Beyond Earth (ATWG) - Chapter 34 - Alternative Strategic Approaches to Space by Martin Schwab

From The Space Library

Jump to: navigation, search

Chapter 34

Alternative Strategic Approaches to Space

By Martin Schwab

Introduction


The theme of this chapter is redirection of military capabilities by the major world powers into global space missions. The following overview of the major divisions of strategic thinking in the West and the scenario sketches serve as reminders for decision makers that there is a wide range of philosophies as to why humans should explore outer space, and that all of these philosophies need to be considered when deciding how we can best explore outer space. In order to promote interactive dialogue in our meeting rooms, boardrooms and classrooms, scenario sketches are given for intervals of 25 years out from 2006 (2031, 2056 and 2081). The last section argues that a variety of clear and present threats to humanity exist now and are natural rallying cries for policy makers to justify working globally, collaboratively and urgently in outer space.

Figure 34.1 Continuum of Relationships in Outer Space

The strategic approaches to space that are introduced in this chapter are located at various points on the above continuum of relationships in outer space. It will be shown that the directions of these approaches have a common pull toward co-exploration and that it is only the starting points on the continuum where assumptions differ. If all of us on this continuum are to better arrange human institutions to bring about co-exploration beyond Earth, we need to briefly review the classic theories of international relations that divide us, and not just in the West: Realism (balance of power), Liberalism (economic liberty) and Idealism, often referred to as constructivism or radicalism of which Marxism is one of many varieties.

All three theories have intellectual blind spots. The perspective of pure balance of power realism or "peace through strength" does not always account for naturally existing progress and genuine good relations among nations, nor does it recognize that political legitimacy can be a source of power equal to military power. Pure economic liberalism or "peace through trade" often fails to recognize that democracies survive only if they safeguard military power, and that transitions to democracy are sometimes violent. Pure idealism-constructivism, or "peace through ideas," often does not explain which power structures or social conditions are able to consistently yield new realities through the persuasive communication of values. (1)

The constructivist bias expressed in this chapter favors an international negotiation framework at the presidential level that would allow small, annual, incremental and reciprocal transfers in terms of percentages of military budgets into large scale and integrated efforts to explore, understand, preserve and enjoy our solar system. These transfers might conceivably be deposited into an international budget or a private fund, with appropriate safeguards.

Peace through Strength in Space

Peace through strength or balance of power realism is a strategic approach that dates back far into our ancestry. This approach assumes that human nature is fundamentally bad. Sub-groups of humans that our political scientists refer to as nation-states require "sticks" to maintain "order." Under this approach, human nature and individual self-interest must be safeguarded against in order to secure the greatest security for the greatest number of nation-states. The peace through strength approach in the United States (U.S.) contains two sub-divisions, illustrated below by scenario sketches. At times, these two camps appear to be diametrically opposed, although in reality they share the assumption of realism on our continuum, that militaries are the primary components of world order, to be responsibly influenced through U.S. leadership.

Global Stability through U.S. Dominance of Space

Scenario sketch: U.S. military dominance in low Earth orbit either exists or is perceived. All other militaries and para-militaries on Earth choose to invest in areas other than military-space technology, resulting from sober cost benefit analyses of challenging the supremacy of U.S. military-space power. As with British naval dominance of the high seas during the 18th and 19th centuries, U.S. dominance of outer space guarantees the security and predictability of global commerce from 2006 until 2081.

Professor Everett Dolman of the U.S. Air Force School of Advanced Air and Space Studies at Maxwell Air Force Base has introduced the concept of "astrogeography," or geographic positioning in space as it pertains to the evolution of current and future military space advantage. While Dolman does not advocate any one "astropolitical" future for the exploration of space, he does analyze what the future might be like, given the continuing and his view likely nationalistic pursuit of outer space. Dolman formulates a neoclassical astropolitical dictum to guide our way: "Who controls low-Earth orbit controls near Earth space. Who controls near-Earth space dominates terra. Who dominates terra determines the destiny of humankind." Dolman argues that the agreements against the weaponizing of space forged during the Cold War were achieved because neither the U.S. nor the Soviet Union thought that they could achieve dominance in space over the other. (2)

Now the U.S. alone enjoys the position of dominance, and can choose to either build upon or squander this advantage as other nations will inevitably catch up if the U.S. does nothing. Dolman asserts that because U.S. citizens are not comfortable with the exercise of global dominance, this makes the U.S. the best candidate for monopolizing space weapons - to keep the peace on Earth so that humanity can begin her first global golden age. (3)

Global Stability through U.S. Negotiation of Space

Scenario sketch: The U.S. acts as a major contributor to a global consensus on robotic and human exploration of our solar system until 2031. A contentious treaty-making process outlawing weapons in space results in a secret military pact between China, Russia and Europe for "control of the high ground." Once the secret pact becomes obvious, the U.S. with the aid of Japan, India, Malaysia, Australia and a reluctant Canada rapidly mobilize a space weapons program. These allies in outer space reassert dominance of low Earth orbit by 2042, 100 years after the Battle of Midway Island in World War II. By 2056, the secret collaborators in China, Russia and Europe are ousted within their own governments. The U.S. is granted moral authority and political capital on Earth by all nations at the Conference on Disarmament in Geneva because it did not start a space weapons race in the 2010 timeframe. The U.S. leads the peaceful development of the solar system through the rule of international law, in keeping with the spirit of the Outer Space Treaty of 1967. This landmark treaty emerges as the defacto "Constitution of the Solar System" until 2081.

Below is an example of the type of strategic thought that is already taking place toward dynamic co-exploration on our continuum of relationships in outer space, taken from an address given by Theresa Hitchens, Director of the Center for Defense Information (an independent oversight group) at an international conference on the prevention of an arms race in outer space (PAROS) in the Council Chamber of the Palais des Nations in Geneva:

...While the United States may be unwilling to work toward a ban on space weapons, it remains a major and for the most part responsible - player in space. Isolating the United States because of its position on space weaponization is simply a waste of time; or worse, attempts to do so may well backfire by promoting the views of those in the United States who see unilateral approaches to security as the only approaches. Meanwhile, other spacefaring nations need to be discouraged from treading down similar destructive paths. This brings even more urgency to undertaking initiatives that promote cooperation amongst the spacefaring powers in areas where they have mutual interests. There is little time to waste. (4)

Peace through Trade in Space

Peace through trade, also known as the classic theory of economic liberalism assumes that human nature is fundamentally good. In outer space as well as on Earth the curious, creative and restless human spirit, the individual self-interest must be given priority over the interests of nation-states. The poor cannot be helped by hurting the rich through tyrannical economic redistribution of wealth by Earth-bound governments, but only by government tax relief, "carrots," provided to wealthy individuals to employ the masses. Each individual within the mass of workers is not a cog in a space wheel but rather a potential future employer or manager of an enterprise in outer space.

Scenario sketch: Global free enterprise, not governments, dominate the initial development of our solar system until 2056, followed by another generation of limited government that supports and does not hinder the individual in space until 2081. Rapid advances in the space elevator make space tourism throughout the Earth-moon system easily affordable by the upper middle class in modernized nations from 2031 to 2056. Asteroids and Earth's moon are mined by many small private firms operating in perfect competition from 2031-2056. At least one small subterranean private settlement project to be constructed at Mars has been fully invested in by multiple private banks as of 2031. Private constructions of space wheel settlements, still only affordable by Earth's economic elite are established at L5 from 2056 to 2081.

Space is a place not a program. This has been one of the rallying cries of the Space Frontier Foundation since its founding in 1988. This influential membership advocacy group believes that "the permanent human habitation of space can only be accomplished by unleashing true free enterprise." (5) If global mobilization to explore our solar system and beyond becomes driven primarily by a free and fair global market, the human space endeavor in reality might look something like the list of hypothetical public-private space initiatives during the 2031-2081 timeframe below. Note also the capitalization of the astrogeographical regions, potential units of interplanetary representative government (or private sector governance) for the post 2081 timeframe:

  • Hypothetical public-private space initiatives from 2031-2081
  • Eurasian Space Consortium colonizing Northern Latitudes of Mars.
  • Pan-American Space Coalition colonizing Southern Latitudes of Mars.
  • African Space Agency mining the Sea of Tranquility of Earth's moon for helium 3.
  • Oceanic Space Launch Authority sending scientific rovers to the far side of Earth's moon.

Peace through International Endeavor in Space

Peace through international endeavor in space is not so much a national strategic approach as it is a trans-global design, grounded in the classic theory of constructivism. This transglobal design assumes that human beings have an equal capacity for good and evil. In this thought model, the choices that individual human beings make in their lives are primarily influenced by those external conditions that have shaped us all in our local communities and through various philosophies of child development. In this model of idealism, nurture, more than nature determines who we are as individuals, and how we interact with the rest of our world.

Medieval literature scholar Joseph Campbell argues that the form of nurture that our world desperately needs today is a modern myth that has the vitality to move the human soul to offer its temporal life for others in a great cause. Our current myth that success is measured economically is a recipe for societal discontent, resulting in various forms of neuroticism and schizophrenia, including through drug use. Campbell argues that the economic model of history fails to explain why the pyramids of Egypt and the cathedrals of Europe were built over many lifetimes. Campbell cites July 20, 1969, the night Neil Armstrong walked on our moon, as the great event of the modern era a public demonstration of the standard to which all human beings in our global tribe can now aspire. (6)

In the 21st century, with planning, dedication and most importantly, a better sense of global team spirit, it could be possible for any human being, who so desires to participate in public or private sector space endeavors, each promising direct and indirect benefits to all of Earth over multiple generations.

Scenario sketch: Massive and sustained redirection of the militaries of our planet into a supreme migration of human and robotic missions to Mars and all celestial bodies in our solar system. These joint human "expeditionary missions" are negotiated, planned and executed by all state and non-state actors on a near continuous basis from 2006 to 2081.

This scenario echoes the precedent of massive international action that was set by President Dwight D.

Eisenhower when he was Supreme Commander of the Allied Expeditionary Force in Operation Overlord. History teaches us that this global invasion of Nazi occupied France was critical in bringing World War II to an end so that Europe could integrate itself back into our present day world system. In 1961, nine months after transferring the title of Commander-in Chief to President John F. Kennedy, General Eisenhower addressed the faculty and students of the Naval War College on the topic of how to help President Kennedy and future U.S. presidents win the Cold War. Below are a few telling excerpts, from his address, which echo Campbell's thoughts above, indicate his views on the military conquest of space in 1961, and suggest just how far behind schedule Eisenhower might view the human endeavor in outer space today:

...If there is one difference between Communism and representative government, it is that we believe in a Supreme Being of some sort, while they say we are cattle...we are dedicated to the defense of something that is even more precious than life itself. We must recall from time to time the majesty of Patrick Henry's statement in the Virginia Convention, "Give me liberty or give me death."...I believe that someday humans are going to circle the moon, take some pictures of it, and maybe even get to a planet and back if there's time - I don't know - but I believe those things ought to come about as a by-product of all the research we are doing today in missiles and in bigger engines and so on. I think to make the so-called race to the moon a major element in our struggle to show that we are superior to the Russians, is getting our eyes off the right target. I really believe that we don't have that many enemies on the moon... if we will put our eyes on the values that bind us together [referring to the transatlantic alliance], then I think we may at least control our side of this material destructiveness, and this may be the strongest element we have in making the other fellow [referring to the superpower of the Soviet Union] be very careful himself. This is the best defense we have both against the other fellow and against ourselves... (7)

To be fair, it must be recognized that it was the Eisenhower administration that institutionalized the legacy of government secrecy in U.S. outer space activities with the advent of the Corona reconnaissance satellite and the subsequent National Reconnaissance Office, a name that was classified until 1992. However, President Eisenhower cannot be blamed for using secrecy in space to protect his citizens from possible Soviet aggression, as it was the Soviet Union that rejected his offer of an Open Skies initiative in 1955. (8) This initiative would have provided mutual aerial observation to promote openness and transparency of military forces and activities, a provision that is now in force as of 2002 under the Open Skies Treaty. The Open Skies Treaty is currently signed by 34 nations including the U.S. and the Russian Federation, due to the initiative of President George H.W. Bush in 1989. (9)

Peace through international endeavor in space is another idea that has been lingering around policy circles for decades, now ready to come to fruition. During the Ronald Reagan administration, the National Commission on Space issued its report entitled Pioneering the Space Frontier, which captures the fundamental idea that human settlement of the solar system in unified effort would be the ultimate fulfillment of the American Revolution. The report contains a "Declaration for Space," a clear reference to the U.S. Declaration of Independence in 1776. The Declaration for Space is reproduced in its entirety as a postscript to chapter 35, "Theory and Action for the Future of Humans in Space." Below are condensed excerpts from the Declaration for Space, including a "Rationale for Exploring and Settling the Solar System."

The Solar System is our extended home...space technology has freed humankind to move outward as a species destined to expand to other worlds...We must stimulate individual initiative and free enterprise in space...Now America can create new wealth on the space frontier to benefit the entire human community by combining the energy of the Sun with materials left in space during the formation of the Solar System...American investments on the space frontier should be sustained at a small but steady fraction of our national budget...America must work with other nations in a manner consistent with our Constitution, national security, and international agreements... (10)

If we agree that Joseph Campbell is right, that walking on our moon was the greatest contribution to the human psyche by the U.S. then it follows that the U.S. decision regarding Hiroshima and Nagasaki in August 1945 was perhaps the least great contribution in this regard. These two stress points; colossal expectation as well as enormous apprehension of the U.S. by the rest of the world, born in the years 1969 and 1945 respectively will still guide world events into the near future. Pioneering the Space Frontier reiterates the words inscribed on the plaque that the Apollo astronauts placed on our moon nearly 24 years after Hiroshima: "We came in peace for all mankind," yet humankind is still not at peace with itself. Why? One way to grapple with this question may be to ask another question: How might current global political sensitivities change if citizens worldwide were together included in the planning, deliberating and dieing that will be necessary for the co-exploration of Mars and then stayed there, represented by an international crew? Or, perform in unified action similar feats of common valor on other fronts beyond Earth?

Clear and Present Threats to Humanity

The following paragraphs describe some of the major threats that humanity faces today, and will continue to face in the coming decades, offering an outline for possible countermeasures by redirecting the world's military capabilities into co-exploration of our solar system.

  • Asteroids and comets of our solar system. There is extensive evidence on Earth, Earth's moon, Mercury and Mars of major collisions in the past, and many recent observations of minor impacts and near impacts between Earth's orbit and the orbits of asteroids and comets of various sizes, velocities, and masses. In 1994, we even witnessed large multiple comet impacts into Jupiter, each of which would have obliterated Earth. (11) Everyday, humanity lives under the threat of local, regional, and potentially global environmental catastrophe because of the substantial risk that asteroids or comets on Earth-crossing orbits go undiscovered. (12) Our world system has the inherent capability to confront this peril of nature but we need to establish an appropriate global chain of command and control of detection, inspection and redirection of these near Earth objects. It would be irresponsible of the leaders of our world system to not work together to create and maintain a more than adequate common defense of our home planet and her citizens.
  • Natural and human influenced change to the Earth system. Citizens and their representatives need to know that we are now winning or losing the battles against multiple threats to human existence, in the wider war for our progeny. We are now experiencing the effects of climate change around Earth. We are now experiencing potential pandemics of disease around Earth. We are now experiencing fresh water scarcity around Earth. We are now experiencing biodiversity decline around Earth. These global threats can be overcome by an expanded human presence in our solar system, if for no other reason than micro-evacuation followed by back-population of Earth, in a worst case scenario. Closer to home, continued medical experimentation aboard the International Space Station (ISS) could potentially yield breakthrough defenses against SARS, the Ebola virus and AIDS, each of which potentially threatens global civilization, as we know it.
  • Human to human violence. Surveillance satellites, in addition to monitoring Earth's natural sub-systems can aid human intelligence efforts around our world in preventing nuclear attack. This form of violence is designed to spawn terror among the global civilian population, serving the interests of various parochial political objectives. Sustained genocide and other forms of local intimidation are other recent tools of these objectives around Earth, of which surveillance satellites are able to provide detailed evidence to a vigilant global community, willing to take necessary action at a minute's notice.
  • Gamma-ray bursts (GRBs) of radiation from hypernovas within our galaxy. GRBs belong to a threat category entirely of their own. They are not only a threat to our world, as they threaten possible life in entire solar systems that happen to lie within the narrowly beamed cones along the rotational axis of a progenitor star that collapses into a black hole, within a given galaxy. (13) GRBs involve the extragalactic release of energy equivalent to a billion trillion of our suns (the most powerful type of explosion in the known universe), and no one is exactly sure what causes them or even from where they originate. (14) On December 3, 2003, the European Space Agency (ESA) Integral space-based observatory detected a troublesome GRB. Months of Earth-based observations of this event, called GRB 031203, concluded that this was the closest cosmic GRB on record, but also the faintest. This suggests that an entire population of GRBs has been missed. (15) As with global asteroid and comet defense, space-based detection of GRBs is optimal, along with the simultaneous conception and preparation of responsible protections or countermeasures by our world's militaries, working together.
  • Three critical applications for space solar power (SSP). 1) Solar power satellites can harvest solar power in space for transmission to Earth which can help fight climate change by serving as one of many distributed renewable energy sources to go online globally, once global civilization decides to move beyond fossil fuels. 2) SSP can be used to power energy intensive seawater desalination, necessary in the fight against global fresh water scarcity. 3) A more controversial area in which SSP could play a role is serving as a power source for interplanetary probes, which currently require small nuclear power sources for optimal performance. These three applications add a great deal of justification for global collaborative investment in this uniquely synergistic technology that can aid us in confronting multiple global threats.

Conclusion

The mandate of human history and the mandate evident to us as we look to the human future demand that we as citizens, policy makers, and policy implementers now do our duty to prepare for the inevitable. It is possible to address the assorted threats to our planetary system and our solar system in unison. During the Cold War, the U.S. and her allies followed a grand strategy of containment of Soviet and Chinese communism. In the post Cold War strategic environment, the most compelling replacement of the grand strategy of containment may be that of Thomas P.M. Barnett's grand strategy of economic and political connectivity. (16) The concept of redirection that has been presented in this chapter is complimentary to Barnett's connectivity. Without connectivity, it will be hard to redirect the backward slide of our military capabilities into the darkness of weaponized anarchy in space and on Earth. Six billion together cannot fail.

Research Questions

What missions in outer space (besides planetary defense) are best suited for the military systems of our world, which by achieving create political accord among the major world powers?


Could a negotiation framework at the presidential level be initiated by the U.S. to allow small, annual, incremental, and reciprocal transfers in terms of percentages from military budgets to an international civil space pioneering and defense budget or private fund?

References

  • (1) Snyder, Jack. (2004, November-December). One world, rival theories. Foreign Policy, 53-62.
  • (2) Dolman, Everett Carl. (2001). Astropolitik: Classical geopolitics in the space age. London: Routledge (Taylor and Francis Group), Frank Cass Publications. Abstract retrieved February 14, 2003, from http://search.barnesandnoble.com/booksearch/isbnInquiry.asp?userid=6WLS.
  • (3) Dolman, Everett C. (2005, September 14). U.S. military transformation and weapons in space. Paper presented at the e-parliament conference on Space Security, Rayburn House Office Building, Washington, D.C. Retrieved November 19, 2005, from http://www.eparl.net/pages/space_hearing_images/ConfPaper%20Dolman%20US%20Military%20Transform %20%26%20Space.pdf.
  • (4) Hitchens, Theresa. (2005, March 21-22). Engaging the reluctant superpower: Practical measures for ensuring space security. Paper presented at the conference on Safeguarding Space Security: Prevention of an Arms Race in Outer Space, Council Chamber, Palais des Nations, Geneva. Sponsored by the People's Republic of China, the Russian Federation, the Simons Center for Disarmament and Non-Proliferation Research (Canada) and the United Nations Institute for Disarmament Research. Retrieved April 23, 2005, from http://www.cdi.org/friendlyversion/printversion.cfm?documentID=2946&from_page=../program/document.cfm.
  • (5) Space Frontier Foundation. (2005). Space is a place, not a program: Help us to open the space frontier [web page]. Retrieved November 19, 2005, from, http://www.space-frontier.org/OtherVoices/19580608spaceisaplace.html.
  • (6) Campbell, Joseph. (Lecturer). (2002). Joseph Campbell Audio Collection, Mythology and the individual (Cassette recording No. 5, The vitality of myth). Minneapolis, MN: HighBridge Audio.
  • (7) U.S. Naval Institute Proceedings. (1971, June). Eisenhower at the Naval War College. Annapolis, MD. Forward by Col. Robert M. Krone (USAF).
  • (8) Taubman, Philip. (2003). Secret empire: Eisenhower, the CIA and the hidden story of America's space espionage. New York: Simon and Schuster.
  • (9) U.S. Department of State. (2005, June 13). Open skies treaty (Bureau of Arms Control Fact Sheet). Retrieved January 19, 2006, from, http://www.state.gov/t/ac/rls/fs/47801.htm.
  • (10) National Commission on Space. (1986). Pioneering the space frontier. New York: Bantam Books.
  • (11) Meteor Crater Enterprises (Director and Producer). (2001). Collisions and impacts: The role of meteors and craters in our solar system [videotape]. (Available from Meteor Crater Enterprises, P.O. Box 70, Flagstaff, AZ 86002-0070.)
  • (12) NASA. (2003, August 22). Study to determine the feasibility of extending the search for near-Earth objects to smaller limiting diameters. Report of the Near-Earth Object Science Definition Team. Prepared at the request of NASA Office of Space Science, Solar System Exploration Division. Retrieved November 19, 2005, from http://neo.jpl.nasa.gov/neo/neoreport030825.pdf.
  • (13) Dar, A. & A. De Rujula. (2002). The threat to life from Eta Carinae and gamma ray bursts. In A. Morselli and P. Picozza (Eds.), Frascati physics series: Vol. 24. Astrophysics and gamma ray physics in space (pp. 513-523). Retrieved November 20, 2005, from, http://www.citebase.org/cgi-bin/fulltext?format=application/pdf&identifier=oai:arXiv.org:astro-ph/0110162.
  • (14) NASA Goddard Space Flight Center. (2001, November 7). NASA's HETE spots rare gamma-ray burst afterglow (Top Story). Retrieved November 20, 2005, from, http://www.gsfc.nasa.gov/topstory/20011025heteburst.html.
  • (15) European Space Agency. (2004, August 6). ESA's integral detects closest cosmic gamma ray burst (News Release). Retrieved November 20, 2005, from, http://sci.esa.int/science-e/www/object/index.cfm?fobjectid=35670.
  • (16) Barnett, Thomas P.M. (2004). The Pentagon's new map: war and peace in the twenty-first century. New York: G.P. Putnam's Sons.

About the Author

Extracted from the book Beyond Earth - The Future of Humans in Space edited by Bob Krone ©2006 Apogee Books ISBN 978-1-894959-41-4

Buy This Book Click here

Retrieved from "http://www.thespacelibrary.com/mediawiki/index.php/Beyond_Earth_%28ATWG%29_-_Chapter_34_-_Alternative_Strategic_Approaches_to_Space_by_Martin_Schwab"