China’s Space Threat – USA Gov Policy

The New York Analysis of Policy and Government begins a two-part look into China’s growing threat in space.

China’s growing prowess in space technology is posing a growing threat to the United States. The U.S. Defense Department notes that in addition to the development of directed energy weapons and satellite jammers, China has developed anti-satellite capabilities.

Testifying before the U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission in 2015, Kevin Pollpeter of the University of California Institute on Global Conflict and Cooperation stated: “Based on their analysis of U.S. military operations, Chinese military researchers view space as a critical component in making the PLA into a force capable of winning “informatized” wars and recognize the role space plays in the collection and transmittal of information and the need to deny those capabilities to an adversary. Indeed, nearly every Chinese source describes space as the “ultimate high ground,” leading many Chinese analysts to assess that space warfare is inevitable. Because of the preeminence of the space battlefield, analysts writing on space argue that it will become the center of gravity in future wars and one that must be seized and controlled. In fact, these analysts argue that the first condition for seizing the initiative is to achieve space supremacy.”

The Guardian reported that there is growing concern about China’s intentions in space and its growing abilities. According to Stuart Clark, the launch of Aolong 1 (Roaming Dragon)” raised eyebrows, and stoked fears in some quarters that the civilian space programme is just a front for more covert operations. Aolong 1 has a robotic arm that can grab another satellite and guide it to burn up in Earth’s atmosphere. Officially, it is to remove space debris from orbit but it could also be used as a weapon, bringing down a rival’s satellite.Although this is true of any space debris removal system, doubts remain because China does not have an unblemished record in anti-satellite weaponry. In 2007, the Chinese shot down one of their own orbiting spacecraft in what was probably a thinly veiled warning to America.”

CNBC notes that “the Asian colossus is investing in anti-satellite technologies that would destroy or disable space-based assets in the event of conflict. Considering the fact that the U.S. relies upon satellites for a lot of its intelligence collection and communication, it’s a worrisome trend. And it is exacerbating tensions with U.S. defense officials and security analysts concerned by China’s focus on enhancing its military capabilities in space.
Anybody could pfizer viagra online face this disorder. In the condition of gastro-esophageal reflux a person may https://regencygrandenursing.com/post-acute-sub-acute-care/stroke-rehabilitation buy generic levitra feel that food is trapped behind the breastbone which may cause pain in the chest. When you hear a loud sound at all times bear in mind: your company’re undoubtedly unaided within the levitra uk regencygrandenursing.com world. This price variation deceives customers and don’t let viagra sample free them to trust other drug stores.
Popular Science outlines that that “This past year, [China] had 19 successful space launches—the second-highest number behind Russia’s 26, and ahead of America’s 18…[China is] redefining what space means—militarily, economically, and politically—in the 21st century. There are plans for heavy-lift rockets, manned space stations, and one of the world’s largest satellite-imaging and -navigation networks. Meanwhile the U.S.—particularly where human spaceflight is concerned—is hardly moving at all. ‘I don’t worry about China suddenly leapfrogging us,’ says James Lewis, a director at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, a D.C. think tank. ‘I worry about us being distracted and waking up to realize that they have a much more powerful position in space.”

A National Interest examination stated that “There are few areas where China is really competitive with the United States: high-speed computing, perhaps (China owns the world’s fastest computer), high-speed rail, enormous dam projects. Many of these “competitions” are mostly symbolic, but it is in outer space where Beijing is not only catching up quickly, but is on the verge of leaving the US space program – once the gold standard – in its wake… There is… one area where the indigenous Chinese defense and aerospace really does shine, and that is its space sector.

The Washington Free Beacon reports that a Dong Neng-3 anti-satellite missile may soon be launched.

The Report concludes tomorrow.

Quick Analysis

Ukraine’s Frozen Conflict

As we approach winter in the northern hemisphere, the war in Ukraine is beginning to resemble a “frozen conflict” from many perspectives. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky recently told the media he hopes the war will end faster once President-elect Trump takes over in January. Opinions in Moscow, however, differ from that of the Ukrainian leader. Russian President Vladimir Putin argues that the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) needs to exclude Ukraine from joining in “exchange” for peace. If it does not, he says, then no end to the war is in sight. So far there is no Christmas solution. Several NATO countries, according to Vladimir Socor of the Jamestown Foundation, are tentatively considering “coalitions-of-the-willing” to provide security for Ukraine outside of the formal NATO framework. There is, however, no collective mechanism today under which such an arrangement is viable. According to the NATO Charter, while Ukraine is a NATO partner country, it may not join as a full member since it has not fulfilled the requirements for membership. That has not stopped NATO and allies from continuing “to provide Ukraine with unprecedented levels of support, helping to uphold its fundamental right to self-defence,” according to the organization. Socor says that keeping Ukraine out of NATO will not advance peace with Russia. Waiting for a peace settlement, he suggests, would only serve to encourage Moscow to continue the war indefinitely. Although the Biden Administration officially withdrew its support for Ukrainian membership in 2021, NATO maintains an “open door” policy toward membership-seeking countries. The current White House position led the way for European states to oppose Ukraine’s membership saying that a decision should be delayed until “conditions are met.” Biden pushed for changing “open door” to a “bridge” metaphor. It is not intended as an across-the-board NATO policy and has been implemented in the past on a case-by-case basis, says Socor. “The alliance’s open-door policy was not fully insulated from Russia’s non-statutory blocking power, and NATO-aspirant countries’ path toward membership was not always irreversible.” Russia has successfully blocked states like Georgia from joining, first in 2008 and again after the war in Ukraine began in 2014. Russia recognizes the value add of Ukraine to NATO is enormous and that Kyiv has a better case than some other nations. Putin’s invasion was, in part, intended to foreclose that option. By 2021, Moscow was pushing hard to maximize its war objectives, which included further annexations of Ukrainian territory. A main goal for Putin was, and is, to ensure there is no Ukraine left to join NATO. As President-elect Trump prepares to assume office in January, he is faced with the historical challenges presented by the war. Post-conflict security guarantees were the center of several proposals made during the 2023 military stalemate. The incoming Trump Administration has yet to outline how it intends to handle the Russia-Ukraine war. Analysts in Washington believe that the new Administration will expect its European allies to guarantee the majority of Ukraine’s security needs. As we approach 2025, several European nations have acknowledged that they do not view Ukraine as eligible for NATO membership as it would draw the organization into the middle of the conflict. Others want to wait until the war is over or pending a “peace” settlement before considering Ukrainian membership. Socor reports that some “influential voices” are suggesting that “Kyiv should join NATO after “freezing” the war along a stable armistice line, de facto accepting Ukraine’s partition, with NATO security guarantees applying de jure to the government-controlled territory only.” This would mean starting accession talks soon with the actual talks to commence only after a ceasefire is in place. Trump arrives in Washington at a time when Putin’s hybrid strategies of war in Ukraine have eviscerated commonly-held differences between war and peace. “Absent a political consensus in NATO over Ukrainian membership, certain European allies, including France’s President Emmanuel Macron, are holding informal consultations about post-conflict security guarantees to Kyiv by NATO members outside of NATO’s framework,” according to the Jamestown Foundation. The Biden Administration downplayed the discussions on possible forms of military assistance and defense industry cooperation by sending only an Assistant Secretary of State. For a European peace to hold the Trump Administration would need to formally extend the United States’ nuclear deterrence to Ukraine. Options under discussion in Europe include a “coalition of the resolute” to deploy forces to Ukraine as part of a possible armistice package, deterring further Russian attacks, says Secor. European officials are also debating, without any agreement, whether its military forces could perform non-combat logistical roles to free Ukrainian forces to fight. None of the possible courses of action has moved forward as all eyes are waiting on the incoming Trump Administration for clues about its intended level of support for a NATO framework and other non-NATO proposals. Daria Novak served in the U.S. State Dept.