Connor F.’s Post

New Hub-and-Spokes post! 🚀 Capitalizing on Critical Technologies: DoD's Office of Strategic Capital and its Plan to Secure America’s Strategic Edge Three key stories shaping U.S. defense and Indo-Pacific alliances this week: 1️⃣ DoD's Office of Strategic Capital Unveils 2025 Investment Plan Focused on supporting critical technologies and national security priorities, OSC's new strategy aims to catalyze private investment in sectors crucial to America’s edge. 2️⃣ $3.6B Sale of Air-to-Air Missiles to Japan A significant step in bolstering U.S.-Japan defense cooperation with the sale of AMRAAMs, ensuring the security of U.S. personnel and regional stability. 3️⃣ NSA Jake Sullivan’s Capstone Trip to India Sullivan's visit underscores the growing U.S.-India relationship, focusing on space cooperation, nuclear collaboration, and emerging technologies. #Defense #NationalSecurity #Technology #USIndia #USJapan #Investment #StrategicAlliances https://lnkd.in/eybhYurD

Tensions are rising in Space, as #Russia deploys an operational ASAT in a co-planar orbit to US satellites. We need to think about 'grey zone' attacks in orbit. Lets say a US satellite starts to malfunction some hours after a close conjunction by a Russian satellite in a co-planar orbit. Is the loss of the satellite a result of some sort of Russian interference, or a technical malfunction? How should the US and its allies respond to such possible intereference, in political and diplomatic terms? The ability to diplomatically influence Russia's actions is pretty minimal at the moment. Economic sanctions are already in place as a result of Ukraine and don't seem to be working very effectively? Some sort of military response - either symmetrically in space, or indirectly through other domains? Could a US-Russia or a US-China direct confrontation in space be managed in such a way to avoid horizontal escalation to a wider conflict? I think the risks would be high that such an effort would fail eventually.

Space has become tomorrow’s battlefield of today! The world is rightfully concerned with the nuclear weapons threat. But, having the abilities to defend and attack from space is exponentially more concerning. The space wars of the future are already a reality. An infantry soldier, a fighter pilot and an eagle all know the battlefield is 360 degrees. The highest ground is the most advantageous place to be.

China’s ‘mind-boggling’ space capabilities worry US, says Space Force chief U.S. Space Force chief General B. Chance Saltzman has warned that China’s rapid development of space-based military capabilities poses a greater threat to the U.S. than Russia’s potential space nuclear weapons. China’s swift deployment of counterspace systems, including hundreds of satellites supporting Earth-targeting capabilities, surpasses Russia’s threat level in both volume and complexity. China and Russia’s collaborative space projects, including a moon station and alliances with countries like Egypt and Pakistan, directly challenge U.S. programs like Artemis. The U.S. Space Force, established in 2019, is tasked with protecting satellites and deterring threats such as lasers and GPS jamming, supported by a $29 billion budget. To strengthen international cooperation, Saltzman has appointed Paul Godfrey to lead efforts through the Combined Space Operations (CSpO) initiative, aligning U.S. allies on space defense strategies. https://lnkd.in/gCSY5vXn

Why would Russia, the pioneer of space exploration, seek to create space weapons that could render parts of Earth's orbit unusable for up to a year? Russia's declining space capabilities and the geopolitical ambitions of President Vladimir Putin provide some answers. The U.S. holds substantial advantages in space, with both its military and civilian infrastructures heavily reliant on space-based assets, in stark contrast to Russia's relatively minimal dependence on its own space assets. Given the imbalance, few options exist to deter Russia from pursuing indiscriminately destructive counterspace weapons. Economic leverage from the U.S. is limited, but China and India could play a crucial role. Their growing trade ties with Russia position them uniquely to pressure Moscow into abandoning indiscriminate space weapons development. Engaging Beijing and New Delhi might be the key to maintaining space security. Read more in the below article from CSIS:

China’s Rapid Space Militarization Raises Concerns. Some of China’s space development is clearly military in nature, much of it remains ambiguous. Space capabilities are often dual-use, meaning they may be civil but can be used for military purposes. Smartphones would not work without the precision timing given by space-based satellites. At the same time, tactical precision bombs, long-range precision strike missiles, and hypersonic glide vehicles launched from aircraft or intercontinental ballistic missiles also need space-based, precision timing and navigation to hit their targets. Other weapons that China may have in space include grappling hooks, lasers, kinetic kill missiles, and secretive space planes that can use other capabilities to destroy, degrade, or snatch satellites. In May 2024, a Department of Defense official referenced an “indiscriminate” nuclear space weapon the Russians have been developing. Still, Saltzman has made it clear that China is the bigger challenge and concern. “The volume of threats, the diversity of threats that [China] is presenting is a particular challenge,” the general told Politico in an October interview. China may very well be pushing the envelope on the spirit and intent of the Outer Space Treaty by justifying their space weapons as “non-nuclear” or that they are not “weapons of mass destruction.” China’s Lunar Ambitions Another critical element of the Outer Space Treaty is the peaceful, non-militarized, non-nationalized status of the moon. The treaty states, “The Moon and other celestial bodies shall be used exclusively for peaceful purposes.” It is clear from this language that there are to be no military-related activities on the moon. However, Bill Nelson, the outgoing administrator of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) and a former astronaut, expressed concerns about China’s ambitions during an interview with Politico. He warned, “We better watch out,” referring to China’s plans for a crewed landing on the moon by 2030 and its goal of establishing a permanent presence there. https://lnkd.in/gEuw6TTN?

The USSR and then Russia 🇷🇺 have an incredible legacy in #space. And they have (I didn't say had) a future in the $4T #spaceeconomy of the 2040s and $10T in the 2050s. But the pathway back to partnerships doesn't look good. Takeaways: (1) First #satellites (1957) was the Soviet Union's Sputnik I. (2) First spacecraft to the #Moon vicinity (1959) and orbit the sun was the Soviet Luna 1. (3) First human in space (1961) was Yuri Gagarin, a Soviet pilot and cosmonaut. (4) First woman in space (1963) was Valentina Tereshkova, a Soviet cosmonaut. (5) Soviet Union launched the world's first space station (1971), Salyut 1, into LEO and another 7 on their own. Add in the International Space Station National Laboratory, and that's 9 for 12, ever. (6) First spacecraft to make a soft landing on another planet (1970 on Venus) was the Soviet Venera 7. Ret. Gen John Shaw lays out effectively how this track record (and more) of greatness in #spacescience deserved better than to be corrupted and led to now put the nation and its scientific community where it is now as the "street bully of space." This new space race is going to be a relay race. Nations must cooperate with each other and with commercial actors to succeed in this new space age. https://lnkd.in/eCgp-QBf -GSP- MilkyWayEconomy The Space Economy

Insightful article from the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) on the geopolitical and security challenges arising from a Great Power Competitior in the space domain. A passage from this article that offers a thought-provoking historical analogy of Great Power conflict, drawing parallels between German submarine warfare in both World Wars and the current security dilemma in space: “Today, Russia has little to lose from a disruption to space access, whereas the United States has everything to lose. Moscow is using its aerospace engineering expertise, derived from Soviet-era achievements, to develop counterspace strike capability that can harm vital U.S. space interests. Look to submarine warfare in both world wars to find a historical parallel. Germany conducted unrestrained submarine attacks on shipping with little fear of the consequences—because Germany had virtually no maritime trade during both wars and could strike at adversaries’ vital trade interests without fear of hurting its own.” An engaging read! However, I'm skeptical of the author's argument that China and India have unique leverage to persuade Russia to abandon its pursuit of indiscriminate space weapons in the context of Great Power Competition and the evolving balance of power in the international order.

The article by CNN discusses the growing counterspace race among the United States, China, and Russia, highlighting the increasing importance of space technology in modern military operations. During Russia's invasion of Ukraine, a cyberattack targeted satellite communications, underscoring the vulnerability of these systems in warfare. The attack disrupted internet services across Europe, revealing how critical satellite networks are for various functions, from military operations to civilian infrastructure. The article details how countries are developing technologies to disrupt or destroy satellites, such as signal jamming, spoofing, and anti-satellite missiles. US intelligence has suggested that Russia is working on a space-based nuclear weapon, though Moscow denies these claims. Both China and Russia have advanced their counterspace capabilities, which include jammers, lasers, and satellites capable of interfering with others in orbit. The US, while leading in space technology, also faces the challenge of protecting its assets from these emerging threats. Furthermore, the article touches on the broader geopolitical implications, including the potential arms race in space and the difficulty of tracking counterspace developments due to their dual-use nature. The Outer Space Treaty of 1967, which bans weapons of mass destruction in space, remains a cornerstone for maintaining peace. However, efforts to reinforce these principles face challenges, as seen in the recent UN Security Council resolutions. The article underscores the high stakes of ensuring space remains a secure and cooperative domain for all nations .