About the American space program

American Space Program

May 28, 2005

The American Space Weapons Program

The American Air Force is currently submitting to President Bush's approval a directive concerning the security of the Nation and aimed at developing new offensive and defensive weapons. A detailed article on this subject can be read in the New York Times dated May 18, 2005 (http://www.nytimes.com/2005/05/.......VfbtZ8wdA). This project risks, say certain observers, being presented by the allies (and potential enemies) of the United States as relaunching a new arms race in space. It would represent an important change in defense policy, given the policy followed since President Clinton's decisions in 1996. Until now space was reserved, on the military level, for observing the application of demilitarization and non-proliferation treaties, as well as for intelligence.

The implementation of the directive aiming to deploy space weapons will cause many financial, technological, political and diplomatic difficulties, although no international treaty explicitly prohibits such weapons, according to official White House spokespersons. A positive decision is expected in the coming weeks.

In fact, according to Air Force representatives, it is not a matter of putting weapons in orbit, but of giving oneself free access to space for defensive or offensive actions.

In this perspective, the Pentagon would have already spent billions of dollars to prepare weapon systems and the modalities of their deployment. This had been recommended in January 2001 by a commission chaired by the newly appointed Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld.

Following these proposals, President Bush had withdrawn from the Antiballistic Missile Treaty which prohibited the deployment of armaments in space.

There is no longer any doubt today that for the Air Force, the concept of absolute space supremacy supposes the freedom to attack as well as the freedom to defend oneself from space ("freedom to attack as well as freedom from attack in space").

This will require new weapons, new types of satellites, new means of cooperation with the armed forces. The technological obstacles will be enormous and the credits are estimated to have to reach hundreds of billions of dollars. It will also be necessary to convince the "allies" that the border of the United States now extends to space, but up to what limits?

The Air Force has developed a new strategy, called Global Strike,

which supposes the development of a space plane called "common aero vehicle,"

carrying guided weapons representing half a ton of munitions. According to General Lord testifying before Congress, it will be a matter of an "incredible capacity for destroying command centers and missile launch sites wherever they are in the world."

It could reach its target in 45 minutes after half a trip around the world. The development of this vehicle is considered the maximum priority.

The Air Force has already produced various prototypes of such weapons, whose tests we have presented in our review.

One will cite in particular the XSS-11, a micro-satellite capable of jamming the communication and reconnaissance satellites of other nations. The Pentagon has not hidden that it would not hesitate to use such weapons to destroy the satellites of "allies" that would overshadow them, for example the satellites of the future European Galileo program in the case where these would have been developed with the participation of countries reputed to be enemies such as China.

Another program, significantly named "Rods From God," aims to precipitate from space cylinders of tungsten, titanium or depleted uranium in order to penetrate deeply into ground targets. Arriving at speeds of 10,000 km/h, they would have the effect of small atomic shells.

A third program will use laser rays or radio-electric waves capable of immobilizing or destroying troops and equipment on the ground.

General James E. Cartwright, head of the United States Strategic Command, recently explained to the Senate subcommittee competent for the question of nuclear armaments

that the objective was to allow the nation to "deliver an attack very quickly, without long preparatory planning, anywhere on the surface of the Earth."

But many senators have expressed concern. How will Russia, the European Union, China and India react. And what will the United States do if one of these countries decided in turn to develop such weapons.

Will it be necessary to resort to preventive strikes?

This reasonable discourse was relayed by Teresa Hitchens, vice president of the Center for Defense Information, a Think Tank that analyzes and criticizes Pentagon policy. "Space must remain an international domain neither militarized nor militarizable."

Moreover, the budgets mentioned by the Air Force itself (from 220 billion to 1 trillion) appear out of reach. The unit strike would go from 600,000 dollars with a Tomahawk to 100 million dollars with the proposed systems. Already, "simple" reconnaissance and observation satellites see their costs at least triple. This is the case of the new spy satellite program called Future Imagery Architecture, whose cost is 25 billion (and whose results would moreover be disappointing). These costs would only be bearable if all current weapon systems were reconverted, which appears both utopian and dangerous.

But General Lord considers that all these objections do not hold. "Space superiority is our destiny. It is a matter today of a mission that must be conducted daily. But it is also a matter of a vision for the

Great Future

One can suppose that the industrialists who hope to profit from these floods of billions, not only to develop weapons but to reinvest the know-how in the civilian sector, fully share this point of view. 05/22/05