In a historic event on July 9, 1962, the night sky over the vast expanse of the Pacific Ocean, spanning from Hawaii to New Zealand, was unexpectedly lit up by a dazzling burst of light that rivaled the brightness of daylight. A mesmerizing artificial aurora painted the sky in vibrant hues of green, yellow, and red, casting its glow for a brief interval before darkness descended. The aftermath of this spectacular display was far-reaching, with blackouts striking Hawaii, disrupting telephone services, and triggering alarms. What appeared as a celestial spectacle was, in reality, the aftermath of the largest nuclear explosion ever witnessed in space.
From a remote island nestled amidst the North Pacific Ocean, the United States had launched a 1.4-megaton nuclear warhead into the heavens as a potent demonstration of strength during the intense tensions of the Cold War. The operation, known as Starfish Prime, unleashed an electromagnetic pulse that unleashed a colossal surge of energy 250 miles above the Earth’s surface. This unexpected pulse wreaked havoc on approximately one-third of the active satellites in orbit and proved to be more devastating than anticipated.
Shortly after, on October 22 of the same year, the Soviet Union conducted its own high-altitude experiments under Project K, culminating in the detonation of a 300-kiloton warhead some 180 miles above central Kazakhstan. Despite its smaller scale, the detonation at a lower altitude proved to be more destructive, causing widespread infrastructure damage on the ground. The detonation fried overhead telephone lines, leading to blown fuses on overvoltage protectors, cutting off underground power cables, and even disabling a power plant. The repercussions of nuclear tests in space extended beyond the skies, posing a significant threat to any technology vulnerable to electromagnetic radiation and capable of carrying a charge, including satellites critical for various functions.
These groundbreaking tests served as a stark warning of the perils associated with nuclear detonations in space. Fast forward to February 14, 2024, when Ohio congressman Mike Turner sent shockwaves through the political landscape by raising concerns about a “serious national security threat.” While details were scarce, the ominous statement was immediately linked to the potential existence of a Russian nuclear space weapon, sparking a flurry of speculation and apprehension. The uncertainty surrounding the nature of this purported weapon—ranging from an orbiting bomb to an antisatellite missile—prompted a wave of conjecture among experts, fueling fears of a dangerous escalation in space militarization.
As the nation grappled with the unfolding crisis, officials remained tight-lipped, citing ongoing intelligence operations and classified information. John Kirby, the National Security Communications Advisor, sought to allay fears by confirming that the speculated weapon was not currently operational or deployed. Despite the lack of concrete details, observers like Victoria Samson, a space policy expert, suggested that Russia’s military space program
Russian President Vladimir Putin has denied allegations that the country is developing nuclear capabilities for space. However, a Pentagon official contradicted this claim during a House Armed Services Committee hearing on May 1, pointing to Russia’s veto of a United Nations resolution in April intended to reinforce the ban on nuclear weapons in space as outlined in the 1967 Outer Space Treaty. Russia has not been hesitant about nuclear threats on Earth and, like the United States, maintains a significant nuclear arsenal on high alert, refusing to rule out a first-strike policy.
The discussion surrounding Russia’s potential space nuclear program is just one example of the advanced military technologies that countries are developing to potentially deceive, harm, or destroy rival spacecraft. It is not just Russia that poses a threat in this regard; the Pentagon is closely monitoring China’s nuclear ambitions as its arsenal continues to grow and could soon rival those of the U.S. and Russia. Nearly seven decades after the start of the initial space race, we find ourselves in a new, more intricate competition where security concerns and strategic objectives often take precedence over scientific exploration. The budget of the Space Force has already surpassed that of NASA, and China and Russia allocate substantial annual funds to their respective space military programs. With tensions escalating among these major powers, we may be heading towards a new space arms race.
Despite the lack of detailed regulations, the Partial Test Ban Treaty of 1963 and the Outer Space Treaty of 1967 are the primary international agreements governing space activities, emphasizing the peaceful utilization of outer space and explicitly prohibiting the deployment of weapons of mass destruction in space. This means that actions such as Russia potentially launching a nuclear warhead into orbit, as speculated by experts, would violate international law regardless of whether the warhead detonates. While deploying weapons of mass destruction in space is forbidden, countries, including Russia, are legally allowed to test other dangerous weapons. An example of this occurred in November 2021 when Russia conducted an antisatellite missile test that destroyed its own defunct military satellite, creating a dangerous debris field that posed a threat to orbiting spacecraft, including the International Space Station.
The scene in the film Gravity depicts a space station being struck by debris from a destroyed Russian satellite. In reality, a similar event occurred in low Earth orbit, causing concern as some of the debris passed near the Chinese space station and other spacecraft. The launch of a Russian Soyuz-2.1b rocket carrying a weather satellite in 2017 was criticized by U.S. officials as “irresponsible” and “reckless,” serving as a reminder of Russia’s military capabilities just before the invasion of Ukraine.
Antisatellite weapons tests by various countries, including Russia, the U.S., China, and India, have left dangerous space debris in orbit. These tests are seen as displays of power that threaten astronauts and vital space activities. Space has long held military implications since the 1950s, with research on space-based weapons dating back to the 1940s. Political leaders have advocated for the development of space weapons, with President John F. Kennedy’s Space Race speech highlighting the military and geopolitical aspects of space exploration.
Despite initial Soviet achievements in space exploration, the U.S. became the first to land humans on the moon in 1969, gaining supremacy in space by the 1980s. However, Russia and China have since developed advanced military space capabilities, including anti-satellite missiles and laser weapons. The militarization of space poses risks to both astronauts and critical space operations.
Guiding a spacecraft towards a target is essential, according to Samson. China now has a larger satellite fleet than Russia, although the majority of orbiting satellites are still under U.S. control, which poses both strengths and weaknesses by offering potential targets to adversaries. Various military space technologies are advancing rapidly. The Space Force is transitioning from a few expensive billion-dollar crafts to numerous smaller, more cost-effective, and less vulnerable satellites. Both the U.S. and China are exploring military spaceplanes for launching satellites and testing new technologies in microgravity and space radiation environments. Additionally, both countries are making significant advancements in their hypersonic and ballistic missile programs, many of which involve trajectories through space.
It’s not just Russia, China, and the U.S. that are enhancing their military space capabilities – other countries are also investing in this area. Samson is actively involved in preparing the annual report on global space military capabilities and security at the Secure World Foundation. The report, released in April 2024, evaluates the military space capabilities of 11 countries, including India, Australia, Japan, France, Iran, the U.K., and North and South Korea, with Israel as a recent addition. Israel’s successful operation of its Arrow-3 ballistic missile defense system in November 2023 demonstrated the potential to target objects beyond Earth’s atmosphere, such as satellites.
The International Space Station, a symbol of space diplomacy, is one of the few remaining joint space programs between the U.S. and Russia since the 1990s. However, issues such as coolant leaks and structural problems have raised concerns about its future. Plans are in place to potentially extend its operation until 2028, but its eventual decommissioning marks the end of an era. As tensions between the U.S. and its allies and China, Russia, and their allies escalate, the prospects for another major American-Russian space collaboration seem unlikely.
The three major space powers are now pursuing independent paths. China recently launched its own space station, Tiangong, which aims to host international experiments and eventually welcome non-Chinese astronauts. NASA is exploring commercial space station options, partnering with private companies to develop a successor to the ISS. Russia is focused on maintaining its space program’s leadership position, with ambitions that extend beyond those of China and the U.S.
The construction of a new space station is scheduled for 2027, although some experts question the feasibility of meeting this timeline. The future of these advanced stations, and whether they will carry on the legacy of the ISS, remains uncertain. The space environment has evolved significantly from the early space race era, with a vast increase in the number of satellites orbiting the Earth from various countries. These satellites, which serve critical functions such as GPS navigation and communication, along with supporting astronauts on space stations, have transformed the night sky into a spectacle of technological advancement. The presence of multiple space stations, rocket launches, satellite movements, and even space debris burning in the atmosphere can now be observed with the naked eye, altering the traditional view of the stars. Artificial constellations like SpaceX’s Starlink further contribute to this change, as thousands of satellites are set to populate Earth’s orbit, surpassing the visibility of natural stars. The convergence of military and civilian interests in space has blurred the lines between the two realms, as satellites are now targeted due to their dual-use capabilities. Disruption of satellite services could have widespread consequences for communication and navigation systems, highlighting the vulnerability of our modern infrastructure. Recent conflicts, such as those in Israel and Ukraine, have underscored the importance of satellite technology in warfare, from surveillance to communication disruptions. The private space industry has also flourished, driven by lower launch costs and increased commercial opportunities. This rapid growth in space activities reflects a dynamic and complex landscape where both government and private entities play a significant role.
With the rise of Earth-observing satellites, companies such as California-based Planet Labs, Capella Space, and Colorado-based Maxar Intelligence have been gathering high-resolution imagery and sharing it with researchers, media organizations, and governments. SpaceX has secured several military launch contracts and established broadband internet services through Starlink, which consists of over 6,000 satellites, making it the largest artificial constellation ever created. In response to Ukraine’s internet access concerns during Russia’s invasion, Elon Musk sent Starlink satellite dishes and terminals to the country. However, Musk declined to activate the network over occupied Crimea during Ukrainian drone strikes, citing potential involvement in a major act of war and conflict escalation.
Boeing, Lockheed Martin, and Northrop Grumman have traditionally been military contractors, but companies like SpaceX are now emerging as key players in the industry. The conflicts in Ukraine and Gaza have highlighted the influence of commercial entities and the challenges they pose. Satellite imaging companies, such as SpaceX’s Starlink, play a significant role. The restriction on satellite imagery collection over Israel has forced humanitarian groups to rely on public space agency data. Nonstate actors, like the Russian mercenary Wagner Group and the pro-Ukraine cyber hacktivist group GhostSec, are now disrupting satellite signals, indicating a shift in norms within the industry.
The expanding industry has enabled a wider range of actors, including opposing sides of conflicts, to access various forms of imagery swiftly. Consequently, commercial spacecraft have become legitimate military targets alongside government satellites. Space security researcher Jessica West highlights the involvement of these companies in warfighting and questions their responsibilities in potential war crimes or human rights violations.
The prospect of an arms race looms amid nationalist rhetoric, international tensions, and increased investments in advanced weaponry. While deliberate destruction of another country’s spacecraft has been rare since Starfish Prime and Project K, the U.S. is taking precautionary steps to defend against potential threats. The U.S. Space Force is exploring design upgrades for missile-tracking satellites to enhance their resilience against nuclear attacks, acknowledging the need for protective measures in the evolving space environment.
Weapons should not be the first resort for space powers facing potential conflicts in the skies. Alternative solutions exist to address space security and instability. According to Samson, diplomatic efforts should not be underestimated. Space diplomats have been making gradual progress in defusing geopolitical tensions and reducing the risk of military escalation, as noted by West. International negotiators acknowledge the need for new and more comprehensive space regulations suitable for the modern era, given the rapid advancements in space technology since the 1960s. With numerous space agencies and companies capable of developing various spacecraft and structures in orbit and beyond, the world requires updated space rules. However, differing opinions on the nature of these regulations remain prevalent among countries.
Over the past decade, Russia and China have advocated for discussions on a potential new space treaty, but global support for such talks has been limited. The U.S. has proposed less rigid “norms” to guide space activities, although these norms lack the enforceability of treaties. The United Nations has organized several meetings where diplomats have shared their concerns and objectives for norms aimed at mitigating space threats. These norms would emphasize responsible behaviors rather than technological capabilities, allowing for the acceptance of designing potentially hazardous technology as long as it remains unused. For instance, a de facto moratorium on conducting orbit-polluting antisatellite missile tests has been established, with 37 countries pledging to adhere to this agreement following Vice President Kamala Harris’s announcement in 2022. Despite this, Russia and China have not signed the pledge, advocating instead for a treaty prohibiting any space weapons.
To overcome this diplomatic deadlock, West suggests that U.S.-allied nations adopt a different approach than China, Russia, and their allies. Enhancing communication and transparency between space agencies and militaries regarding spacecraft intentions and technologies could lead to reduced hostilities, fewer misunderstandings, and less inflammatory rhetoric. West emphasizes the importance of integrating these discussions to foster progress, highlighting transparency as a critical factor in bridging the gap between differing perspectives.
Cassandra Steer, a space policy expert at Australian National University, shares West’s viewpoint. She stresses the necessity of transparency and data sharing to dispel misconceptions, such as doubts about Russia’s purported advanced space nuclear weapons program. Steer anticipates smaller and mid-level nations beyond major powers assuming leadership roles and advocating for transparency to prevent conflicts in space. She remains optimistic about international efforts pushing back against escalating competitions among dominant nations.
The Chinese space station Tiangong, launched in 2022, has facilitated international scientific experiments. Without transparent communication and clearly defined intentions, defensive weapons may be perceived as offensive. Establishing effective dialogue is crucial to prevent misunderstandings and promote cooperation in space exploration.
During the era when the United States Department of Defense was still referred to as the Department of War, the Trump administration notably pursued space “superiority” and “dominance” with boldness. In contrast, the Biden administration advocated for upholding a “competitive edge,” particularly in light of China’s progressing space military capabilities. However, with China and Russia also vying for an advantage in space, the prospect of a space arms race appears to be increasingly unavoidable.
Focusing on electronic components, cyberweapons such as malware and jamming signals have gained popularity due to their ability to avoid dispersing space debris throughout Earth’s orbit. Additionally, these weapons are cost-effective and challenging to attribute to a specific source, as explained by space policy expert Victoria Samson. Not only do orbiting equipment play a significant role, but the ground infrastructure supporting spacecraft is also vital and more susceptible to targeting than the satellites themselves. Consequently, a potential attack is less likely to trigger international condemnation. In fact, the former head of Russia’s space program raised the possibility that hacking a Russian satellite could be interpreted as an act of war.
Delving into laser technology, Russia has allocated resources towards developing a mobile ground-based laser system known as Peresvet. There are even indications that Russia and France might be working on lasers capable of being deployed from spacecraft to engage other craft, although concrete evidence is currently limited, according to Samson. These laser systems, currently operated from the ground, have the ability to “dazzle” optical sensors on adversaries’ satellites by inundating them with laser light. This action could temporarily blind the sensors, impeding their ability to track missile-launching systems, for instance, as outlined in a report by the Center for Strategic and International Studies. The United States and China have also been exploring laser systems, but to date, there is no evidence of their use for harming other satellites.
Moving on to the realm of robotics, the Pentagon harbors concerns regarding the potential threat posed by robotic arms despite the absence of known capabilities like those depicted in the Netflix series “Space Force,” where a Chinese spacecraft disables an American counterpart by severing its solar arrays, thereby cutting off its sole power source. Wendy Whitman Cobb, a researcher at the Air Force’s School of Advanced Air and Space Studies in Montgomery, Alabama, notes that many of the suspicions surrounding this technology today are not unprecedented. For instance, in the 1970s, the Soviet Union accused the United States of intending to employ the space shuttle’s robotic arm as a potential antisatellite weapon. Meanwhile, astronauts aboard the International Space Station have utilized its robotic appendage for peaceful purposes since 2001. China also demonstrated the use of a spacecraft with an arm to relocate a satellite from a congested orbit and has plans to launch a spacecraft in 2025 to rendezvous with a military satellite for instrument upgrades. Nevertheless, robotic arms have not yet been weaponized.
—
I hope this revised version captures the essence of
