Space weapons will increase the risks of minor conflicts escalating into full-scale war because they target strategic systems.
Can you improve on this argument text? Help develop this argument by editing and adding more information or click on one of the edit links below to add a counter, supporting, or related argument.
You can help improve this argument by adding a supporting argument.
You can help improve this argument by adding a related argument.
The particulars of escalation have necessarily changed from the Cold War to asymmetric warfare, but the inherently escalatory nature of ASAT use remains inescapable. The flight-testing and deployment of space weaponry by any nation would likely generate responses in kind, as well as asymmetric responses. U.S. battle stations in space would become prime targets in the event of warfare and thus magnets for space mines or other countering devices that would cost a small fraction of the platforms to be defended. ( More ... ) Katz-Hyman, Michael and Michael Krepon. Assurance or Space Dominance? The Case Against Weaponizing Space. Washington, D.C.: Henry L. Stimson Center, April 2003. [ 16 quotes ] [ page 90 ]
Space weapons are destabilizing for other reasons, as well. Space warfare is unlikely to be confined to space, since the platforms that would be primary targets for attack support terrestrial military operations. Civil societies have worked diligently to affirm laws of war to limit dangers to noncombatants. The dictates of international law that warfare be pursued in a discriminating and proportional fashion -- guidelines that are reinforced by the "revolution in military affairs" pursued by the United States -- are undercut by space warfare, since satellites subject to attack provide essential services to noncombatants as well as to armies, navies, and air forces. ( More ... ) Katz-Hyman, Michael and Michael Krepon. Assurance or Space Dominance? The Case Against Weaponizing Space. Washington, D.C.: Henry L. Stimson Center, April 2003. [ 16 quotes ] [ page 91 ]
The simple unilateral posturing of space weapons creates global instability in the form of encouraging adversaries to respond symmetrically or asymmetrically, heightening tensions, while at the same time crippling alliances. In this less stable global environment, there is also the prospect of space weapons causing less stable regional environments. Integrating space weapons into military operations could have unexpected consequences for the progression of conflict situations, prompting significant regional instability. ( More ... ) Deblois, Bruce M. "The Advent of Space Weapons." Astropolitics. Vol. 1, No. 1 (Summer 2003). [ 15 quotes ]
In this less-stable global environment, there is also the prospect of space weapons causing less stable regional environments. That leads into my second point: space weapons will also cause regional instabilities. Integrating space weapons into military operations will undoubtedly have serious consequences for the progression of conflict situations. In most war games that include space assets, commanders have repeatedly discovered that pre-emptively destroying or denying an opponent's space-based assets, using space weapons to do so, is both appealing and often, inevitably, leads to rapid escalation in a full-scale war, even triggering nuclear responses. ( More ... ) Deblois, Bruce M. "Weapons in Space." Carnegie International Non-Proliferation Conference. Ed. . Washington, D.C.: Council on Foreign Relations, . [ 3 quotes ]