Space Weaponization has not Already Occurred (1259)

This issue is often muddled by the failure to maintain a clear distinction between "militarization" and "weaponization." Such equivocation often appears to be a rhetorical strategy of those who wish to argue that something is inevitable because something that sounds like it has already occurred. There is no debate about the fact that space is exploited for military purposes and has been for more than four decades. This is what is conventionally meant by "the militarization of space." But no nation is known to have permanently stationed in space devices capable of projecing destructive force against targets in space or on Earth, readied large numbers of such weapons for rapid launch into space in a "pop-up" deployment mode, or deployed ground-based anti-satellite weapons in numbers capable of attacking a significant fraction of targets in space. The latter scenarios are conventionally known as "space weaponization." Furthermore, if "weaponization" were to occur, it is expected that a number of states would engage in an arms race leading to a quick buildup of such forces in space, or ready for launch, to as large numbers as may be economically and technologically feasible. While experimental prototypes of space weapons or small numbers of systems such as ground-based lasers and "antimissile" missiles with inherent antisatellite capabilities may exist, space weaponization would be characterized by the deployment in large numbers of systems specifically designed for space warfare. Thus, while "space militarization" has already occurred, "space weaponization" has not.

Edit History