• Forum
• SITREP
• Military
• WMD
• Intelligence
• Homeland Security

• Space

• Introduction
• Systems
• Facilities
• Agencies
• Countries
• Hot Documents
• News
• Reports
• Policy
• Budget
• Congress
• Links

• Public Eye

Space Force Application

The United States, DOD, and Air Force all have a policy for the military space mission areas of space control, force application, force enhancement, and space support. Capabilities within the Space Mission Areas (as defined in JP 3-14 and FM 3-14) include Space Force Application - combat operations in, through and from Space to influence the course and outcome of conflict by holding terrestrial targets at risk. “Space force application operations consist of attacks against terrestrial-based targets carried out by military weapons systems operating in or through space.” Specific responsibilities for the force-application mission can be found in DOD Instruction (DODI) 3100.13, Space Force Application.

The application of space force would consist of attacks against terrestrial-based targets carried out by military weapons systems operating in or through space. The force application mission area includes ballistic missile defense and force projection. In accordance with current US space policy, there are no force application assets operating in space. However, there are many strategists arguing for a reversal of this policy. See Dr. Everett C. Dolman’s book Astropolitik for an in-depth discussion and argument on the subject of placing force application assets in space.

Space Strike Weapons are defined as systems of space-based weapons intended to hit targets in space or on earth as well as ground-, air-, and sea-based weapons intended to hit space targets." They fall into two categories: kinetic energy weapons which are projectiles launched from space or into space, and directed energy weapons which include lasers and high power radio frequency (RF) weapons. RF weapons can damage electronics, but are otherwise nonlethal. Lasers can be lethal or nonlethal, depending on the level of power employed.

• Constellations of space-based interceptors to attack ballistic missiles in flight with ability to destroy on impact.
• Orbiting rods of depleted uranium with ability to penetrate hundreds of feet into the earth. They are equipped with small boost rockets and GPS guidance electronics, and commanded by ground controllers. These rods can be used against airborne targets.
• Electromagnetic radiation weapons on spacecraft able to project beams of radio frequency (RF) energy over long distances to either space or ground targets for the purpose of degrading or destroying electronics.
• Space-based high energy lasers to destroy a target, or nonlethally to degrade or temporarily disrupt performance.
• Rendezvous weapons, e.g., small satellites that close in on enemy space assets and spray paint onto sensors or solar panels or nudge spacecraft out of orbit.
• Small, ground-based pulsed lasers to clear low-altitude space debris, and to be used against small satellites.

Space Force Application would apply force from or through space against terrestrial targets. The capability to strike through space is provided today with ground- based ICBMs and will be expanded with ballistic missile defenses. The ICBM force serves as a. deterrent against countries that possess, or are in the process of developing, weapons of mass destruction. Ballistic missile defense systems could provide land-, sea-, air-, and space-based forces capable of destroying incoming ballistic missiles in order to protect the United States, forward deployed United States forces, friends, and allies from limited ballistic missile strikes.

Enthusiasts claimed that the combined impact of space weapons and increasing use of space systems in military operations could radically change military force structure. Space, or space guided, weapons would be able to strike anywhere, anytime, with great precision. In a world of precision-guided munitions, the need for tanks and aircraft carriers is questionable. Massed infantry armies were expected to become obsolete because there would no longer be a need to fire large quantities of ammunition to hit a single target. Instead small numbers of highly trained and skilled soldiers with tremendous firepower, modeled after Special Operations forces, would support land operations, reducing the size of land forces without decreasing military power. The structure of the Navy also could change dramatically. Sea-lanes could be controlled more effectively using long-range projectiles targeted from space. Carrier battle groups would no longer be needed. Manpower and logistics requirements and the need for conventional equipment such as tanks and carriers would be drastically reduced.

Orbiting systems can respond anywhere, anytime; can be used offensively and defensively, as required; and are effective against targets in any medium, land, sea, air, and space. Air-, sea- and land-based systems provide only limited area coverage to protect specific assets. The number of systems required is based on the area to be defended.

The argument against space-based weapons for attacking airborne or surface targets was that i the United States deploys such weapons, other nations may feel compelled to do likewise. In this case, the United States would not only be making a segment of its defense system vulnerable to attack but also could very well make US cities vulnerable. Unfriendly nations with orbital weapons capable of attacking terrestrial targets would be able to strike the United States, or anywhere else on the globe, without investing the tremendous resources necessary to field a US-style military. This would, in effect, negate our present ability to intervene wherever it is in our interest to do so, since a country possessing these orbital weapons would be able to strike back. With the technology necessary to launch satellites even now becoming widely available, the number of countries capable of deploying spacebased weapons is growing. This proliferation of technology makes US development of space-based weapons fraught with peril.

The USSR brought several proposals to the United Nations (UN) to prohibit weapons in space. Their 1981 draft treaty would have prohibited the stationing of weapons of any kind in outer space. In 1983 they drafted a treaty to prohibit the use of force in outer space and from space against earth. In 1985 the USSR proposed the UN General Assembly include an agenda item on "International cooperation in the peaceful exploitation of outer space under conditions of its non-militarization." No action was taken on any of these proposals. And in 1985, the USSR called for a ban on “space strike weapons.” [kosmicheskoye nastupatelnoye oruzie]

The Soviet Union in August 1985 acknowledged for the first time that it was engaged in military space research but denied its military efforts were geared toward developing "space strike weapons". After criticizing U.S. space defense research as part of a "strategy directed to preparing the stage for nuclear war," the Soviet booklet stated that "certainly space research is also being done in the Soviet Union, and in the military field, too." It adds that the Soviets are not developing any "space strike weapons:' the Soviet phrase for space- and ground- based satellite interceptors, particle beams and lasers capable of attacking objects in space.

On 24 December 1985 Presidet Gorbachev wrote to President Reagan that " I do not doubt that you personally may really have no such intentions. But you must agree that the leadership of one side has to evaluate the actions of the other in the area of developing new types of weapons, not in accordance with intentions, but in accordance with the potential cababilities which may be attained as a result of the development of these weapons. "Examining the SDI program from this perspective, the Soviet leadership comes to the same conclusion every time: given the realities of the current situation, only a country which is preparing for a first (disarming) strike needs a "space shield"; a country which does not base its actions on such a concept should have no need for such a weapons system.

"After all, space-strike weapons are all-purpose weapons. The space-strike weapons that are being created in the U.S. are kinetic energy weapons and also long-range, directed energy systems (with a range of several thousand miles and great destructive power). As our experts and scientists and yours confirm, those weapons are capable of destroying in space, as well as from space, within a very short time, in great quantities and selectively, objects which are thousands of miles away. I stress -- thousands of miles away.

"For example, how should we regard the space weapons of a country which have the capability of destroying another country's centers for controlling space objects and of destroying its space devices for monitoring, navigation, communication etc. within very short time intervals measured in minutes? Essentially, these weapons can only be intended for "blinding" the other side, catching it unprepared and depriving it of the possibility of countering a nuclear strike. Moreover, if these weapons are developed, the process of perfecting them and giving them even better combat characteristics will begin immediately. Such is the course of development of all weaponry.

Moscow sounded variations on the same theme, often aided and abetted by China, ever since. On 22 September 2020, Russian President Vladimir Putin proposed a prohibition on the “stationing” of weapons in space and the “threat or use of force” against space objects.

Konstantin Vorontsov, Deputy Director of the Department for Nonproliferation and Arms Control of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Russia, at the UNIDIR Outer space Security Conference, Geneva, September 13, 2023, stated "these days the risk of outer space being transformed into springboard for aggression and war is beginning to materialize. Some Western States have pursued a course towards placing weapons in outer space, building capabilities for the use of force against space objects (primarily through the development of weapon systems intended for the threat or use of force in, from and against outer space), and using outer space for combat operations, which further undermines international peace and security, destabilizes the situation in outer space..."