSTAC Report to the President on Commercial Satellite Communications Mission Assurance (Washington: National Security Telecommunications Advisory Committee, November 2009) http://www.ncs.gov/nstac/ reports/2009/NSTAC%20STF%20Report%20FINAL%2011302009.pdf

  • (O) “The Administration’s Export Control Reform Plans,” Remarks by General Jones, National Security Advisor, 30 June 2010 http://www.aia-aerospace.org/assets/speech_jones_06302010.pdf

  • (O) “National Security and the Commercial Space Sector: An Analysis and Evaluation of Options for Improving Commercial Access to Space,” (Washington: Center for Strategic and International Studies, July 2010) http://csis.org/files/publication/100430_berteau_commercial_space.pdf

  • (O) Scott Pace, “Merchant and Guardian Challenges in the Exercise of Spacepower,” Spacepower Theory Study http://www.ndu.edu/press/space-Ch7.html

  • (Sk) Report to Congress: Section 1248 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2010 (Public Law 111 - 84): Risk Assessment of United States Space Export Control Policy (Washington: Departments of State and Defense, March 2012) http://www.defense.gov/home/

features/2011/0111_nsss/docs/1248_Report_Space_Export_Control.pdf

  • (Sk) Todd Harrison, The Future of MILSATCOM (Washington: Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments, 2013) http://www.csbaonline.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/Future-of-MILSATCOM-web.pdf

  • Satellite Industry Association Celebrates Publication of Final Satellite Export Regulations (Washington: Satellite Industry Association, 13 May 2014) http://www.sia.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/SIA-Press-Release-SIA-CELEBRATES-PUBLICATION-OF-FINAL-SATELLITE-EXPORT-REGULATIONS-2014-05-13-FINAL.pdf

Week 8: 14 Oct Space Deterrence, Control, and Force Application




  • Simon P. Worden and Bruce P. Jackson, “Space, Power, and Strategy,” The National Interest (Fall 1988): 43-52

  • Simon P. Worden, “Space Control for the 21st Century,” in Spacepower for a New Millennium, pp. 225-238

  • Lambeth, Mastering the Ultimate High Ground, pp. 97-123

  • Karl P. Mueller, “Totem and Taboo,” in Space Weapons: Are They Needed? pp. 1-37

  • Everett C. Dolman, “U.S. Military Transformation and Weapons in Space,” SAIS Review vol. XXVI, no. 1 (Winter-Spring 2006): 163-174

  • Ambassador Roger G. Harrison, Collins G. Shackelford, and Deron R. Jackson, “Space Deterrence: The Delicate Balance of Risk,” Space & Defense Journal vol. 3, no. 1 (Summer 2009): 1-29 http://web.mac.com/rharrison5/Eisenhower_Center_for_

Space_and_Defense_Studies/Space_Deterrence.html

  • (O) 2010 Global Security Forum: How to Stigmatize the Use of Cyber and Anti-Satellite Attack? (Washington: Center for Strategic and International Studies, 13 May 2010) http://csis.org/files/attachments/100517_gsf_cyber.pdf

  • (O) Forrest E. Morgan, Deterrence and First Strike Stability in Space: A Preliminary Assessment (Santa Monica: RAND, 2010) http://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/monographs/2010/RAND_MG916.pdf

  • (O) Everett C. Dolman and Henry F. Cooper, Jr., “Increasing the Military Uses of Space,” Spacepower Theory Study http://www.ndu.edu/press/space-Ch19.html

Week 9: 21 Oct Space Weaponization and Global Stability





  • Lt Col Bruce DeBlois, “Space Sanctuary: A Viable National Strategy,” Airpower Journal 12, no. 4 (Winter 1998): 41-57 http://www.airpower. maxwell.af.mil/airchronicles/apj/apj98/win98/deblois.pdf

  • Watts, The Military Use of Space, pp. 97-106

  • (O) William Spacey, II, “Assessing the Military Utility of Space-Based Weapons,” in Space Weapons: Are They Needed? pp. 121-83

  • (O) Michael Krepon with Christopher Clary, Space Assurance or Space Dominance (Washington: Stimson Center, 2003), pp. 58-86 http://www.stimson.org/wos/pdf/space3.pdf

  • O’Hanlon, Neither Star Wars nor Sanctuary, pp. 1-90

  • (O) Michael Krepon, Theresa Hitchens, and Michael Katz-Hyman, “Preserving Freedom of Action and Realizing the Potential and Limits of U.S. Spacepower,” Spacepower Theory Study http://www.ndu.edu/press/space-Ch20.html

  • C. Robert Kehler, “Implementing the National Security Space Strategy,” Strategic Studies Quarterly 6, no. 1 (Spring 2012): 18-26 http://www.au.af.mil/au/ssq/2012/spring/spring12.pdf

Week 10: 28 Oct Space and Missile Defense




  • Donald R. Baucom, “Space and Missile Defense,” Joint Force Quarterly no. 33 (Winter 2002-03): 50-55 http://www.dtic.mil/doctrine/jel/jfq_pubs/1033.pdf

  • Lester L. Lyles, “Space and Ballistic Missile Defense,” in Spacepower for a New Millennium, pp. 107-127

  • Henry F. Cooper, “Space Defense,” in Spacepower for a New Millennium, pp. 129-40

  • Curt Weldon, “Charting a New Course on Missile Defense,” in Spacepower for a New Millennium, pp. 141-64

  • Bob Preston, Dana J. Johnson, Sean Edwards, Michael Miller, and Calvin Shipbaugh, Space Weapons, Earth Wars (Santa Monica: RAND Corporation, 2002), Chapters 3-4

http://www.rand.org/pubs/monograph_reports/MR1209/MR1209.ch3.pdf

http://www.rand.org/pubs/monograph_reports/MR1209/MR1209.ch4.pdf



  • (Sk) Independent Working Group, Missile Defense, the Space Relationship, and the Twenty-First Century (Washington: Institute for Foreign Policy Analysis, 2009), pp. 1-98 http://www.ifpa.org/pdf/IWG2009.pdf


Third Written Assignment (due 2 December)
Write a 15-20 page research paper that examines specific issues associated with significant and enduring national security space themes. Examples of appropriate topics include any major policy, program, or system related to the space weaponization debate or any of the major themes for this course. Discuss your proposed topic with and gain your instructor’s approval to write about that issue no later than 28 October. Your paper should provide background and context that explain how your topic relates to major course themes, analyze current developments, and then make specific policy recommendations related to management and organizational structures. You will present your main findings for about 10-15 minutes in class on 18 November or 2 December.
Week 11: 4 Nov Is Conflict in Space Inevitable? Transparency- and Confidence-Building Alternatives


  • Hays, United States Military Space, pp. 59-137

  • (O) Krepon and Clary, Space Assurance or Space Dominance, pp. 87-127 http://www.stimson.org/wos/pdf/space4.pdf

  • O’Hanlon, Neither Star Wars nor Sanctuary, pp. 91-142

  • Moltz, The Politics of Space Security, pp. 124-227

  • (O) Deputy Assistant Secretary Frank Rose on U.S. National Space Policy, Statement at Conference on Disarmament, Geneva, 13 July 2010 http://geneva.usmission.gov/2010/07/13/das-frank-rose-space-policy/

  • Gregory L. Schulte and Audrey M. Schaffer, “Enhancing Security by Promoting Responsible Behavior in Space, ” Strategic Studies Quarterly 6, no. 1 (Spring 2012): 9-17 http://www.au.af.mil/au/ssq/2012/spring/spring12.pdf

  • (Sk) David A. Koplow, “An Inference about Interference: A Surprising Application of Existing International Law to Inhibit Anti-Satellite Weapons, University of Pennsylvania Journal of International Law 35, no. 3 (Spring 2014): 737-827

Week 12: 11 Nov Organizing for National Security Space




  • Cynthia A. S. McKinley, “The Guardians of Space: Organizing America’s Space Assets for the Twenty-First Century,” Aerospace Power Journal 14, no. 1 (Spring 2000): 37-45 http://www.airpower.maxwell.af.mil/airchronicles/apj/apj00/spr00/mckinley.pdf

  • (Sk) Report of the Commission to Assess United States National Security Space Management and Organization, Chapters IV-VII

  • Lambeth, Mastering the Ultimate High Ground, pp. 125-180

  • James B. Armor, Jr., “Viewpoint: It is Time to Create a United States Air Force Space Corps” Astropolitics 5, no. 3 (September 2007): 273-88

  • (Sk) Independent Assessment Panel, “Leadership, Management, and Organization for National Security Space: Report of the Independent Assessment Panel on the Organization and Management of National Security Space,” Alexandria: Institute for Defense Analyses, July 2008 http://www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?AD=ADA486551&Location=U2&doc=GetTRDoc.pdf

  • Richard W. McKinney, “Review of Headquarters Air Force Management of Space Responsibilities,” (Washington: Office of the Under Secretary of the Air Force, 23 August 2010) http://www.af.mil/shared/media/document/AFD-100826-028.pdf

  • (O) John M. Logsdon, “Emerging Domestic Structures: Organizing the Presidency for Spacepower,” Spacepower Theory Study http://www.ndu.edu/press/space-Ch27.html

  • (Sk) “The Space Commission: Ten Years Later,” High Frontier 7, no. 4 (August 2011): 2-50

http://www.afspc.af.mil/shared/media/document/AFD-110825-027.pdf
Week 13: 18 Nov Current Global Space Security Issues


  • Ashley J. Tellis, “China’s Military Space Strategy,” Survival 49, no. 3 (Autumn 2007): 41-72

  • Larry M. Wortzel, “The Chinese People’s Liberation Army and Space Warfare,” (Washington: American Enterprise Institute, October 2007) http://www.aei.org/docLib/20071017_SpaceWarfare.pdf

  • Brian Weeden, “How China ‘Wins’ a Potential Space War,” China Security, 4, no. 1 (Winter 2008): 134-47

  • (Sk) “Space, China, and Strategy,” Space & Defense Journal 2, no. 3 (Winter 2009): 2-75 http://web.mac.com/rharrison5/Eisenhower_Center_for_Space_and_Defense_Studies/Journal_Vol_2_No_3_files/Space%20and%20Defense%202_3.pdf

  • Xavier Pasco, “The European “Spacepower?” A Multifaceted Concept,” Spacepower Theory Study http://www.ndu.edu/press/space-Ch25.html

  • Dean Cheng, “China’s Military Role in Space,” Strategic Studies Quarterly 6, no. 1 (Spring 2012): 55-77 http://www.au.af.mil/au/ssq/2012/spring/spring12.pdf

  • Brian Weeden, “Through a Glass Darkly: Chinese, American, and Russian Anti-satellite Testing in Space, (Washington: Secure World Foundation, 17 March 2014) http://swfound.org/media/167224/Through_a_Glass_Darkly_March2014.pdf

Week 14: 25 Nov No Class


Week 15: 2 Dec Future National Space Strategy and Policy: Finding a Focused Consensus



  • Watts, Military Use of Space, pp. 107-114

  • (Sk) Barry R. Posen, “Command of the Commons: The Military Foundation of U.S. Hegemony,” International Security 28, no. 1 (Summer 2003): 5-46

  • (O) Gregory A. Orndorff, Bruce F. Zink, and John D. Cosby, “Clustered Architecture for Responsive Space,” AIAA-RS5 2007-1002, (Los Angeles: American Institute for Aeronautics and Astronautics, 5th Responsive Space Conference, 23-26 April 2007)

  • (O) Mr. Naresh Shah and Dr. Owen C. Brown, “Fractionated Satellites: Changing the Future of Risk and Opportunity for Space Systems,” High Frontier 5, no. 1 (November 2008): 29-36 http://www.afspc.af.mil/shared/media/document/AFD-081117-032.pdf

  • (O) Philip J. Baines and Adam Cote, “Promising Confidence- and Security-Building Measures for Space,” Disarmament Forum 2009, no. 4, pp. 5-16 http://www.unidir.org/pdf/articles/pdf-art2906.pdf

  • Moltz, The Politics of Space Security, pp. 228-329

  • (O) S. Pete Worden, “Future Strategy and Professional Development: A Roadmap,” Spacepower Theory Study http://www.ndu.edu/press/space-Ch30.html

  • Everett Carl Dolman, “New Frontiers, Old Realities,” Strategic Studies Quarterly 6, no. 1 (Spring 2012): 78-96 http://www.au.af.mil/au/ssq/2012/spring/spring12.pdf




Download 99.63 Kb.

Share with your friends:




The database is protected by copyright ©ininet.org 2022
send message

    Main page