Home > Bibliography > View Citation

View Citation


Lambakis, Steven. "Putting Military Uses of Space in Context." Future Security in Space: Commercial, Military, and Arms Control Trade-Offs. Ed. James Clay Moltz. Monterey, CA: Center for Nonproliferation Studies, 2002. [ 4 quotes ]

Evidence Related to this Citation

Space has been Weaponized for the Past 60 Years
 
Second, there is historical context to consider. Critics of expanding the military uses of space are wont to make a clean-cut distinction between 'militarizing' space, on the one hand, which they say already has happened, and 'weaponizing' space on the other, which they say has yet to occur. But this is a distinction without a meaningful difference, because the combat or force function, which naturally involves the use of arms, is a potential part of any military activity. Even some peacekeepers carry arms. Viewed in this light, the term 'weaponization' may be used, in a general way, to characterize activities that countries have undertaken for nearly 60 years. In other words, the so-called weaponization of space is happening under our very noses. ( More ... )
Lambakis, Steven. "Putting Military Uses of Space in Context." Future Security in Space: Commercial, Military, and Arms Control Trade-Offs. Ed. James Clay Moltz. Monterey, CA: Center for Nonproliferation Studies, 2002. [ 4 quotes ] [ page 23 ]
Space Weapons give Military Commanders more Options, Enhancing Deterrence and Diplomacy
 
There are sound political and strategic justifications for looking to space. First, a weapon that exploits Earth's orbit may increase the number of foreign policy and military options available to our leaders and commanders. More options mean that a leader may not be forced to take a more destructive or weaker course of action, that he has choices on how his country should act in a dynamic, complex, and often dangerous world. Effective military options, in other words, can work to improve deterrence and stability and help leaders deal more intelligently, even more diplomatically, with surprises.
Lambakis, Steven. "Putting Military Uses of Space in Context." Future Security in Space: Commercial, Military, and Arms Control Trade-Offs. Ed. James Clay Moltz. Monterey, CA: Center for Nonproliferation Studies, 2002. [ 4 quotes ] [ page 25 ]
Space Weapons in the Hands of Democratic States can Improve Global Peace and Stability
 
Second, enhanced military power in the hands of states that uphold the rule of international law can work to improve peace and stability in the world. Treaties dealing with the space environment are written to establish stability and order on the space frontier. And this is good. Washington has never considered space to be a domain of anarchy. Indeed, it is in the U.S. interest to develop proper laws and exercise force in a restrained and responsible manner to prevent space from devolving into a lawless, disorderly realm. ( More ... )
Lambakis, Steven. "Putting Military Uses of Space in Context." Future Security in Space: Commercial, Military, and Arms Control Trade-Offs. Ed. James Clay Moltz. Monterey, CA: Center for Nonproliferation Studies, 2002. [ 4 quotes ] [ page 25 ]
Current U.S. Military Dominance on Land and in Space should be Enough to Start an Arms Race in Space if it were Likely
 
States, of course, have many incentives to start a weapons program, (not just reacting to what Washington does). So we can't ignore unique national security requirements. I would also observe that there is no evidence that unique capabilities residing in U.S. stealth bombers and fighters, its aircraft carriers, advanced satellites, and superior land power forces have sparked in-kind arms racing, although governments do seek ways to counter U.S. superiority in less direct, unconventional ways. The rise of American aircraft carriers did not spark hell-bent arms racing for carriers. The appearance of U.S. stealth planes, and specialized advanced satellites, did not turn the world upside down, with adversaries focused single-mindedly on matching the United States in these areas. Why do we presume that other states will not jump to space simply to counter the operational advantages the United States currently enjoys there? History tells us that this is what will happen. States will not need the incentive of an American ASAT program to do so. ( More ... )
Lambakis, Steven. "Putting Military Uses of Space in Context." Future Security in Space: Commercial, Military, and Arms Control Trade-Offs. Ed. James Clay Moltz. Monterey, CA: Center for Nonproliferation Studies, 2002. [ 4 quotes ] [ page 26-7 ]