President George W. Bush, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld,
and General Tommy Franks deserve applause for their leadership and steadfastness
in the prosecution of the war on terrorism. The innovative methods used in this
conflict have transformed the way we will conduct future conflicts.
Leading the way in military innovation and transformation
has been our use of space. Central Command's General Franks, in his Feb. 7
statement before the Senate Armed Services Committee, stated that the use of
unmanned aerial vehicles, precision-guided munitions, and command, control,
communications, computers, intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance
(C4ISR) systems proved to be "very effective" in the prosecution of what he
considered to be "the most accurate war in the history of the United States."
Underpinning the use of these modern tools of war is
dependency on space assets, such as the Global Positioning System (GPS) and our
satellite communications networks. Our nation's warfighters rely more and more
on space systems. In fact, General (now Secretary of State) Colin Powell, while
chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said the United States learned from
Operation Desert Storm that it had "to achieve total control of space if [our
nation is] to succeed on the modern battlefield."
Our nation's growing dependence on space is not limited to
military purposes. Our economy is becoming increasingly dependent on space. We
use satellite communications for everyday things like pagers, cell phone
networks, pay-at-the-pump gas service, and satellite television. Backpackers,
hunters, fishermen and lost tourists use GPS to find their way.
Without question, space has become America's major "center
of gravity," and our enemies know it. It is only a matter of time before an
adversary figures out how to deny us use of these systems. A nuclear
antisatellite (ASAT) weapon can indiscriminately destroy many satellites in a
single blast, while conventional ASATs and microsats (very small satellites)
can be far more surgical in their attacks.
Our ability to defend against attacks on our space systems
is limited at best, and more focus to bolster our space defenses is desperately
needed. According to General Ralph Eberhart, commander of U.S. Space Command,
space control - the ability to protect one's own space assets while denying an
adversary's use of in-orbit resources - is "still at idle." Lieutenant General
Chuck Wald, one of the directors of the air campaign in the Afghan conflict,
said recently that the space-enabled advantage the United States enjoys in
precision strike would undoubtedly be the focus of attack from future
adversaries. I agree. It is critical for the United States to pay serious
attention to space systems defense. We need to devote more resources to
strengthening the advantage space systems lend us over potential adversaries
and to protect our space systems from attack as we press ahead with our utilization
of space as part of our overarching strategic vision.
Our adversaries of the future will target our reliance on
space assets. In July 2000, the Xinhua news agency reported that China's
military is developing methods and strategies for defeating the United States
military in a high-tech and space-based future war, arguing, "For countries
that could never win a war by using the method of tanks and planes, attacking
the United States space system may be an irresistible and most tempting
choice."
Attacks can come from a number of sources, to include the
aforementioned ASATs, jamming, electromagnetic pulse attack and directed-energy
weapons. The Chinese press has noted their government's development of
parasitic satellites that attach to a functioning host satellite with the
ability to degrade or disrupt service. It is imperative that we aggressively
pursue options to protect ourselves from attack - both offensive systems such as
kinetic energy ASAT and space-based laser (SBL) and defensive systems such as
hardened facilities and increased surveillance.
A recent national intelligence estimate stated that the
United States most likely would be faced with the threat of intercontinental
ballistic missile (ICBM) attack on its homeland from adversaries before 2015.
Any nation that can launch ICBMs at us can directly threaten our systems in
space. However, I believe our space systems will see other threats far sooner
than that. It is past time to start investing in defenses against both these
threats, and opposition to space "weaponization" cannot deter us.
Space has been weaponized for years, with military
operations relying on satellite communications and precise GPS navigation. Let
us not forget that ICBMs we've had deployed since the 1960s travel through
space to reach their intended targets.
One of the best ways to defend against both ballistic
missile attack on our homeland and ASAT attack on our space systems is to
develop a boost-phase ballistic missile interceptor. The U.S. Air Force had
undertaken a significant first step along this path with the SBL Integrated
Flight Experiment (IFX) program, which was to be a space-based proof-of-concept
demonstration of a directed-energy weapon against a boosting ballistic missile
target.
Conducting the demonstration would have yielded important
information on a future operational system. Unfortunately, SBL IFX funding was
slashed to roughly $50 million per year, effectively killing the program and
threatening its technology base. There is no other program on the books that
can meet the timelines to combat a boosting strategic missile anywhere on the
globe. This shortfall must be redressed.
In addition, the nation absolutely must develop the other
needed components of the missile defense system, such as the Space Based Infrared
System - Low (SBIRS-Low) for surveillance, as soon as possible. Another area that
lacks focus is the establishment of an overarching strategic view of space. The
Space Commission, which was created by my legislation and chaired by Donald
Rumsfeld before he was selected as Secretary of Defense, understood the
critical importance of space to our nation. The commission's report stated,
"The United States has a vital national interest in space. Space should be high
among the nation's security priorities. It deserves the attention of the
national leadership, from the president down."
I am concerned that we have not yet embraced this notion.
The commission's top two recommendations, establishment of space as a national
security priority and establishment of a Presidential Space Advisory Group,
have not been implemented, and the third recommendation, the establishment of a
Senior Interagency Group for Space, fizzled after just a few meetings.
I met recently with Peter Teets, who has dual roles as the
under secretary of the Air Force and the director of the National
Reconnaissance Office (NRO). I was very impressed with his plans to ensure the
defense and intelligence space organizations capitalize on their synergies and
best practices. Teets is the right person for the job at an important time.
However, I am concerned he will only be able to do so much from his position
without leadership from the top.
Although "dual-hatting" the position and broadening scope of
authority and responsibility (e.g., making Teets the Department of Defense
space milestone decision authority) is a step in the right direction, only the
organizations under his direct control, the Air Force and NRO, will be required
to follow his direction. What is needed is leadership within the National
Security Council to chart our course in space over the next 20 years and break
down interagency barriers to achieving those goals.
Issues like the development of space-plane capabilities,
improvement of our GPS capabilities, and overall use of the radio frequency
spectrum cannot be resolved by the Defense Department alone. We must follow up
to ensure needed funding is available to achieve our vision. In his position,
Teets can only affect this so much, without control over the larger national
space community.
It shouldn't take another catastrophic event like Sept. 11
to awaken the United States into action. The war on terrorism has rightly
consumed the full attention of the national leadership, and we must continue to
provide sufficient funding to prosecute the war and protect our troops in
combat. We also must act vigilantly and prepare now for any future threats.
Robust missile and space defenses are essential for protecting lives, ensuring
freedom from terrorism, and safeguarding the economy.
Sen. Bob Smith (R-NH) is the former chairman of the Senate
Armed Services Committee Subcommittee on Strategic Forces. He is the
author of the legislation that created the Space Commission.