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.

---

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 ]