(pikrepo.com)
[1] Peter Anson and Dennis Cummings, ‘The First Space War: The Contribution of Satellites to the Gulf War”, RUSI Journal 136/4 (1991) p.53
This idea was excellently defended by Steve Lambakis, who carefully analyzed the war and concluded that the role of space would be increasing and the factor of “control” would be transferred into Outer Space. Lambakis puts it straightforwardly that he wants to come to grips with the space control mission denying space to our enemies and ensuring the U.S. access to the space environment. Additionally, he advocated that space power must be institutionally separated from sea and air power.[1] He emphasizes that “…in the future, space control will be as important as sea control or command of the air is today, depending on the importance of space to the course and outcome of the particular war.”[2]
Thus, Naval and Air Operations have similarities when we speak about future models of warfare and not only in space. However, the most crucial task is to extrapolate the geopolitical and geostrategic principles and imperatives to the realities of Astropolitics. It’s possible to compare Astropolitics with a new scientific dimension and it possesses unlimited challenges and opportunities for humankind. This subject is so young that the delimitation between the science or verification and sci-fi or philosophical elucidations is very weak.
If someday humanity reaches the status of a civilization that is able to constantly maintain its presence and existence in space, it will be comparable only with the Age of Discovery or even a greater event. So far we have only reached the stage when humankind has populated every corner of the Earth, resulting in the unprecedented interdependence of these “corners.” To reach this stage, since the Age of Discovery we had to go through almost five centuries in order to make the world as it is now. As Collin Gray writes, in the XXI century there appeared new dimensions of warfare: “…space power and now cyber-power as comprising a clutch of wholly new means of warfare.”[3] And in Everett Dolman, we have someone who has already been described as “the ‘Mahan’ of Space.”[4]
After a detailed and comprehensive examination of the theoretical approaches regarding the analogies between space power and sea power I would like to present a set of geopolitical principles and imperatives which will determine the future of space power, based on sea power as the main intellectual foundation.
Geopolitics vs. Astropolitics
The term “geopolitics” refers to the study of human or political and social (political) interaction in special domains or geographical environments: air, land, sea and recently appeared informational space (cyberspace). They all have their own distinctive rules and principles including physical ones, that should be always taken into account. The thing that they all have in common is that they are an indispensable part of planet Earth (or merely ‘Geo’). Hence, geopolitics operates and tries to understand human history and the future through the reflections and examination on Planet Earth. Consequently, in order to understand the next environment where the civilizational (great power) rivalry is going to happen, which has nothing in common with our Earth, the term “Astropolitics” was introduced. The subject is the same as Geopolitics, but the difference is the domain – this time it is Outer Space or, more precisely, our Solar System. However, I would like to add the following geopolitical and astropolitcal principles and imperatives which will play an important role in the upcoming decades.
As long as the space domain remains in the Earth Orbit, space power will be a distant element of geopolitics and geostrategy. Even for some period of humankind’s future history, activities on the Moon will remain more closely associated with geopolitics than anything else. Until Astropolitics and Astrostrategy become an independent subject of political science, mostly derived from geopolitics, geopolitics itself will be used as a tool to analyze the impact of space power on Earthly geopolitics. One of the main grand postulates of Mahan is that “No nation can become a great world power without a great navy. Overseas colonies are required to support naval bases on which to project a globe-girdling navy.”[5] From this, it is possible to create an additional imperative, more relevant to our discussion for the next century: “No nation can become a superpower without a great and technologically advanced space fleet and no nation is able to be confident of their defense, even if it is an undeniable hegemon in the other mediums: air, sea and land. Control of the Earth’s orbit allows the elimination of hegemony in all the aforementioned mediums. Rivalry for the Earth’s Orbit immediately necessitates the further expansion of space command and control over the Solar System’s choke points. Therefore, without the expansion of control and command of space, it is impossible to be a hegemon over the Earth’s Orbit.”
Control and command of the space and control of the CLOCs
The importance of the CLOCs in the Outer Space is much more important than on the Earth because space is less compact and dense. On Earth we have peninsulas and islands even in oceans (closer than in Outer Space in its spatial expression) and these systems of islands and peninsulas are much easier to reach. Of course we can argue – correctly – that everything depends on the type of transportation. Hence we can see that the contemporary level of technology is equal to the times of Columbus and Magellan in the XVI century. Therefore we are in the times of big space discoveries and advantages, but this time the distant celestial bodies are going to become this “America” to discover. The first frontiers are going to be the Moon and Mars.
Additionally, it is very important to state that the command of space and control over the choke points is a far more difficult challenge to humanity than it was in the sea. Bowen, with the use of Mahan’s theoretical framework, for example, posits a division between the command of the space and space control. For him, space control is one form of visualising the command of space with a mind to possessing and exploiting an elaborate space infrastructure (satellite constellations, extensive terrestrial down- and up-link communication hubs, launch complexes, etc.).[6] It is possible to add to this that the concept of control of space is closer to the geostrategic concept over the control of the geographic areas on the Earth. Concurrently, the command of space is closer to geopolitics (in our case astropolitics). It is about hegemony – both military and political (ideological). Bowen defines the command of space as a means that the strategic object of space warfare is always to secure and/or deny the use of celestial lines of communication where objects and information travel in, from, towards and through space. At the same time, both command of space and space control are patent parts of a state’s grand strategy.
Choke Points
It is possible to predict that the choke points are going to be of different types (satellites, including armored satellites; long-term mission warships, both unmanned and with human crew; space stations of different types). The space stations will be some sort of colonies and fortresses able to conduct diplomatic and military missions. Regarding the long-term military missions of space warships, their mission will be the same as in the sea – to project military and geopolitical power of the representing state. I would divide them into the following categories (but let’s make clear that I am purposefully avoiding writing about the situation inside the planets and their satellites):
Drones/ UAVs and Artificial Intelligence
In the future, the nature of space will demand the use of satellites, warships, drones and UAVs which will be run by Artificial Intelligence without human interference. Dolman connects space warfare with informational warfare, but it is possible to develop this concept that in the future there will be a completion and a direct military interaction both on Earth and in space, between the “software” of the great power. For a space mission, it would be cheaper and safer to send drones with AI to specific and dangerous missions than to endanger a human crew. Both for politicians and for business leaders, this will be an optimal solution. For example, for the delivery of commercial cargoes from the different planets and their satellites to the Earth, but for such activities an international space law must be developed. As Jonathan Sydney Koch writes, currently there is a lack of legal framework for the use of space resources found on asteroids and other celestial bodies. In general, their missions – strategically speaking – will be the same as those of warships at sea.
Settler systems and Land Power Logic
There is no sea and no water, either on the Moon or on Mars, consequently, the logic of political and social behavior of these celestial bodies for future settlers will be conducted according to land power (flat surface) logic. Definitely, two main factors will be taken into account – that these celestial bodies have no air and different gravitation levels. Compared with all other environments, space is an alien medium for humanity and this fact must be taken into consideration. The same is true of planets and their satellites. Human beings have amazing stamina and are able to adapt to new environments and challenges from nature. The European migration into new continents happened by the use of ships and this time spaceships are required again.
From Sovereignty at Sea to sovereignty in Space
If you want to cope with an enemy, you must cope with space and its physical rules. These rules are the same as those of our planet and will be the same in the Solar System.[7] Space – in every corner of the Solar System – determines the rules for navigation, with its own aerodynamics, as well as for the weapons, and will require serious adjustments. The sea and ocean required autonomy and independence from ships. They always present a particular country in the open seas and it is even possible to state that the warship is a “moving piece” of the country in the World Ocean. It is a special mission of naval forces, but what about the spaceship and the crew in the Outer Space? If we take into account the fact that between Earth and space there is difference and the time dilation, it creates an additional reason why spaceships and space stations will be more independent in terms of their political rights. The appearance on the global political map of different independent states is determined by geopolitical factors. The metropolis was not able to control the complex social and political entities that colonies became from a remote distance. While they were primitive settlements, it was relatively easy but when the old management started to change, it became impossible. In case of war or emergency, the crew or settlers must have full independence in order to adopt the most adequate decision to their reality, but with the serious time delays this would be impossible. Here are some examples from communications delays between space and Earth (scientifically it is called the Deep Space Network):[8]
| Circuit | Distance | Delay Time |
| Geosat Link (US-Aus) | ~80,000 km | 0.25 s |
| Earth-Moon | 384,000 km | 1.3 s |
| Earth-Mars | 55 – 378 million km | 3 – 21 minutes |
| Earth-Jupiter | 590 – 970 million km | 33 – 53 minutes |
| Earth-Pluto | ~5800 million km | 5 hours |
| Earth-Nearest Star | ~40 million km | 4 years |
[1] Steven Lambakis, “Space Control in Desert Storm and Beyond,” Orbis: A Journal of World Affairs (Summer, 1995), p. 418
[2] Ibid., p. 427
[3] Colin S. Gray, “War, Peace and International Relations: An Introduction to Strategic History,”Rutledge, New York, 2007, p. 205
[4] David Grondin, “The (power) politics of Space The US astropolitical discourse of global dominance in the War on Terror,” in (Edit.) Natalie Bormann and Michael Sheechan “Security Outer Space,” Routledge, London, 2009 p.118
[5] John A. Adams, “If Mahan Run Great Pacific War: An Analysis of World War II Naval Strategy,” Indiana University Press, Bloomington, 2008, p.3
[6] Bowen, B. E. “From the sea to outer space: The command of space as the foundation of spacepower theory.” Journal of Strategic Studies, 2017 p.11
[7] Copernicus in his work “De revolutionibus orbium coelestium” – O obrotach sfer niebieskich” about the heliocentric theory proposed a new theory of space. Copernicus used the word “Helio” which is mean the sun, actually the Solar System. Thus, the next space of competition of the great powers will be our Solar System, whereas, it is possible to say that the best name can be “Heliopolitics” – the politics within our Solar System, because people will need to divide the politics on Earth and politics on Solar System.
[8] The Australian Space Academy “The Communication Delays” // https://www.spaceacademy.net.au/spacelink/commdly.htm
Autor
Ridvan Bari Urcosta
Senior Analyst at Strategy&Future
Strategy&Future
Trwa ładowanie...