Home > Bibliography > View Citation

View Citation


Scheetz, Lori. "Infusing Environmental Ethics into the Space Weapons Dialogue." Georgetown International Environmental Law Review. Vol. 19, No. 1 (Fall 2006): 57-82. [ 8 quotes ]

Evidence Related to this Citation

Must Look at Space Weapons in Environmental Context
 
To facilitate protecting outer space as the province of all mankind, policymakers, especially in the United States, must consider environmental concerns alongside national security concerns. The dramatic increase in space debris and the potential tragedy of the space commons that could result from the testing, deployment, and use of space weapons cannot be ignored when addressing potential threats from terrorist organizations and unfriendly states. Bringing intergenerational equity and sustainable development principles into the space weapons debate will avert a tragedy of the space commons and ensure that the interests of future generations are taken into consideration in contemporary national security decisionmaking. In order to accomplish these objectives, international actors must consider environmental concerns together with security policies, rather than allowing environmental trepidations simply to give way to national security interests. Further, policymakers must adopt a long-term outlook towards protecting the space environment by viewing "the human community in an interconnected manner, every generation [becoming] both the trustee for and the beneficiary of Earth's environment."
Scheetz, Lori. "Infusing Environmental Ethics into the Space Weapons Dialogue." Georgetown International Environmental Law Review. Vol. 19, No. 1 (Fall 2006): 57-82. [ 8 quotes ] [ page 81 ]
Must Recognize Threat to Global Environment and Security Posed by Space Weapons
 
Either by implementing a blanket ban on space weapons to comport wholly with the goals of sustainable development or by striking a balance between environmental objectives and national security interests with a more flexible model banning only space-based weapons, the present generation will ensure adequate protection of the space commons for future generations. Although national security interests will almost always take precedence over other interests, because of the fragile characteristics of the space environment and its critical role for the continued existence of Earth, international restrictions on the weaponization of space are justifiable and necessary. While contemporary national security threats are causing a sense of trepidation in many Western nations, including the United States, in the long-term, irreparable damage to the space environment could result in a global threat to mankind's security. There is no better time than the present to inject real meaning into the phrase "province of all mankind" by focusing on environmental protection of the space commons and halting efforts to weaponize space.
Scheetz, Lori. "Infusing Environmental Ethics into the Space Weapons Dialogue." Georgetown International Environmental Law Review. Vol. 19, No. 1 (Fall 2006): 57-82. [ 8 quotes ] [ page 81 ]
Space Weaponization Runs Counter to Goals of Sustainable Development of Outer Space
 
Recognizing that the interdependence between development and ecology is at its height in the global commons, the Brundtland Report specifically labels outer space as a "global commons" outside of the limits of national jurisdiction. Space weapons are at the center of concern for the health of the space commons. Troubled that debris from space weapons and space weapons testing will significantly damage the space environment, the Brundtland Report asserts that the international community must prohibit both testing and deployment of "space-based weapons or weapons designed for use against objects in space." Although the Brundtland Report advocates using space for data collection to monitor changes in the environment resulting from human activity, it strongly warns that "[t]he future of space as a resource ... will depend most of all upon humanity's ability to prevent an arms race in space." Agenda 21, a later blueprint of sustainable development presented at the 1992 U.N. Conference on Environment and Development in Rio de Janeiro, supports the first assertion by advocating using space-based technology, especially satellite-based remote sensing, to collect data in order to predict and handle a host of environmental problems, including desertification, soil degradation, and biodiversity. The Rio Declaration reinforces the Brundtland Report's second assertion by ardently stating that "[w]arfare is inherently destructive of sustainable development."
Scheetz, Lori. "Infusing Environmental Ethics into the Space Weapons Dialogue." Georgetown International Environmental Law Review. Vol. 19, No. 1 (Fall 2006): 57-82. [ 8 quotes ] [ page 75 ]
Space Debris Accumulation Risks Making Space Unusable for all Purposes
 
It is important to note that debris orbiting approximately 800 kilometers above Earth resulting from testing, deployment, and use of space weapons will reside there for decades. After debris settles into orbit at more than 1,500 kilometers above Earth's surface, it will remain there indefinitely. Collisions involving debris exceeding just one centimeter can be disastrous. In LEO, a marble-sized debris fragment can collide with satellites "with about the same energy as a one ton safe dropped from the top of a five story building." When these fragments collide, the quantity of debris increases. This prospect is compounded if each nation, in the long-term future, rationally takes advantage of the space commons and introduces its own weapons systems.
Scheetz, Lori. "Infusing Environmental Ethics into the Space Weapons Dialogue." Georgetown International Environmental Law Review. Vol. 19, No. 1 (Fall 2006): 57-82. [ 8 quotes ] [ page 69 ]
Proponents Argue Space Weapons Needed to Deter Attacks against Valuable Space Assets
 
Proponents of weaponizing space focus on American military dependence on space and a sense of increasing danger of a ballistic missile attack. Supporters argue that space weapons might be able to address threats from small, enemy satellites, ground-based anti-satellite weapons, and high altitude nuclear explosions. With the growing concern in the United States over terrorists and unfriendly nations, weaponizing space to bolster U.S. national security is close to becoming a reality. Furthermore, the 2005 report of the Presidential Commission on the Future of Space Exploration, ("Aldridge Commission Report"), focuses on the commercialization of space. Space weapons could be used to protect these new commercial interests, along with providing diplomatic leverage and creating offensive potential from space.
Scheetz, Lori. "Infusing Environmental Ethics into the Space Weapons Dialogue." Georgetown International Environmental Law Review. Vol. 19, No. 1 (Fall 2006): 57-82. [ 8 quotes ] [ page 62 ]
Critics Argue Space Weapons Risk Destabilizing Arms Races and Accidental Nuclear War
 
Many in the arms control community, on the other hand, believe that space weapons will destabilize the global community and promote a costly arms race. Emphasizing the destabilizing consequences of space weapons, Thomas Graham Jr. asserts that, because American missile interceptors in space could quickly wipe out Russian early warning satellites, the mere existence of these weapons will escalate tension between the two countries and place Russia on constant alert. One false signal from an early warning satellite could lead to a Russian nuclear strike. Moreover, weaponization of space might not significantly reduce American vulnerability to attack because most weapons systems will depend on ground facilities and radio links, which can be attacked through electronic hacking and jamming. The actual weaponry based in space is also susceptible to attack.
Scheetz, Lori. "Infusing Environmental Ethics into the Space Weapons Dialogue." Georgetown International Environmental Law Review. Vol. 19, No. 1 (Fall 2006): 57-82. [ 8 quotes ] [ page 62 ]
Three-Part Definition of "Space Weapons"
 
When the United States established the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), President Eisenhower emphasized that the United States sought to keep space free of weapons. Given new security concerns and technological advances this stance is in flux. The vague and often undefined notion of space weapons at the forefront of this potential transition in U.S. policy. Recognizing the uncertainty surrounding the term "space weapon," the Council on Foreign Relations Study Group, chaired by Dan Goldin, a former NASA Director, defined "space weapon" as a weapon that could be used in three different situations - Earth to space, space to space, or space to Earth. The Federation of American Scientists (FAS) asserts that the weaponization of space includes: (1) Earth-based and space-based weapons that target satellites, (2) weapons that shoot from space to Earth, and (3) missile interceptors that hit the offensive ballistic missile in boost or mid-course phase. The FAS excludes missile interceptors that strike ballistic missiles in their terminal phase, presumably because missiles in the terminal phase have exited the outer space environment and re-entered the Earth's atmosphere.
Scheetz, Lori. "Infusing Environmental Ethics into the Space Weapons Dialogue." Georgetown International Environmental Law Review. Vol. 19, No. 1 (Fall 2006): 57-82. [ 8 quotes ] [ page 60 ]
Sheer Number of U.S. Programs for Potential Space Weapons shows Space Weaponization is Inevitable
 
Thus far, research for U.S. space weapons includes: (1) the ballistic missile defense system (BMDS); (2) the Experimental Spacecraft Systems, which are microsatellites that can disturb and disrupt other satellites; (3) the Near Field Infrared Experiment, which encompasses tests for destroying objects in orbit; (4) the Microsatellite Propulsion Experiment, which involves launching kill vehicles to destroy satellites; and (5) the Hypervelocity Rod Bundles (dubbed "Rods from God"), which plunge from space to destroy targets on Earth. Further, the United States is still pursuing laser research, along with the Kinetic Energy Interceptor, which could operate as an anti-satellite weapon, and the Kinetic Energy Anti-Satellite Weapon (KE-ASAT), a weapon designed to launch from Earth to destroy orbital satellites with energy equivalent to an explosion of almost one ton of TNT. While all of these potential space weapons are still in the research and development stage, the sheer number of programs currently being funded points to the imminence of space weaponization. Illustrating this point, the Department of Defense's budget proposal for the 2007 fiscal year includes funding for "a missile launched at a small satellite in orbit, testing a small space vehicle that could disperse weapons while traveling at twenty times the speed of sound, and determining whether high-powered ground-based lasers can effectively destroy enemy satellites."
Scheetz, Lori. "Infusing Environmental Ethics into the Space Weapons Dialogue." Georgetown International Environmental Law Review. Vol. 19, No. 1 (Fall 2006): 57-82. [ 8 quotes ] [ page 61 ]