![]() ![]() ![]() and its allies depend on early-warning satellites to detect it. When North Korea launches an intercontinental ballistic missile, the U.S. military deploys troops overseas, satellite communications connect forces on the ground to control centers. When we use our phones to plan a trip, we depend on American GPS satellites to guide us. Space may seem distant, but what happens there affects our everyday lives on the ground. That’s twice as many as Russia and China, combined. Almost half of all operational satellites are owned and operated by the United States government or American commercial companies. has the most to gain by establishing norms, but also the most to lose. With by far the most satellites in orbit, the U.S. has the most to lose in a space-based conflict No treaties address this kind of test, the creation of space debris, or the endangerment of other satellites. Even though demonstrations like this have consequences for everyone, countries are free to carry them out as they see fit. In the process, it annihilated an old Chinese weather satellite and created high-velocity shrapnel that still threatens other satellites. In 2007, China tested an anti-satellite weapon, a conventionally-armed missile designed to target and destroy a satellite in orbit. Although the United States, Russia, and others soon agreed to a treaty to prevent another nuclear test in space, China and North Korea never signed it. The blast destroyed approximately one third of satellites in orbit and poisoned the most used region of space with radiation that lasted for years. ![]() In 1962, the United States detonated a 1.4 megaton nuclear weapon 250 miles above the Earth’s surface. With only a limited history of dangerous behavior to study, and few, outdated guidelines in place, a war in space would be a war with potentially more consequences, but far fewer rules, than one on Earth.Īlthough there has never been a military conflict in space, the history of human activity above our atmosphere is not entirely benign. It’s presumed that International Humanitarian Law would apply in outer space-protecting the civilian astronauts aboard the International Space Station-but it’s unclear whether damaging civilian satellites or the space environment itself is covered under the agreement. While agreements for how to operate in other international domains, like the open sea, airspace, and even cyberspace, have already been established, the major space powers-the United States, Russia, and China-have not agreed upon a rulebook outlining what constitutes bad behavior in space. No longer confined to the fiction shelf, space warfare is likely on the horizon. Fundamental changes are already underway. The debate in Congress over whether to create a Space Corps comes at a time when governments around the world are engaged in a bigger international struggle over how militaries should operate in space. Outer space has never been a military battleground. One hundred miles above the Earth’s surface, orbiting the planet at thousands of miles per hour, the six people aboard the International Space Station enjoy a perfect isolation from the chaos of earthly conflict. This article is edited from a story shared exclusively with members of The Masthead, the membership program from The Atlantic. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |