Oberg on the Weaponization of Space
October 9, 2007 :: The Space Review :: Analysis
James Oberg writes on the weaponization of space in the October 9 edition of The Space Review. Oberg reacts to the clear media bias against U.S. space programs, and charges that the media further encourages inflammatory Russian remarks about having to match the U.S. military presence in space. Oberg argues:
Like children drawing glee in poking a stick into an anthill to see the turmoil they can cause, or teenagers throwing rocks at a chained junkyard dog just to hear him snarl, some elements of the Western news media seem to evince diabolical delight in seeing just how they can inflame good old fashioned Russian paranoia about "enemy threats", especially from the United States. Regardless of the rationale, such exercises leave measurable scars on the international diplomatic scene. ...
To fabricate and encourage Russian fears of the imminent American "weaponization of space", then, isn't merely a matter of politically useful alarmism and ideologically satisfying posturing. To the degree that it reinforces Russian fears and encourages Russian militaristic responses, it is downright dangerous and irresponsible. Shame on the space-war fear mongers: they are part of the problem, not part of the solution, which is accuracy.
Most recently, articles in the New York Times recognizing the 50th anniversary of the launch of Sputnik cited that the Soviet satellite motivated Eisenhower to enter a "scary new world of space arms" by "publicly encouraged peaceful uses of space even while spending billions to explore futuristic weaponry like death rays fired from rocket ships." Oberg argues that the article ignores the most important details of Eisenhower's space policy, such as "deliberately assign[ing] America's satellite project to a research rocket rather than a weapons rocket... and establish[ing] a civilian-controlled space exploration administration (something the Soviets never did)." Also, the New York Times's article omits critical information about the Soviet's history in space.
Not discussed here are the orbital thermonuclear weapons designed, tested, and deployed by the USSR in the 1960s, whose operation was expressly forbidden by the Outer Space Treaty of 1967-a scrap of paper that provided no protection to their use in a sneak attack on the United States. Not mentioned... are the handguns that the Russians are allowed to pack at the International Space Station (NASA's website doesn't mention them either), or the much more serious space-to-space attack vehicles (on standby in earth-based launch tubes) whose very existence Moscow denied for decades.
The revisionist perspective of history has a profound effect today, as the U.S. deploys the first components of a missile defense system, and considers future space-based components. The Russian government, supported by the U.S. media, has hitherto condemned these efforts as sparking a new weaponization of space. Russian Colonel General Vladimir Popovkin recently claimed Russia would "not allow any other country to play the master in outer space. The consequences of positioning strike forces in orbit will be too serious." Once again, the facts of the planned space system are ignored, Oberg suggests: "Proposed space-based anti-missile systems will be designed with guidance sensors that depend on hot rocket exhausts and large missile skins, the sort of thing you'd see during an actual launch. Satellites orbiting passively high above Earth are not nearly as big as missiles, and are nowhere near as hot. They usually aren't firing rocket engines at all. Anti-missile systems of the type under consideration probably could not even detect such targets, much less hit them." (Article, Link)
» More stories on: Analysis, Russia, Space-Based Systems
Obering: Dependence on Radar in Azerbaijan Would be Inadequate
September 18, 2007 :: News
On September 18 a delegation of U.S. missile defense experts toured the Russian Gabala radar facility in Azerbaijan. A current U.S. plan to house ten Ground Based Interceptors in Poland and an X-band radar in the Czech Republic as part of a limited missile defense system has angered Russia, which believes it is intended to challenge its own nuclear deterrent and fears the proximity of the system to its border. Russian President Vladimir Putin offered a counter-proposal in July that would allow the U.S. to share the use of its radar facility in Azerbaijan instead of building one in the Czech Republic. However, the director of the Missile Defense Agency, Lieutenant General Henry Obering, stated that "we do not anticipate, and cannot see, that what they are proposing can take the place for what we are proposing for Poland and the Czech Republic." Obering added, that based on current assessments of the Russian system, it is "not capable of performing the functions" of the radar proposed for the Czech Republic. The Russian radar in Azerbaijan has a broad view of the horizon and is useful for early warning, while the system proposed for the Czech Republic is designed to have a quite narrow view, but one that is very detailed and exact, as required for tracking and targeting individual missiles. The Russian system could be useful as a way to alert the rest of the missile-defense system in Europe to a missile attack but the Russians have maintained that the Gabala radar facility is intended to be an alternative to the U.S. plan and not a supplement. (Article, Link)
» More stories on: Russia, NATO
NATO Secretary General Criticizes Russia's Stance on Third Site
September 6, 2007 :: News
NATO Secretary General Jaap de Hoop Scheffer criticized Russia's stance on the U.S. missile defense to place an X-band radar system in the Czech Republic and ten Ground Based Interceptors in Poland. "Let me speak openly. Russia's sharp criticism of U.S. plans attached a counterproductive and useless coloring to the NATO-Russia dialogue... Russia's warnings addressed to our Czech and Polish allies are inappropriate in today's Europe."
The Secretary General did find Russia's counter-proposal, suggesting the joint use of Azeri radar base, heartening. "I would not judge the specific advantages of this proposal but I think it point out to three nuances. First, Russia recognized the existence of potential rocket menace; second, Russia seeks for joint solutions; third, pragmatic compromise on missile defense shield can be found," Scheffer said. (Article, Link)
» More stories on: European Missile Defenses, NATO, Russia
Franks Urges Russia to Join Another Race
September 5, 2007 :: RIA-Novosti :: News
Responding to Russian rhetoric that American and NATO efforts to construct missile defenses in Europe will precipate an "arms race," U.S. Congressman Trent Franks, one of three co-chairs of the new Missile Defense Caucus in the House of Representatives, has challenged Russia to join in a missile defense "race" with the United States. Franks was the keynote speaker on September 3 at the Multinational Ballistic Missile Defense Conference in Maastricht, the Netherlands. Congressman Franks challenged Russia to complete the best missile defense system:
My challenge to the leaders and people of Russia is this: There was a time in history when America and Russia's predecessor, the Soviet Union, had a massive arms race and built thousands of missiles and nuclear warheads that have ever since cast a foreboding shadow of fear across humanity. But times have changed. It is now technologically possible to build systems to defend our citizens against nuclear missiles and therefore, to diminish their military and strategic value and, ultimately, their purpose for existence. So, to Russia I would say, let us have another race, and let it be one of cooperation or of competition as you choose. Let us cooperate or compete to see whether both of us or which of us can develop the best missile defense systems to protect our own children and all of the children of the world from falling under the shadow of nuclear Jihad. Let us together, turn Mutually Assured Destruction into Mutually Assured Survival for our children and our children's children. This is my Challenge to Russia.
Full text of Franks' remarks below: (More »»»)
» Text of Trent Franks Keynote Address
» More stories on: Policy, Russia
Russia to Deploy S-400 Systems Around Moscow by August
July 25, 2007 :: RIA-Novosti :: News
Russia will deploy the first air- and missile-defense battalion of the new S-400 systems around Moscow on August 6, according to a Russian Air Force spokesman. "A battalion equipped with S-400 Triumf air defense systems and a command post will be put on combat duty [around Moscow] August 6," Colonel Alexander Drobyshevsky told a news conference July 24. The S-400 Triumf is a new defense system developed by the Almaz Central Design Bureau as an upgrade of the S-300 family. The system is said to be effective against stealth aircraft and cruise and ballistic missiles at a range of up to 400 kilometers. Russia successfully conducted live firing tests of the S-400 complex at the Kapustin Yar firing range in the Astrakhan Region on July 12-13. (Article, Link)
» More stories on: Russia, Russian Missile Defenses
» Missile system details for: S-400 (SA-20 Triumf)
Jaap de Hoop Scheffer: "There is Every Reason to Strive for Preserving the CFE Treaty"
July 24, 2007 :: Interfax :: News
Interfax interviewed NATO Secretary General Jaap de Hoop Scheffer about NATO-Russian relations and Russia's recent suspension of its obligations under the Conventional Forces in Europe (CFE) treaty. Scheffer reiterated NATO's disappointment with Russia's suspension, and voiced his hope that NATO and Russia could find common ground on the landmark treaty for the sake of European security.
[The] Allies did express disappointment and concern with the unilateral decision of Russia. They also reiterated their full commitment to the CFE regime and called upon all signatories to continue implementing fully all the obligations under the CFE Treaty and associated documents. At the same time we have invited Russia for a constructive and creative dialogue on this important issue. The NATO-Russia Council (NRC) framework—that has served us so well over the last five years— can also play a helpful role... the CFE Treaty is such an important document and represents years of extensive negotiations and discussions that there is every reason to strive—on all sides—for preserving this landmark Treaty and bringing the Adapted CFE Treaty into force. Don't forget also that the Adapted Treaty reflect not the realities of the bygone, bloc to bloc era, but those of the new cooperative security situation in Europe.
(Article, Link)
» More stories on: Russia, NATO, Treaties and Agreements
Financial Times: Prague Warns of Kremlin Ambition
July 20, 2007 :: Financial Times :: News
Czech government officials have recently made a series of noteworthy observations about Russian foreign policy and influence in Europe. The Czech Republic's Foreign Minister Karel Schwarzenberg commented that while Russia is not an imminent threat, it could become one within the decade.
Maybe Russia will be a threat once more... In the last few months there have been some rather surprising occurrences... Russia would like to achieve the same status [vis-a-vis America] that the former Soviet Union had. Then the two of them, Washington and Moscow, would be the two to decide European issues. I am very sorry, but we consider that is our affair too.
In separate comments, an independent member of the Czech government Prince zu Schwarzenberg concurred with the Foreign Minister's statement while speaking at the International Institute for Strategic Studies.
We can understand that Russia is claiming its former position of superpower... However, we are scared by a strategy oriented more on prestige and on building military might instead of investing in civil infrastructure. With this strategy, I am afraid that Russia will once again end up as a giant with feet of clay... The Russians have always thought much more in long-term and strategic considerations than other European states. Other European states [go] from one election to another, and think more about tactics.
Both officials agreed that Europe must acquire energy independence to preserve its full independence. (Article, Link)
» More stories on: Allies, Russia
Economist: The West and a Grumpy Russia
July 19, 2007 :: The Economist :: Events
The Economist critiques Russian President Vladimir Putin's recent suspension of Russia's obligations under the Conventional Forces in Europe (CFE) treaty. The CFE regulates the number of troops, tanks, artillery and aircraft which can be stationed in Europe. Russia announced that because NATO has not ratified treaty amendments to the CFE from 1999 while Russia has, it would be justified in suspending its obligations under the treaty. NATO has demanded that before they ratify amendments that allow Russia to deploy greater numbers of troops to its restive Southern Republics, Russia must first withdraw all conventional force from Moldova and Georgia. The suspension would take effect in six months to allow for negotiations between the two sides, but the six month window is likely to be only cosmetic.
The planned suspension of the CFE is only part of Russia's new post-Cold War foreign policy. Russia resents NATO's eastward push, the U.S.'s new bases in Romania and Bulgaria and a planned missile defense system in Poland and the Czech Republic. Acquiescence caused by its weakness in the 90's has evaporated with the flush of petro-dollars in recent years. Putin is attempting to eliminate older treaties signed in weakness, and reengage in the European political arena by dividing the Europeans from the U.S., and the Eastern Europeans from their Western counterparts. The next target could likely be the 1987 Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) treaty which banned both superpowers from building or deploying land-based missiles with ranges from 500-5,500 km.
Unfortunately, the U.S. is contributing to the deterioration of security in Europe by "looking askance at binding agreements to limit the two sides' strategic nuclear arsenals after the current Moscow treaty governing them expires in 2012. Meanwhile the counting rules being used (which date from the earlier Start-1 treaty) will lapse in December 2009." The Economist concludes that good Cold War agreements are evaporating because hotheads on both sides refuse to find common ground. (Article, Link)
» More stories on: Russia, Analysis
Merkel Open to Missile Shield Due to Iran
July 18, 2007 :: News
German Chancellor Angela Merkel said she did not oppose U.S. plans for a missile defense system in Europe to counter a possible missile attack from Iran. "I am not against Mr Putin but also not against the idea," Merkel said at a semi-annual news conference in response to a question about the U.S. shield plan. "I have always said that one cannot say there's no threat coming from Iran." While the U.S. plan, which would place ten Ground Based Interceptors in Poland and an X-band radar facility in the Czech Republic, has angered Russia, Chancellor Merkel thought Russian President Vladimir Putin's latest counterproposals were an encouraging sign of possible reconciliation. "Thanks to the Russian proposals we no longer talk about whether we have to have a missile shield, but how can we do it together," she said. Chancellor Merkel also stressed that any plan must cover all NATO and European countries: "We in Europe will have to think again about whether we need to fully cover Europe. Southern Europe won't be covered and this will have to be discussed in NATO and in the NATO-Russia Council." (Article, Link)
» More stories on: Russia, NATO, European Missile Defenses
Russia Rejects NATO Offer but Rules Out 'New Cold War'
July 18, 2007 :: Spacewar.com :: News
Russia rejected a NATO proposal for consultations over the Conventional Forces in Europe (CFE) treaty from which it said it would withdraw. Russia added, however, that it would consider talks the U.S. later. "I don't see much point in holding such a meeting since the position of NATO on the CFE treaty has not yet changed," said General Yevgeny Buzhinsky, a top defense ministry official, in Itar-Tass. The Russian general said the CFE treaty should either be changed or renegotiated. Buzhinsky added that if NATO countries do not ratify the treaty by December, Russia will withdraw. The CFE treaty regulates the deployments of tanks and troops in NATO and former Warsaw Pact countries in Europe. NATO countries insist they will only ratify the treaty once Russia withdraws its remaining forces in Georgia and Moldova.
Buzhinsky also emphasized his country's interest in converting the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) treaty into a multilateral agreement, and in renegotiating the Strategic Offensive Reductions treaty which expires in 2009. The INF treaty bans ballistic and cruise missiles with a range of 500-5,500 kilometers, but currently only applies to the U.S. and Russia. The 2002 Strategic Offensive Reductions treaty reduces warheads in Russia and the U.S. by two thirds, to between 1,700 and 2,200 deployed warheads each. (Article, Link)
» More stories on: Russia, NATO
