Recently, the United States has fully unveiled a new initiative under President Trump called Golden Dome – a missile defence project of unprecedented scope and ambition. Originally included among Trump’s flurry of Executive Orders in January as an American version of Israel’s Iron Dome, it has since changed names and is envisioned to be much, much bigger. It is intended to provide security for the entirety of the United States homeland, but it will have global coverage – because the US can be targeted by long-range missiles, including intercontinental ballistic missiles, launched from any point on the globe.
Golden Dome is intended to be a family of systems – some, based on the ground – but centred around a space-based architecture. It would deploy interceptors in orbit capable of being fired from space to intercept enemy missiles during their intra-atmospheric course. These are essentially airborne targets. But once the principle is established that you can target an airborne threat from orbit, a Pandora’s Box opens: why not strike a ground-based target, or a naval target, from space?
This is the beginning of a new era in space warfare. For the first time, the United States has made it its policy to place weapons in space that can conduct space-to-Earth strike – effectively, and eventually, bombardment from orbit. To channel President Trump’s inimitable style, this is HUGE. It is going to be a major departure for US space policy – an expensive programme, with massive industrial and strategic repercussions.
Golden Dome also raises foundational questions for international security. The principle of the “peaceful use of outer space” has long been front and centre in international space diplomacy and agreements since the first US-Soviet Space Race in the 1960s. But the legal framework is narrower than many assume. The Outer Space Treaty of 1967 prohibits weapons of mass destruction – namely nuclear weapons – in orbit. It does not prohibit conventional weapons. During the Cold War, there were numerous tests of conventional weapons for space intercept and other offensive military operations. In recent years, China, Russia, and India have all conducted direct-ascent anti-satellite (ASAT) missile tests from the ground. So the taboo against space weaponisation has always been more normative than strictly legal.
No comments:
Post a Comment