[ad_1]
The head of the Chinese lunar exploration program, Ye Peijian, remarked that:
the universe is an ocean, the moon is the Diaoyu Islands, Mars is Huangyan Island. If we do not go now even if we are able to do it, we will be blamed by our descendants. If the others go there, they will take over, and you will not be able to go even if you wish. His reference to the Senkaku Islands (Diaoyu Islands) occupied by the Japanese and to the Huangyan Island claimed by the Philippines (Scarborough Shoal) suggests that China sees space in terms of astrostrategic terrain: the Moon and Mars are astropolitical places. importance, rather than simply the purpose of scientific exploration. Just as China sees control of the "first island chain" in East Asia as vital to its maritime security, Ye's commentary suggests that these highlands in outer space will directly address strategic interests Chinese in the coming decades. Everett Dolman as "the study of the relationship between the field and the technology of outer space and the development of politics and political and military strategy". It contrasts with traditional geocentric approaches to spatial power, which focus on how space directly influences earthly affairs and minimizes the vast astrostrategic terrain in the cislunar space (the region between Earth and the Earth). Moon)
is coming. The 2020s promise greater commercial and national activity from low earth orbit to the moon and beyond, bringing the mindsets of geocentric thinking to space-centric thinking.
Ye Peijian clearly thinks long-term: Mars is distant and probably won. Given its gravitational proximity to "near-Earth space" – the region ranging from LEO to geostationary orbit (GEO) – and its highest natural terrain status above gravity of the Earth, the moon is more important
It is important to understand the astrostrategic terrain of space. Dolman notes:
What first appears as a void without relief is actually a rich perspective of gravitational mountains and valleys, oceans and rivers of alternately dispersed resources and energies. and concentrated, widely scattered and dangerous. Astrodynamics
Rather than being an infinite void, the space is delimited by gravitational and transfer trajectories, which constrain human activities in the same way as the points of gravity. strategic maritime strangling. An actor who can control them can control access to resources of great value and strategic significance throughout the remainder of the 21st century.
Dolman connects astropolitics with Halford Mackinder's early 20th century ideas on geopolitics, planes and railroads rapidly transformed advanced economies and thus power hierarchies. The driving force of this change was the desire to control strategically important resources to gain a comparative advantage over other states.
In the 2020s, there will likely be a similar recognition of the potential value of resources on the moon or on asteroids close to the Earth. , in addition to a LEO region control requirement at GEO. In these circumstances, the traditional geocentric approach to space energy will be increasingly challenged.
At the same time, space technology is being transformed by the introduction of cheaper reusable rockets, airborne launch systems and, on the horizon, hypersonic aerospace aircraft. . Going into the space becomes easier, faster and cheaper, allowing more states and commercial actors to exploit it for a geostrategic and commercial gain. The space becomes more competitive and more crowded accordingly. This is not a sanctuary of human competition, and the high power conflict on the high border is becoming more and more likely.
In this complex astropolitical environment, President Donald Trump's US Space Force – another great idea – will emerge and likely evolve over a time period similar to the expansion of human activity in the US. cislunar space in the 2020s.
There has been a lot of criticism – some thoughtful and others based on a derision of Trump – about the idea of a US space force. The most thoughtful critics have highlighted the difficulties in funding a sixth military force from an already limited US defense budget. There are legitimate concerns about the need to avoid duplicating existing US Air Force organizational structures and missions in space. Critics point out that the formation of a space force could seriously disrupt the air force at a time of increasing international uncertainty.
It was also criticized that a US Space Force would violate the 1967 Treaty on Outer Space and Related Agreements. However, nothing in the space law prevents the military use of space or the development of space weapons, provided that they are not weapons of mass destruction or do not involve the military use of the moon and other celestial bodies. Space Force per se would not violate the Outer Space Treaty, but there is a growing threat that the treaty may be under increasing pressure as competition from the major powers it extends to the Cislunar region
. The US Air Force, which separated from the US Army in 1947, was driven by the operational experience of the Second World War, the maturing of technology and the development of the US Air Force. strategic importance of the air domain. In recent years, space thinking has evolved in the same way as an operational combat field and, like the 1940s airspace, the space domain of the next decade will be strongly contested. Perhaps space force is an idea whose time has come, and that it should not be rejected without a deep consideration of risks and opportunities.
This means that it is important to understand what motivates Chinese aspirations. If the Chinese see the area of space in line with Dolman's astrological thesis, the parallel of Ye's moon and Mars with the strategically challenged ground on Earth should make space thinkers think in the West . High border control must not stop at GEO, especially if the moon and other celestial bodies possess strategic wealth and value, and will be more readily available from here. the end of the next decade. [19659009] The prospect of a major power competition on the high border can go beyond GEO. You clearly say that China will control the moon and other celestial bodies, or that others will do it. The United States and its allies must decide whether Chinese control of this height is acceptable. The mission of the US Space Force can be completely different from what the US Air Force is currently doing in space.
Malcolm Davis is senior analyst at ASPI. This article is published with the kind permission of The Strategist from ASPI, and it can be found in its original form here.
The opinions expressed in this document are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of The Maritime Executive.
Source link
