Joseph L. Puntoriero
Space is no longer a sanctuary but a contested domain where the United States must achieve local, time-bound control of key orbital inclinations and celestial lines of communication. This article proposes an operational framework that integrates a shield and sword approach – layered resilience, active/passive satellite self-protection, and guardian-escort constellations paired with agile co-orbital and non-kinetic counterspace options – to enable deterrence by denial and punishment while managing escalation, debris, and attribution risks. Furthermore, grounding in the theories presented by Corbett and Clausewitz translates theory into practical guidance, enabling campaigns to be conducted effectively in orbit without ceding strategic initiative.
Introduction
The transition of space from a sanctuary to a contested domain marks a pivotal shift in global security dynamics. Orbital regimes – Low Earth Orbit (LEO), Medium Earth Orbit (MEO), Geosynchronous Orbit (GEO), and Highly Elliptical Orbit (HEO) – and the vast expanses of inter-celestial space are now arenas of strategic competition. The rapid proliferation of space-faring nations, commercial entities, and dual-use technologies compressed strategic maneuver space in orbit and intensified competition for control over critical orbital regimes. Nations like China and Russia are rapidly advancing anti-satellite (ASAT) weapons, co-orbital systems, and cyber capabilities, challenging the United States’ dominance. Sustained strategic advantage for the United States in the emerging era of space warfare will depend on the urgent development, integration, and perfection of offensive and defensive satellite capabilities capable of asserting control and proactive denial in contested orbital regimes and inter-celestial space. These systems must be paired with resilient force composition, intelligent redundancy, and tailored doctrine to ensure deterrence stability, safeguard critical assets, and shape the norms of engagement before adversaries dictate them.
The United States has long recognized the strategic importance of space and thus attempted to guide the global community in establishing global norms. The 1967 Outer Space Treaty (OST) established the principle that space should be used for peaceful purposes, prohibiting the placement of weapons of mass destruction in orbit. However, the OST did not prevent the development of conventional military capabilities in space, nor did it define “peaceful” in a way that precluded military uses. The United States and the Soviet Union both pushed this boundary during the Cold War. Each country conducted rudimentary ASAT testing, including co-orbital interceptors that approached targets to disable or destroy them. These tests demonstrated that space could be contested, but technological limitations and the desire to avoid debris-generating incidents dissuaded significant advancements. Today, technological advancements, integration of space into joint force operations, and the rise of peer competitors have removed many of these constraints, creating a need to establish control in localized orbital slots and defend them.
No comments:
Post a Comment