|
|
|
|
Dangerous race in
space
By Bruce K Gagnon
(Republished with permission from Japan Focus)
Japan is embarking on a historic and
potentially dangerous journey into space, urged on
by the US, which seeks a more heavily armed and
militarily active partner in the Asia-Pacific.
Space technology is being developed for
two primary reasons. One is to give nations the
ability to better coordinate warfare on Earth. The
second is that many nations and corporations view
space as the "new world". Gold on asteroids, water
and helium-3 on the moon, magnesium, cobalt and
uranium believed to be on Mars. Corporations
intend to venture to these planetary bodies and
secure massive profits in the years ahead. But
first, new space technologies have to be created
that make it possible, and cost effective, to
"mine the skies". [1]
If citizens can be
convinced that their nation must use space
technologies to "protect" them from enemies real
or imagined, then this investment in space
technology can also be used to create the
infrastructure that will allow these same
aerospace industries to mine the heavens. Thus
space technology becomes "dual use". With the
development for military use also comes
development for corporate use. The question is,
who benefits? Who pays and who reaps the profits?
Japan is working on both military and
civilian space technologies, developing so-called
"missile defense" systems, new generations of
military spy satellites, and planning for manned
stations on the moon. All of these programs will
come at a tremendous cost to Japanese taxpayers
and will set the course for a more aggressive
foreign policy in the coming years.
Most
important, Japanese military space developments
dramatically link Japan and the US militarily in a
dangerous course of confrontation in the region as
the US moves to counter China's development as a
global economic competitor.
The Washington
Post reported, "The Pentagon is looking at Asia as
the most likely arena for future military
conflict, or at least competition." [2] The
article concludes that the US will essentially
double its military presence in the region. For
example, on the north Pacific island of Guam, the
US has lengthened and widened runways to handle
the B-1 and B-2 bombers. Cruise missiles have been
pre-positioned on Guam and new fighter squadrons
are planned to make it a "power projection hub".
New small "lily pad" bases are being
developed throughout the Asia-Pacific by the
Pentagon for rapid intervention capability. At the
same time, the transfer of the US lst Corps to
Japan more tightly integrates that nation in US
global military planning.
Theater missile
defense is a key program in the US arsenal to
surround China. Based on ships and sold to the
public as a "missile defense" system to protect
allies like Japan and South Korea, new interceptor
missiles (SM-3) are planned that will be deployed
on Aegis destroyers around Japan, South Korea,
Australia and Taiwan.
Ground-based (PAC-3)
interceptor missiles would be deployed in Japan.
Converted Boeing 747 aircraft, called the Airborne
Laser (ABL), are in development and are envisioned
to fly round-the-clock, giving the US complete air
coverage of China's coast. The ABL would have a
laser beam on the airplane’s nose and would fire
at any missile launched by China or North Korea.
The ABL, though, is having huge technological
development problems and is enormously over
budget. The US seeks to involve Japan as a partner
on this program to share the costs.
All of
this is being done to give the US the ability to
surround and neutralize China. Tokyo's shift in
policy, as a US proxy in the region, at a time of
mounting China-Japan conflicts over territorial
issues and provocations such as Prime Minister
Junichiro Koizumi 's visits to the Yasukuni
Shrine, signals to China a more aggressive
Japanese role in the region and tighter alignment
with US strategic goals. In particular, US missile
defense strategy is designed to neutralize China's
small nuclear deterrent capability, giving the US
first-strike advantage.
The US-Japan
Security Consultative Committee meeting in
Washington on February 19 identified "new threats"
emerging in the Asian-Pacific region and called
for the "modernization of military capabilities"
in response, notably ballistic missile defense.
The joint statement concluded that the "US is
reorienting and strengthening its global defense
posture to provide it with appropriate,
strategy-driven capabilities in an uncertain
security environment". [3]
Space in US
strategic planning
The US is embarking on a
dangerously destabilizing plan to deploy so-called
ground-based "missile defense" interceptors at
Fort Greely, Alaska and Vandenberg Air Force Base,
California. Although the systems have yet to be
successfully tested, they are already being
deployed. We are told that these new interceptors
will protect the US from attack by the "rogue
states" that so far have shown zero technological
capability to hit the continental US with nuclear
weapons.
And why would they want to? The
US, with over 7,500 nuclear weapons, could easily
annihilate any "rogue" that fired a lonely missile
its way. Even China, with 20 nuclear missiles
capable of hitting the US, would not ignore the
strategic consequence, nor for that matter would
it be oblivious to the economic consequences of
attacking one of its best trade partners. Then
what is this "missile defense" scheme really all
about?
The logic is clear in Pentagon
planning documents like the Space Command's Vision
for 2020 that outlines the need for the US to
"control and dominate space" and to "deny" other
countries access to space. [4] Once it is
recognized that all warfare on Earth today is
essentially coordinated and directly by space
military satellites, the reader can begin to
understand why the Pentagon is racing to control
space and deny access to other nations..
US military doctrine is predicated on Full
Spectrum Dominance. [5] This notion is that the US
will dominate conflict at every level - control
the Earth with conventional military forces;
control the seas with the navy; control the skies
with the air force; and now control space with new
technologies under development.
In a
recent planning document, "Strategic Master Plan
FY06 and Beyond", the Air Force Space Command
boldly states, "While our ultimate goals are truly
to 'exploit' space through space force enhancement
and space force application missions, as with
other mediums, we cannot fully 'exploit' that
medium until we first 'control' it." The report
goes on, "The ability to gain space superiority
(the ability to exploit space while selectively
disallowing it to adversaries) is critically
important and maintaining space superiority is an
essential prerequisite for success in modern
warfare." [6]
Once you connect this
language about space "control" and "domination"
with the idea of mining the sky for precious and
valuable resources you begin to understand the US
and Japanese rejection of the United Nations' Moon
Treaty in 1979. The treaty outlaws any "military
bases" on the moon and states that no country, no
corporation nor any individual can make land
claims on the moon's surface or subsurface. The UN
rightly was concerned about creating a body of
international law in order to preempt any conflict
in space as humankind inevitably moved off the
planet.
It is clear that planning is
underway to create the military infrastructure to
control the pathways, or shipping lanes, on and
off the planet Earth. Whoever controls and
dominates these pathways in years to come has the
ability to determine which countries or
corporations can profit from mining the sky. This
military control would also determine who
militarily controls planet Earth.
The US
has spent well over $120 billion on space research
and development since the creation of the space
program following World War II. In a recent book
called The Hunt for Zero Point, military
journalist Nick Cook explains the Pentagon's
"black" (secret) budget. For 15 years, Cook has
been a defense and aerospace writer for Jane's
Defence Weekly. Cook argues that over $20 billion
a year is spent on these programs outside the
purview of the US Congress.
Cook states,
"It [black programs] has a vast and sprawling
architecture funded by tens of billions of
classified dollars every year. The height of its
powers was probably in the Reagan era. But it has
not stopped since then. In fact, under the Bush
administration it is having something of a
resurgence. Stealth technology is a primary
example ... research into anti-gravity technology
... has been going on for quite some time." [7]
The aerospace industry has stated that
plans for space control, popularly called Star
Wars, will be the largest industrial project in
the history of the planet. But how will it be paid
for? In 2005, the US Pentagon is spending $10
billion on space weapons research and development.
Clearly, the US cannot afford to fund these
programs alone. So far Japan, Australia, Britain
and Italy have signed up as part of this plan.
Recently, Canada decided not to join the Bush
"missile defense" scheme. Canada's Prime Minister
Paul Martin, with strong urging from the aerospace
industry, wanted to join Bush's program, but
popular opposition has thus far prevented
cooperation. [8]
Japan's role in
military space
Spread among six Japanese
ministries and agencies involved in space
programs, the Tokyo government has allocated $3.4
billion for fiscal year 2005. Japan will devote
nearly one-third of its space spending in fiscal
2005 to developing military reconnaissance and
war-fighting satellites manufactured by Mitsubishi
Electric Corp. Nearly as much will go to the Japan
Aerospace Exploration Agency for all of its space
exploration, manned space and operational
programs. Japan's share for its participation in
"missile defense" is expected to cost another $1
billion. [9]
In December 2003, Japan opted
for a US-developed missile defense system in
response to the North Korean missile threat.
Second, third and fourth generation spy satellites
are planned for launch in 2006, 2009 and 2011.
These new smaller and more maneuverable satellites
will increase Japanese ability to target and
direct war in the region. The estimated lifetime
cost for the Japanese Defense Agency (JDA) missile
defense program is $30-50 billion. [10] As of
2002, the JDA had spent over $30 million on
missile defense research and development.
The recent successful launch of the H-2A
rocket is the centerpiece of Japan's space
program. Japan was the fourth country to launch a
satellite, in 1972. It now has a space probe on
its way to collect and retrieve samples from an
asteroid, and a major lunar exploration mission is
in the works. In a major policy move last year, a
government panel recommended that Japan begin
studying the possibility of establishing its own
manned space program. [11] The major consequence
of these moves, however, is that Japan is playing
an expanded role in the US military plan to
contain and manage China. [12]
The
China factor
China today has 20 nuclear
missiles that could hit Los Angeles or San
Francisco. But are 20 Chinese nuclear missiles
enough to justify the US spending another $100
billion or more on Star Wars?
Jonathan
Pollack, director of the Strategic Research
Department of the US Naval War College, told the
New York Times that while China did have the
largest standing army in the world and was in the
process of modernizing, "I don't see these
capabilities as the leading edge of a more
comprehensive, long-term plan to either supplement
US military power in the western Pacific or
challenge US power on a global scale," adding,
"Let's not make them out to be 10 feet tall." [13]
The US, with its new agreements to sell
"missile defense" technologies to Japan,
Australia, Britain and Italy, and to upgrade its
own offensive and defensive capability in Asia and
globally, may force China to embark on an
accelerated missile development program.
Opposition grows
To make Star
Wars work, the US is upgrading key radar
facilities in Greenland, Germany, England,
Australia and other locations around the world. In
addition, the US is working to base missile
defense systems in many countries, including
Poland, Romania, England, Japan, South Korea and
Australia, offering many of those same nations a
piece of the Star Wars bounty by extending an open
hand to their aerospace corporations.
For
the past several years an attempt has been made at
the United Nations Conference on Disarmament in
Geneva to create a new global ban on weapons in
space. (The current UN Outer Space Treaty of 1967
is limited by its out-of-date definitions that
prohibit weapons of mass destruction in space.)
But each year the US government has blocked the
attempts, saying that there is no need for such a
new treaty because there are no weapons in space
today, and thus no problem. It is precisely the
nation that is actively working to take "control
and domination" of space that is obstructing the
new international treaty and aggressively
accelerating its nuclear development program. One
thing is certain: moving the arms race into the
heavens will only make life here on Earth more
insecure, and at immense cost.
Notes
[1] John S Lewis,
"Mining the Sky: Untold Riches from the Asteroids,
Comets and Planets." 1996.
[2] Thomas E
Ricks, "For Pentagon, Asia Moving to Forefront,"
Washington Post, May 26, 2000.
[3] "Full
Text of Joint US-Japan Security Committee
Statement," February 20, 2005, CNA News.
[4] US Space Command, "Vision for 2020,"
planning document February 1997.
[5] US
Space Command, "Long Range Plan," March 1998, Pg
7.
[6] Air Force Space Command, "Strategic
Master Plan FY06 and Beyond," October 1, 2003.
[7] Space Alert! Global Network Against
Weapons & Nuclear Power in Space, Issue No 14,
Fall 2003.
[8] Oliver Moore, "Canada
refuses further role in missile defense," February
24, 2005, The Globe and Mail.
[9] Eiichiro
Sekigawa, "Recce Recovery," Aviation Week &
Space Technology, February 7, 2005.
[10]
Paul Mann, "Economic Woes Shadow Japan's Missile
Defense," Aviation Week & Space Technology,
March 11, 2002.
[11] Associated Press,
"Rocket Success Puts Japan in Space Race,"
February 26, 2005.
[12] Nao Shimoyachi,
"New defense chief sees SDF playing more active
role in global security," the Japan Times,
September 29, 2004.
[13] Conn Hallinan,
"Cornering the Dragon: Bad Idea," February 26,
2005, Foreign Policy in Focus.
Bruce
K Gagnon works with The Global Network Against
Weapons & Nuclear Power in Space. He can be
reached at globalnet@mindspring.com. The
network was created in 1992 to build an
international constituency that would work to
protect the heavens from this new and deadly arms
race. Today, the network has over 170 local
affiliated peace groups throughout the world.
(Republished with permission from Japan Focus) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
All material on this
website is copyright and may not be republished in any form without written
permission.
© Copyright 1999 - 2005 Asia Times
Online Ltd.
|
|
Head
Office: Rm 202, Hau Fook Mansion, No. 8 Hau Fook St., Kowloon, Hong
Kong
Thailand Bureau:
11/13 Petchkasem Road, Hua Hin, Prachuab Kirikhan, Thailand 77110
|
|
|
|
