Home
Archive
Newsletters
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement

War in Heaven: Stopping the Arms Race in Outer Space

By Helen Caldicott and Craig Eisendrath, The New Press. Posted June 12, 2007.


A new book reveals Bush's revamped national space policy. It lays the basis for a radical change of U.S. policy toward outer space -- the deployment of weapons.
spacestory
space story
Advertisement
Upcoming AlterNet stories on Digg

The following is an excerpt from War in Heaven: Stopping the Arms Race in Outer Space Before It's Too Late (New Press, 2007).

If the stars should appear one night in a thousand years, how would men believe and adore; and reserve for many generations the remembrance of the city of God which had been shown!
--"Nature," by Ralph Waldo Emerson, 1836

It's politically sensitive, but it's going to happen. Some people don't want to hear this and it sure isn't in vogue, but -- absolutely -- we're going to fight in space. We're going to fight from space and we're going to fight into space. That's why the U.S. has developed programs in directed energy and hit-to-kill mechanisms. We will engage terrestrial targets someday -- ships, airplanes, land targets -- from space. We will engage targets in space, from space.
--William R. Scott, "USSC Prepares for Future Combat Missions in Space," Aviation Week & Space Technology, Aug. 5, 1996

The Cold War is over, but many of us can remember the terror of living in that era. Tens of thousands of rockets were poised to strike the United States and the Soviet Union in less than an hour -- all armed with hydrogen bombs hundreds of times stronger than the bombs that had leveled Hiroshima and Nagasaki. If war broke out, our countries would be seething wastes of radioactivity. Almost nothing would survive.

The Cold War began in 1945, immediately after World War II, and by 1958, both the United States and Russia had obtained hydrogen bombs of unbelievable destructive power. At the same time, both countries were developing intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs) to speed the delivery of these satanic weapons to their targeted cities. Between them, the United States and the Soviet Union soon had the capacity to destroy the planet in a series of lightning strikes. During the 1960s, reports from the Rand Corp., a national security research institution, predicted between one and two hundred million dead in the first nuclear exchange. Not only would millions die, but the planet would be permanently polluted with radioactivity. Nikita Khrushchev, the leader of the Soviet Union, said "Will the living envy the dead?"

The fact that the ICBMs were designed to exit the earth's atmosphere before raining death and destruction down on Moscow, St. Petersburg, New York and Washington, marked the first instance of the use of outer space for military purposes. And once this threshold had been crossed, military planners realized that space itself could be militarized -- satellites could be used to identify military targets on the other side of the world and accurately guide missiles to their targets. Before satellites were used in this way, it had not been feasible for the United States or the Soviet Union to fly over each other's territory under international law. The United States could not observe the Soviets, who might be developing a missile launching platform in some obscure area of Siberia, unless the United States flew over Soviet territory, a violation of national air space under international law and an act of war. Satellites allowed such observations to be made unobtrusively and legally for the purpose of either identifying targets or monitoring arms control agreements. This technology became even more important after the U-2 incident in 1960, when the American airplane pilot, Francis Gary Powers, was shot down while spying on the Soviet Union in a high-altitude plane.

The military planners had still other ideas for the military uses of outer space. Not only could missiles move through outer space and satellites spot targets and guide missiles, but weapons could be permanently placed in orbit outside the earth's atmosphere and then, on a signal from the earth, bombard bases and cities. Bombardment satellites, and satellites to knock out the satellites of other countries, looked like the weapons of future wars.

At the same time that military planners were dreaming of space wars, others were imagining a wide range of ways by which space could be used to benefit humankind. First on the seas, and then in the air, human beings had expanded their horizons, and had begun to create a unified planet. Outer space held the exciting promise of a further extension of the human endeavor -- a new frontier with the potential to benefit the entire species.

Scientific exploration held perhaps the greatest and most wonderful promise. Before satellite technology became available, the examination of the solar system, our own galaxy and the universe was limited to rather primitive observations made from the ground, because telescopic sightings were restricted by the fog of the atmosphere, which seriously compromised their clarity. Observations from satellites, by contrast, transcended the atmosphere, which opened up a whole new field of scientific endeavor. For the first time, we could observe the farther reaches of our planetary system with accuracy and begin to understand the composition of our galaxy and then of the universe as a whole. We began to comprehend the immensity of the universe that we inhabit -- 100 billion galaxies -- and to be able to speculate on the world's origins based on the direct evidence provided by satellite observations. The earthly restrictions on scientific research that limited findings in the 19th century and earlier decades of the 20th century were astonishingly superseded by the birth of a totally new field of astrophysics.


Digg!    Share on facebook   submit to reddit    Bookmark on Delicious   Stumble This  

See more stories tagged with: foreign policy, weaponization of space, space wars

Helen Caldicott is the co-founder of Physicians for Social Responsibility, president of the Nuclear Policy Research Institute, and a Nobel Peace Prize nominee. She divides her time between Australia and Washington, D.C. Craig Eisendrath is a senior fellow at the Center for International Policy and author, most recently, of Bush League Diplomacy. He lives in Philadelphia.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from World! Sign up now »

Advertisement
Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Gee?
Posted by: Temporary on Jun 12, 2007 12:29 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Whoud this sudden fear of space weapons have anything to do with Chinas laterst missile tests? It would be a shame if all those big and expensive B2-bombers would become permanently BLIND now wouldn't it;) No wonder your spooked;P

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Gee? Posted by: Temporary
» No need to worry about China Posted by: mrcentrist
Instead...
Posted by: Monitor523 on Jun 12, 2007 1:18 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I agree that this is an extremely important issue. The expansion of weapons into space sounds like science fiction - nuclear missiles, "directed energy weapons" (i.e. orbital laser platforms), and other more remote plans like the "orbital aircraft carrier" plans including robotic drone spaceplanes etc. which could reach anywhere on earth in 90 minutes or less. There are people who find such things incredibly exciting, but what they represent is a sign of how our ability to make powerful machines is expanding beyond what can safely fit on a single planet. Environmental degradation, climate change, etc. are another facet of the general issue, but weaponizing space is a bigger threat in the short term, just like ICBMs were (and continue to be). The issue comes down to policy - a decision about what to do with these abilities, and the technical possibilities that are created when we can relate to the whole Earth at once, from a distance.

As the article points out, there have been any number of peaceful uses for "outer" space - remote sensing and communication satellites among the given examples. It's hard for national governments - inherently concerned with only a small fraction of the Earth's surface - to make coherent policy about the whole planet, let alone the ways in which we deal with the world outside the planet. They - and particularly those most heavily invested in the military, since space travel is still very expensive - have strong institutional leanings to continue their current policies in the new arena. If governments have few incentives to come up with sound plans for how to relate to the world off Earth, strong public pressure - necessarily internationally-based, I'd assume - has to be used to balance those leanings.

So here's a problem: space is not something that most of us think about very much, because it doesn't affect our daily lives (even though, physically speaking, it's much closer than most other countries, or even most of our own country - the "edge of space" being only 100 miles away from any point on the Earth's surface).

I think what's needed is a really strong, compelling story about what else to do with space apart from militarization, that makes it clear that there's a reason to want to have a peaceful environment there, just as we want peace on the high seas, or in the air, even though most of us don't live there. The Space Age is still very new - less than 50 years old - and many of the early "science-fictional" dreams may yet come to pass, but it'll take a while, and long-range stories about settlement off Earth don't seem to have a lot of appeal. In fact, we still use the phrase "outer" space to mean mostly Low Earth Orbit and geosynchronous orbit - not even 1/6 of the way to the moon, the nearest major object to the Earth. I think if we try to apply the kind of long-range thinking to the Space Age that we do to environmental problems - say, thinking about our children's children's experience - this starts to seem a bit parochial.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Instead... (part II) Posted by: Monitor523
There's no other way to put this. You Yanks are out of control!
Posted by: justaguy on Jun 12, 2007 2:25 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This space legislation is not just (or probably even) the product of the Bushies, but an out of control Military-Industrial-Congress Complex.

It is proof positive of your/their desire to control the earth through fear and terror(ism).

Sorry my American friends, do something, or we'll be friends no more.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Space Junk
Posted by: Illiteratilumen on Jun 12, 2007 7:57 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
A war in outer space could potentially seal the fate of humankind without ever firing a shot or dropping one bomb on the planets surface.

There is already a great deal of debris circling our planet and the larger pieces are tracked by NASA. Blowing up a few hundred satellites could put an awful lot of debris in orbit that would make any attempt to exit the atmosphere VERY dangerous. We could basically be trapped on this planet.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Space Junk Posted by: Knowmad
» Hillary Clinton is pro-space junk! Posted by: Illiteratilumen
» RE: Space Junk Posted by: Knowmad
» RE: Space Junk Posted by: Illiteratilumen
Space junk indeed
Posted by: thoughtcriminal on Jun 12, 2007 9:06 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
See the above comment. This is an stunning example of the lunatic idiocy of Donald Rumsfeld and his ilk, who have been pushing various 'Star Wars' plans for decades.

On one hand, it's just a giveaway program for delivering more bloated defense contracts to their cronies in the defense industry. These include:

Boeing Corporation, Lockheed Martin, TRW, Raytheon

Boeing Corporation, the "Lead System Integrator" or main contractor on Star Wars, is responsible for ensuring that all component NMD parts and systems are developed and integrated successfully. A $14 billion taxpayer-subsidized purchase of McDonnell Douglas in 1997 made Boeing the country's second largest war profiteer and NASA's top contractor. Boeing is also the nation's largest exporter with over half its annual sales of military and civilian aviation equipment crossing international borders....

Lockheed Martin is responsible for building the NMD Payload Launch vehicle and components of the Space-Based Infrared System. The largest war contractor in the world, Lockheed Martin rakes in about $18.5 billion in annual Department of Defense (DoD) contracts, making it the top Pentagon contractor as well....

Raytheon's pieces of the Star Wars pie include the Exoatmospheric Kill Vehicle (EKV) and X-radar. These are key NMD components. The EKV is the interceptor that's supposed to destroy the incoming missile, and the X-radar system is supposed to find the EKV's target by discriminating between real warheads and decoys...

TRW is the lead innovator of what it calls the "center of the National Missile Defense system," the Battle Management Command, Control and Communications (BMC3) system, which integrates the computer systems that are supposed to differentiate between nuclear warheads and Mylar decoy balloons. As the record of the first three tests indicates, the BMC3 system has been a complete failure.

Even more disturbing, this year former TRW senior engineer Nira Schwartz blew the whistle on her former employer, stating publicly that TRW blatantly lied about rampant test result failures to the DoD....


On the one hand, you have this bloated defense industry...owned by the same Wall Street firms that control both the oil corporations, agribusiness and the corporate media (the usual suspects: Barclays, Vanguard, Janus, AXA, etc.)...whose business plan is based on political corruption, fraudulent tests and militaristic ideology.

On the other hand, you have the simple fact that a few rocketloads of ball bearings dumped into high Earth orbit would destroy every existing satellite and would stay up there forever, permanently closing off space to humanity.

The basic issue is that human greed hasn't changed much since the days of the Egyptian god-kings, 6000 years ago - and our new technology is more than we can handle.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Space junk indeed Posted by: LeftCoastProgressive
» scattering debris everywhere Posted by: thoughtcriminal
» RE: Space junk indeed Posted by: Illiteratilumen
RE: Obvious...
Posted by: VZEQICVA on Jun 12, 2007 2:09 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
You're right. How could anyone not see this coming? My favorite response is, "oh, they wouldn't do that". They're doing it. Keep trying. Thanks, ANNA

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

wars and rumors of war
Posted by: solrev on Jun 12, 2007 10:22 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
We will colonize this solar system and this galaxy. I am not so sure of the relationship between our galaxy and the other galaxies. If you can hang around for the next 50 years, you will see the moon colonized and all the pollution free energy for life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness produced there. The last Babylon is about to crumble. We all die in fear but none of us have to live in fear.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: wars and rumors of war Posted by: PopRox80
» Time acts funny when you go REALLY fast Posted by: Illiteratilumen
SPACE COMMAND
Posted by: Ghoulman on Jun 12, 2007 11:13 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
SPACE COMMAND was formed in the mid 90s, this new agency is the centre of future US policy in outer space. This is a military branch with all the secrecy and dark operations one might expect, such as the looming prospect of the old insanity called ORBITING NUCLEAR WARHEADS.

Blame Bush all ya like, but really it's American policy. I'm shocked this entire article didn't even mention Space Command. Surely, this is relevant. Bashing a lame duck president because he's committed every evil imaginable is fine, but the articles point suffers for the distraction.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Our Space "Program" is...
Posted by: edraven on Jun 12, 2007 11:18 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Fueled by corporate greed. The plan is to create a war capability, that's where the money is, and worry about who the enemy will be later. Any scientist will tell you that the current program (international space station, shuttle and spy satellites) is designed to improve the military applications. Real NASA exploration is best done by robots.

Our government has to be replaced.

Ed Graham

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Yes and no.... Posted by: Illiteratilumen
» It was cheaper... Posted by: justaguy
» RE: It was cheaper... Posted by: Illiteratilumen
The Defense Pretense
Posted by: fanny666 on Jun 12, 2007 1:20 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The Defense Pretense

A series of talks on the subject, worth listening to if you want more specifics on this very important subject... literally threatening human survival.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The Lesson of America is the Lesson of War
Posted by: sofla100 on Jun 12, 2007 10:15 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
With attempts to militarize space, along with an ever expanding military presence, is it a big surprise nuclear proliferation continues? Take Iran, what this country sees is a conquered Iraq, an ever expanding Israel, and now, American power projection likely into space. Take what all the world's countries see, an America willing and presumably able to do whatever it likes and wants to "protect it's interests." If this means side-skirting treaties or abrogating them, or spending massive amounts of money, it does not seem to matter. The lesson of America has become the lesson of war. And still, they criticize countries trying to acquire a nuclear deterrent to stop invasion or worse.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

DEFENDING MY MINING CLAIM
Posted by: AsteroidMiner on Jun 12, 2007 10:19 PM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Helen Caldicott and Craig Eisendrath suffer from a
lack of imagination. I recommend they read some science
fiction.
I WANT THE US MILITARY OUT THERE
DEFENDING MY MINING CLAIM. As a stockholder in
SpaceDev, I intend to proceed with prospecting, claiming
asteroids and MINING. One iron asteroid 2.5 miles in
diameter is worth $35 TRillion, not counting the gold.
Such an asteroid would have less than a billion dollars
worth of gold, but I fugure I could make ends meet on a
few hundred billion, if it was in gold.
As soon as the Space Elevator is operational [see
www.liftport.com] mining gold on near-earth asteroids and
bringing it back to earth will bring back $100 for every $10
invested.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Grandchildren
Posted by: AsteroidMiner on Jun 12, 2007 11:15 PM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Reference: Cosmological Forecast and Its Practical
Significance
Journal of Evolution and Technology Vol. 12 - September
2002
http://jetpress.org/volume12/CosmologicalForecast.htm
Milan M. C´irkovic´
Astronomical Observatory Belgrade
Volgina 7
11000 Belgrade
YUGOSLAVIA
Dr. C´irkovic´ says that for every century we delay
colonizing space, we have 5 times 10 to the exponent 46
fewer descendants between now and the death of our
galaxy. 5 times 10 to the exponent 46 is 5 followed by 46
zeros before the decimal point. That many descendants is
such a huge reward that ANY move into space is far more
than worth it.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

"Armageddon" and "Deep Impact"
Posted by: AsteroidMiner on Jun 12, 2007 11:31 PM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Did you see the movies "Armageddon" and "Deep
Impact"? I invented their method. For better defense of
earth, we need far more than George W. Bush has
proposed.
In only 33000 years, Proxima Centauri, a red dwarf
star, will enter our Oort Cloud. A star in our Oort cloud
causes a period of "Heavy bombardment". "Heavy
bombardment" means that the earth will be hit by more
large objects like the one that killed the dinosaurs. There is
only one species that can protect mother earth, and it is us.
We will be much more able to defend earth if we inhabit
the whole solar system by that time.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Once space is weaponized
Posted by: Ian MacLeod on Jun 13, 2007 4:15 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It's all but over. A railgun - magnetically-propelled crowars, essentially, that fire chunks of steel aimed by computers that strike at velocities from 30K-50K moh would strike with the force of nuckes, but without the radiation. There MUST be an international treaty, enforced by international forces in space, to stop this. It's the ONLY way, as each nationality would be fighting for the safety of his/her own homeland as well as everyone else's. The resources of even near-space are all but infinite, and are there for the taking - if we can cooperate! If not, there is ALWAYS war.

Ian

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

PNAC moving like clock work.....
Posted by: denk on Jun 13, 2007 11:54 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
uncle sham is really
going by the book

lets see........

iraq checked

iran checked

SEA checked

china checked

star war checked

only one item envisioned in that pnac "road map" seems to be unaccounted for, now whats with this "advanced forms of biological warfare that can 'target' specific genotypes "?

but take a look at this map, [scroll down], is it CHECKED ???







checked

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Unfortunately, Many Have Vested Interests
Posted by: StuartH on Jun 14, 2007 11:52 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
If you look around, most people who graduate with a baccalaureate or an advanced degree in physics, electrical engineering, or mathematics have few choices outside of academic institutions. The idea of contributing to the development of an interplanetary age of pioneering and scientific development is a really great one.

Thus, there has come to be a great distortion in the economics of our country. People need jobs, and people with PhDs in the sciences should expect to be well paid.

The military industrial complex has gotten so good at creating jobs for scientists that the entire economy pretty much depends on staying the course that has been built over the decades since Kennedy pointed us at the moon.

Very few people are aware of the implications for a national course bent on a war vision rather than on exploration and commercial or purely scientific ventures. Very many people have a vested interest in paychecks that turn out to be war related.

Political leaders that we elect need to be aware of this and strong enough to steer a national course that makes more sense. We The People need to be, as Thomas Jeffersion put it, "Ever vigilant."

George Lucas' vision of the future posed a very real choice to be made: Do we develop along the lines of Darth Vader's vision or Luke Skywalker's? Interesting that the appellation "Star Wars" has been in use to describe the militarization of space. It is more appropriate than the politicians who use it realize.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]