SUMMARY
With all attempts to establish international norms to prevent the militarisation of space and ensure its peaceful use having failed, the only solution in sight lies in multlateralism. An escalation of weapons in space, as in the Arctic, could have devastating consequences for global security and the economy. But the US, Russia and China – the main players in this new space race – continue to develop significant capabilities in ASAT technology and weaponry.
Óscar Ruiz / Escudo Digital
The space war is back in the news after US officials reported that Moscow launched an anti-satellite weapon into the same orbit as a US satellite on 16 May, but more than the news itself, it would be necessary and important to analyse the global consequences of a possible militarisation of space.
‘On 16 May, Russia launched a satellite into low-Earth orbit that the United States says is likely an anti-satellite weapon (presumably) capable of attacking other satellites in low-Earth orbit,’ US Ambassador Robert Wood said in a 20 May speech at the United Nations. ‘Russia deployed this new anti-satellite weapon in the same orbit as a US government satellite’.
The anti-satellite payload characteristics of this new device would resemble those previously deployed by the Kremlin in 2019 and 2022. In late 2019, the Russians launched a satellite that later released a second satellite. Both satellites followed a National Reconnaissance Office satellite. The then head of Space Operations, General John W. ‘Jay’ Raymond, compared them to ‘Russian dolls’. Several months later, US officials said the sub-satellite had released another object, apparently firing a high-speed projectile.
In 2021, Russia tested a direct-ascent anti-satellite missile against one of its own satellites, destroying it and creating a massive debris field.
And earlier this year, then Under Secretary of Defense for Space Policy John F. Plumb confirmed US concerns that Russia is developing an ‘indiscriminate’ nuclear weapon for space.
The United States took the initiative to co-sponsor a resolution at the United Nations. This resolution was primarily aimed at urging all nations to refrain from developing or deploying nuclear weapons in outer space. The proposal reflected the commitment of the US and its allies to the preservation of space as a peaceful, nuclear-free domain, seeking to avoid an arms race in this critical environment.
The proposed resolution was part of a broader effort to establish international norms and rules to prevent the militarisation of space and ensure its peaceful use. In particular, concern about the development of nuclear weapons in space focuses on the catastrophic risks that such weapons could pose, including the possibility of nuclear war that could have devastating effects not only in space, but also on Earth.
Russia, a permanent member of the Security Council with veto power, strongly opposed the resolution. They argued that the US proposal was one-sided and did not address concerns about the development of other non-nuclear space weapons that could also destabilise the balance of power in space.
The vote ended in a 7-7 tie, with Switzerland abstaining. This tie meant that the resolution could not be adopted. Russia used its veto power to block the resolution. In addition, in a strategic move, Russia tabled a resolution of its own condemning all weapons in space, attempting to divert attention and gain support for its position. However, this resolution also failed to be adopted.
Consequences of an arms escalation in Space
– Increased risk of conflict. As in any of the other domains, the militarisation of space could lead to a significant increase in international tensions. The possibility of pre-emptive strikes against satellites and other space assets could become a trigger for conflict between space powers.
– Development of new warfare technologies. Anti-satellite (ASAT) weapons, such as lasers, capture satellites and other advanced technologies, could evolve rapidly. This would not only increase destructive capabilities in space, but also have collateral effects on Earth, such as disruption of communication and navigation systems.
– Proliferation of space debris. The destruction of satellites can generate large amounts of space debris, posing a danger to other satellites and manned missions. Kessler syndrome, a situation where the density of objects in orbit is high enough to cause chain collisions, could become a reality, jeopardising future access to space.
– Economic impact. Modern economies rely heavily on space infrastructures for communications, navigation, and surveillance. War in space could have catastrophic economic repercussions, affecting sectors such as trade, finance, and emergencies.
The United States, Russia and China are the main players in the space arms race. Each of these countries has developed significant capabilities in space technology and ASAT weaponry. The European Union, Japan and India also have advanced space programmes and could become involved in this dynamic. For its part, the United Nations and its Office for Outer Space Affairs (UNOOSA) would play a crucial role in attempting to mediate and establish regulations to prevent uncontrolled arms escalation.
If we think of establishing a balance of power in space, this could generate a new form of mutual deterrence similar to the Cold War, where space powers would maintain a very fragile peace based on the capability of mutually assured destruction (MAD) in space as in the field of nuclear weaponry.
This could certainly lead to rapid technological development and the arms race in space could accelerate, although not only for military use, but also for civilian applications.
Ultimately, an arms escalation in space would have wide-ranging and devastating consequences for global security and the economy. The involvement of multiple actors, combined with rapidly advancing technologies such as artificial intelligence, could, as in other domains, on the one hand exacerbate risks but also offer new ways to mitigate them. It is essential that the international community work together to establish norms and agreements that prevent conflict in space and ensure its peaceful and sustainable use.
Russia, which appears to be at a disadvantage vis-à-vis the US in the classic domains of sea, land and air, as well as cyberspace, might try to retaliate in the space domain, knowing the global economic consequences that space could bring.
The Arctic and Space should be free of armaments and geopolitical tensions, but on the contrary, we are heading towards a rapid and ‘natural’ militarisation of both places.
ÓSCAR RUIZ
International analyst and migration expert
Career Marine with more than 30 years of experience. Nine years stationed at NATO Headquarters in Belgium and Sarajevo developing intelligence and information security functions.
Military missions in Africa, America and Europe. Lecturer and speaker on subjects such as jihadist terrorism, migration challenges and maritime security.
