View Citation

Mueller, Karl P. "Totem and Taboo: Depolarizing the Space Weaponization Debate." Astropolitics. Vol. 1, No. 13 (Summer 2003): 4-28. [ 3 quotes ]

Evidence Related to this Citation

• Evolution of Air Power too Dissimilar from Space to Serve as Useful Analogy
• Naval Analogy does not Apply to Space because Spacecraft are more like Lighthouses than Ships
• Multiple Examples from Modern Times Dispute the Argument that Warfare Spreads Wherever Humanity Goes

Evolution of Air Power too Dissimilar from Space to Serve as Useful Analogy

 

However, the evolution of air and space power has not been as similar as space weapons advocates' analogies often suggest. For example, less than a decade elapsed between the Wright brothers' first flight and the first aerial combat missions, while in the fifth decade after Sputnik space remains unweaponized. Of course, the occurrence of a major war in the 1910s had much to do with the rapid evolution of air power, and space power might look very different today if World War III had broken out in the 1960s, but with no major wars now on the horizon , this caveat hardly makes the parallel between the two cases look like a strong basis for space policy in the 21st century. ( More ... )

---

Mueller, Karl P. "Totem and Taboo: Depolarizing the Space Weaponization Debate." Astropolitics. Vol. 1, No. 13 (Summer 2003): 4-28. [ 3 quotes ] [ page 16-17 ]

---

Naval Analogy does not Apply to Space because Spacecraft are more like Lighthouses than Ships

 

In spite of the intuitive similarities between seafaring and spacefaring, however, there is one fundamental difference between them which makes the sea-space analogy very weak: ships primarily transport goods and people, while spacecraft (with only minor exceptions) are built to collect, relay, or transmit information. This means that space piracy is not a problem, so space navies are not required to suppress it, while "commerce raiding" threats to space systems can be ameliorated by building redundant, distributed systems of satellites; for merchant shipping this is obviously not an option. It also means that whatever threats may be posed by enemy space systems, invasion is very low on the list. ( More ... )

---

Mueller, Karl P. "Totem and Taboo: Depolarizing the Space Weaponization Debate." Astropolitics. Vol. 1, No. 13 (Summer 2003): 4-28. [ 3 quotes ] [ page 15 ]

---

Multiple Examples from Modern Times Dispute the Argument that Warfare Spreads Wherever Humanity Goes

 

The simplest inevitability argument is that warfare and armaments are intrinsically uncontrollable because people are warlike: weapons and warfare abhor a vacuum, and will spread wherever humanity goes. This assertion is often accompanied by arguments that arms control never works, although it is possible to argue more narrowly that only space arms control is infeasible. This generalization is not far from the truth, yet it is far enough away that it should be considered invalid. For example, although the longstanding success of the 1957 treaty prohibiting military bases in Antarctica, often cited as an example of an effective sanctuary regime, would be more impressive if the signatory powers actually had strong incentives to establish bases on that continent, it still flies in the face of the idea that weaponization must always follow wherever people go (the argument that space weapons in particular will have military utility too great to resist is a different proposition from the contention that weapons always spread everywhere). ( More ... )

---

Mueller, Karl P. "Totem and Taboo: Depolarizing the Space Weaponization Debate." Astropolitics. Vol. 1, No. 13 (Summer 2003): 4-28. [ 3 quotes ]

---