A few months back, the Space Review did a helpful survey of the platforms of the leading presidential contenders to see what they had to say about the U.S. role in space. Not surprisingly, their space platforms were underdeveloped compared to the more salient issues in the race and none of them had anything specific to say about space weaponization.
However, in a new press release, Barack Obama laid out his space policy plan which includes the plank:
Keep Weapons out of Space: China’s successful test of an anti-satellite missile in January 2007 signaled a potential new arms race in space. Barack Obama does not support the stationing of any weapons in space. He believes the international community must address the issue of space weaponization head-on and enter into a serious dialogue with Russia, China and other nations to stop this slow slide into a new battlefield.
To my knowledge, Senator Obama is the first 2008 candidate to specifically address the U.S. military role in space in their space policy though the other candidates would likely break down along party lines if pressed. However, this is unlikely to become a significant election issue unless China resumes testing during the campaign, forcing the candidates to address how they would handle the threat from China.
Updated, February 25, 2008: Just saw this on Global Security Newswire: the Council for a Livable World sent a questionnaire to all of the candidates at the time and received these responses from the Democratic candidates:
The candidates were the most divided on the issue of weapons in space. Dodd, Edwards, and Richardson endorsed a multilateral international ban on space weapons with no qualifiers.
Clinton supported the multilateral international ban but committed herself only to constraining testing and deployment of weapons in space “as much as possible, while continuing to protect our satellites from any threats that remain.”
Obama said a treaty increasing space security, while “a good idea,” would “take a long time to negotiate” and therefore suggested a “simpler and quicker” alternative: a “Code of Conduct for responsible space-faring nations.”
Biden was the only candidate to answer “It Depends,” explaining that he opposed space weapons “designed to cause damage on the ground” and supported “a carefully crafted ban on destroying or disabling another country’s satellite,” but remained wary of any treaty that aimed to “ban space stations or require international inspection of space payloads.”