German Military Space Command Chief Warns of Russian Space Weapon Threat
The Threat of a Nuclear Space Weapon: Rendering Space Unusable
The commander of Germany’s military Space Command issued a stark warning last week, stating that Russia’s proposed development of a nuclear weapon for use in space could have catastrophic consequences. Major General Michael Traut, speaking at the Munich Security Conference, emphasized that detonating a nuclear weapon in high atmosphere or space would render space unusable, potentially forever.
According to Traut, the detonation of such a weapon would have devastating effects on satellites from all nations, including China, Russia, America, and Europe. He argued that no rational actor would employ such a weapon in space due to the catastrophic consequences it would entail.
House Intelligence Committee Chairman Mike Turner also expressed concern about the issue, drawing attention to the classified matter. He voiced worries that the administration was attempting to cover up their inaction on the issue, similar to their handling of the Chinese spy balloon incident.
Lt. Col. “Tony” Vincent, an active duty scientist in the United States Air Force, highlighted the dangers of a nuclear weapon detonated in space. He referenced the Starfish Prime test conducted in 1962, which revealed the destructive power of a high altitude nuclear detonation. The test damaged or destroyed a significant portion of satellites in low Earth orbit at the time.
“The test was codenamed Starfish Prime and it revealed an unfortunate lesson: Even one high altitude nuclear detonation is particularly effective at destroying satellites. Not only were satellites in the line of sight destroyed, but even satellites on the other side of Earth were damaged and rendered inoperable. Starfish Prime damaged or destroyed roughly one third of all satellites in low Earth orbit at the time.”
Vincent emphasized the need for commercial satellites to be hardened against radiation to protect them from the threat of a nuclear space weapon. However, he cautioned that this practice comes with increased costs and potential size and mass implications for the payload.
He further warned that there are two primary motivations for a country to use a nuclear weapon in space: to cripple America’s economy and to disrupt the U.S. Military’s space-based assets used for command and control.
Vincent explained that a nuclear explosion in space would disproportionately harm the United States, which is the largest investor in space capabilities. The economic impact would be immediate, as commercial satellites in low Earth orbit would be the first to fail due to the radiation belt created by the detonation. While military space assets may still function for a period, their informational space products would be severely degraded.
Moreover, Vincent highlighted that the threat of a nuclear space weapon is higher than commonly perceived. He argued that a nuclear strike in response to such an attack would only further degrade space-based assets. The attacked nation would have to consider conventional or nuclear weapons as a response, which would escalate the conflict significantly. However, an adversarial nation may not find the threat of a nuclear response credible.
“Once an adversarial nation with a disadvantage in space capabilities detonates a nuclear weapon in this domain, there is no benefit to respond with a similar attack. This act would further degrade space-based assets… The attacked nation, then, must consider responding with conventional or nuclear weapons on Earth. Targeting cities and military installations with nuclear weapons is not an in-kind response to the initial action of nuking space and represents another significant escalation in the conflict. Space assets are not on par with human lives. Further, the attacking nation will also have nuclear weapons in reserve, and with the right mix of forces can hold targets at risk. Therefore, the attacked nation would have to weigh escalating to nuclear weapons use, knowing that it would invite a nuclear response on targets in the homeland. The obvious response is to signal that the use of nuclear weapons in space would be treated as a nuclear attack on Earth, but an adversarial nation could consider such a threat non-credible. A nation may also be deterred from acting because every nation in the world is dependent upon space products to some degree. Therefore, using a nuclear weapon in space would be ‘self-harm.’ However, as the history of war reveals, nations choose self-harm, such as when they collapse their own bridges and burn fields, to prevent an invader from gaining ground. Nuclear weapons are at the pinnacle of threat escalation, so the use of one is a sign of desperation with diminishing alternative options.”
The potential consequences of a nuclear space weapon are grave, as it could permanently disrupt space activities and have severe economic and military impacts. It is crucial for nations to address this threat and take necessary measures to protect their space assets.
Related: House Intel Republican Warns Russian Space Weapon May ‘Blind’ U.S. Economy And Military
What steps can the international community take to prevent the development and deployment of nuclear space weapons?
To refraining from using all available tools of war. That nation will already be faced with the reality of their space assets being rendered useless by the initial detonation.”
Given the potential catastrophic consequences, it is vital that the international community takes steps to address the threat of a nuclear space weapon. Major General Michael Traut has called for strong international consensus and cooperation to prevent the development and deployment of such weapons. He stressed the importance of diplomatic efforts and discussions to ensure the peaceful use of space remains intact.
In addition, Lt. Col. “Tony” Vincent recommended that countries invest in research and development of space-hardened satellite technology. By improving the resilience and protection of satellites against radiation, the impact of a nuclear space weapon could be minimized. This would require collaboration between governments, space agencies, and commercial satellite companies to develop and implement effective strategies.
Furthermore, international treaties and agreements should be established or strengthened to specifically prohibit the development, testing, and use of nuclear weapons in space. The Outer Space Treaty of 1967 already prohibits the placement of nuclear weapons in orbit and establishes space as a peaceful domain, but additional measures may be necessary to ensure compliance and deterrence.
The threat of a nuclear space weapon is a serious concern that must be addressed promptly. The potential consequences are far-reaching, jeopardizing not only the functionality of satellites but also the economic and military aspects of nations heavily reliant on space-based assets. International cooperation, research and development, and robust legal frameworks are essential in safeguarding the peaceful use and sustainability of outer space. Failure to act could have devastating consequences for our modern way of life and the future of space exploration and innovation.
" Conservative News Daily does not always share or support the views and opinions expressed here; they are just those of the writer."
*As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases
Now loading...