To proceed on the basis of worst-case assumptions and hasten development of ASAT capabilities would be to ignore the serious political and strategic consequences of any U.S. rush to weaponize the heavens. American satellites, so dominant today, could be put at risk by the countervailing actions of other countries more quickly than they would be otherwise. Even more important, relations with Russia and China, which have improved in recent years but remain fragile, could suffer. Even if the United States someday does put weapons in space or develop weapons against objects in space, timing matters in international politics. Witness how the events of September 11, 2001, and the focused personal diplomacy between Presidents George W. Bush and Vladimir Putin preserved good relations between the United States and Russia even after the United States' withdrawal from the ABM Treaty in June 2002, an event that could have seriously damaged bilateral relations if it had occurred only a little earlier. Today, weaponizing space could reinforce the image of a unilateralist United States too quick to reach for the gun and disinclined to heed the counsel of others. Given that almost all countries routinely support an annual UN resolution calling for a treaty outlawing the weaponization of space, and that most currently find the United States too ready to flex its military muscle, any near-term decision to weaponize space would be very bad timing

---

O'Hanlon, Michael E. Neither Star Wars nor Sanctuary: Constraining the Military Uses of Outer Space. Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institute, 2004. [ 6 quotes ] [ page 21-2 ]