THE advancement of counter space capabilities by major powers like the U.S., Russia, China, and India poses a significant threat to commercial space-based assets, which are crucial for global economic stability. More alarmingly, these advancements raise the spectre of weaponization and trigger a dangerous arms race in outer space, increasing the risk of rapid, accidental, and inadvertent military escalation between strategic competitors.
The United States Department of Defence’s (DoD) space strategy reveals augmentation of space capabilities through collaboration with allies, partner countries, and commercial organizations. Such a strategy startles adversaries. Another counterproductive puzzle is exposing commercial satellites to military targeting. China and Russia have indicated their intention to target commercial actors providing space support to DoD. Such signaling necessitates the prevention of weaponization of outer space and international consensus to discourage the development and advancements in anti-satellite vehicles.
The weaponization of outer space refers to the placement in orbit of space-based devices that have a destructive capacity. The leading space faring nations—China, Russia, and the United States—military doctrines reveal that they have engaged in developing and fielding in-orbit and ground-based capabilities to exploit adversaries’ reliance on space-based systems. These warfighting space capabilities transform outer space into a battlefield.
The rapidly expanding space economy, valued at $469 billion in 2021 and projected to reach $1.8 trillion by 2035, is a crucial driver of global prosperity. The transformation of outer space into a battlefield would not only jeopardize this economic growth but also disrupt vital space services such as telecommunications, weather monitoring, and scientific exploration. Therefore, ensuring the sustainable growth of space services is not just a matter of global security, but also an economic imperative.
The space capabilities are dual-use from the launch of Sputnik 1 in 1957, which ushered in new political, military, technological, and scientific developments. Rockets were built to be used as long-range weapons for space exploration. The same rocket that could carry a nuclear warhead could also launch spacecraft into orbit. Most current satellites are dual-use and can be used to create a collision. Besides, a few states have developed kinetic-kill vehicles or direct energy weapons. Russia announced an earth-based laser system capable of degrading satellite capabilities. Moreover, China, India, Russia, and the United States tested anti-satellite missiles. During the crisis, space systems can be targeted by cyber-attacks or physical attacks on ground stations.
The constitution of a treaty, Preventing an Arms Race in Outer Space (PAROS), has been an agenda item in the First Committee of the United Nations and the Conference on Disarmament (CD) in Geneva since 1981. Ironically, discussions on PAROS have made little progress during the last four decades. Washington, India, and Israel vetoed it in 2005 to maintain their advantageous positions in missile defence systems. The contemporary strategic competition between Moscow and Washington has further curtailed the progress of PAROS.
Last month, Japan and the U.S. tabled the resolution on Weapons of Mass Destruction in Outer Space at the United Nations Security Council, proposing to prevent a nuclear arms race in outer space. 13 members endorsed it, and China abstained. Russia vetoed a draft resolution on the basis that it only specified nuclear weapons be prohibited from space rather than all weapons. The United States accused Russia of developing an anti-satellite nuclear weapon, which the latter denied. Nonetheless, the Russians and Americans seem insensitive to the grave danger of increasing militarization and the probability of weaponization of outer space.
Pakistan is struggling to bolster its space program for civilian purposes. However, Islamabad maintains a firm stance against the weaponization of outer space.It has advocated urgent negotiations for PAROS and actively contributed to non-legally binding measures such as Transparency and Confidence-Building Measures (TCBMs). On May 7, 2024, Ambassador Munir Akram said at the U.N. General Assembly, “The threats to security in and from outer space have escalated sharply in recent years. This is evident from the placement of weapons in space and its increasing characterization as the next warfighting frontier in the military policies and doctrines of major powers.” He emphasized the need for collective action to eliminate the possibility of weaponization of outer space.
To conclude, over the past four decades, the states’ apathetic approach towards PAROS has stimulated them to develop space warfare capabilities. Though there is no precedent for a conflict in space, the offensive advantage in space could generate an incentive to attack first. Hence, there is a need to initiate serious negotiations on PAROS to prevent transforming outer space into a battlefield.
—The writer is professor at the School of Politics and International Relations, Quaid-i-Azam University.
Email: [email protected]
