IMPACTS: NMD WILL LEAD TO DANGEROUS SPACE MILITARIZATION

IT WILL BE DIFFICULT TO AVOID SPACE MILITARIZATION OF SPACE DURING NMD DEVELOPMENT

MICHAEL KREPON, President Emeritus of the Henry L. Stimson Center, May, 2001 / June, 2001 Foreign Affairs SECTION: COMMENTS; Pg. 2 HEADLINE: Lost in Space; The Misguided Drive Toward Antisatellite Weapons //VT2002acsln

Since advanced missile defenses (of the kind the Bush team proposes) could be used to shoot down satellites and not just missiles, avoiding the weaponization of space while pursuing missile defense will not be easy. Much depends on the type of missile defense the Bush administration ultimately chooses to pursue. If the system it decides on includes weapons in space, as the Rumsfeld report recommends, a cascade of negative repercussions will follow. Moscow and Beijing will view an aggressive U.S. missile defense program as an attempt to both negate their own nuclear deterrents and render their satellites blind. If, however, U.S. missile defenses are designed to counter proliferation only and do not include weapons in space, Chinese and Russian fears could be assuaged.

ANTI-SATELLITE WEAPONS ALONG WITH NMD WILL BUST ALL OF THE USA’S ALLIANCES AND POLICY GOALS

If the Bush administration does decide to pursue space weapons -- whether to seize the strategic high ground, to protect its missile defenses, or both -- it can expect American allies, already uncomfortable with missile defenses, to go their separate ways. Meanwhile, rather than cede the field to Washington, Moscow and Beijing will no doubt respond with their own ASAT programs, hoping to blind U.S. satellites and negate American missile defenses in the cheapest possible fashion. Closer strategic cooperation between Russia and China will also be assured. Furthermore, the pursuit of space weapons by Washington will accelerate the demise of the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty and the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaties, which will then weaken nonproliferation accords.

SPACE MILITARIZATION WOULD BE IMPERIAL OVERSTRETCH BY THE USA

An arms race in space was avoided during the Cold War due in part to the assumption that the Kremlin would compete with and nullify American moves. Now the sole remaining superpower may be tempted to slough off treaty constraints and to seek protection through unilateral initiatives. If this strategy is pursued, it will no doubt be couched in flexible and reassuring language. But U.S. allies and potential adversaries will see it as something else: the hubris of imperial overstretch. And they will react accordingly.

SPACE WARFARE INITIATIVES WILL DAMAGE SPACE-BASED COMMERCE SEVERELY

With the global economy so intimately tied to assets in space, space-warfare initiatives by the Bush administration could also create havoc with satellite-dependent commerce. The extent of damage that the loss of a key satellite could cause was suggested by the failure of a Galaxy IV satellite in May 1998. When the computer controlling the satellite broke down, 80 percent of U.S. pagers -- affecting 37 million users -- went dead. Some radio and television stations were knocked off the air, while gas stations and retail stores found themselves unable to verify credit card transactions. The Rumsfeld commission cites this event as a harbinger of America's future vulnerability in space to malefactors and hence as another reason to implement its recommendations.