Russia’s Orbital Plans – USA Gov Policy

Twenty seconds before the scheduled liftoff in March, Russia aborted its launch of three astronauts to the International Space Station (ISS). Putin’s space program continues to suffer from a number of challenges. For over a decade the Russian program has endured turbulence, funding constraints, a shrinking workforce, and low workforce productivity. The March incident was reported as “…a significant mishap for the Russian space program.” This week a newly-released Foreign Policy Research Institute (FPRI) report examines the Russian government space program in light of President Putin’s announcement that he intends to put a new space station into orbit by 2027.

It may be a challenge beyond what Putin can effectively deliver as Russia is suffering from monetary inflation in the aerospace industry, as well as a devaluation of the ruble. For Putin, however, the military space program is an “at any cost” venture for him. The current environment, according to the FPRI report, notes that there is not only a deficit of financial resources but also limited access to advanced machine tools and space-grade electronics. “These challenges for Russia to focus efforts on the military space activity and leave manned spaceflights and space exploration only to maintain its international status as a space superpower and sense of domestic legitimacy of authoritarian governance without any sustainable outcomes of the civil space activity itself,” says the report.

Wester military analysts are growing more concerned as Russia’s military space program is increasingly asymmetrical. It currently depends on a large number of inexpensive satellites composed of consumer and industrial-grade imported electronic components, and notes, FPRI, “technologies of nuclear power to increase its counter-satellite electronic warfare capabilities.” These satellites have relatively short lives, increasing Russia’s constraints on developing a modern, comprehensive system. This is growing more pronounced since Putin’s 2014 annexation of Crimea and Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. Economic sanctions take time to work. Putin’s space program is experiencing a dearth of components due to the embargo on advanced industrial equipment, limited finances spread across too many major projects, and the general Russian inefficiency within the space industry. Added to the domestic economic challenges, the cancellation of space cooperation with Western partners has made it impossible for Putin to reverse the negative trends.

Russia’s two main priorities for the next decade are to maintain the presence of its astronauts in outer space after the ISS era and even if it is unable to proceed with scientific research and discoveries. Second, according to FPRI, is that Russia must move satellite manufacturing from space-grade electronics to “relatively simple and cheap consumer-grade electronics.” This would be one option for Putin given the preference for quantity over quality. Russia could then afford to quickly replace its short-lived satellites and at the same time develop more advanced communications and intelligence capabilities to support the armed force.

Russia’s Global Navigation Satellite System (GLONASS) is also at risk since the development of new architecture with fewer resources in the sky may make it impossible for Putin to achieve his goal of covering Russia and its neighboring territories. The FPRI report suggest that the armed forces already use consumer-grade GPS and BeiDou trackers, so avoiding the deterioration of GLONASS may not be a top priority. By 2026 Moscow plans to transfer additional federal project funds that are not targeted for other projects to space activities.

The Russian state space program has two subprograms to improve management of its space endeavors. Putin’s first priority is innovation projects within the space industry, and second, is to ensure implementation of “space activity.” The latter is inclusive of its military program and includes development of the Plesetsk launch site for military orbital launches. Cuts in funding since 2020 indicate that Putin will be unable to achieve his objectives by 2030, despite the lengthening of project timelines. Originally planned and approved as a $50 billion effort, less than $26 billion in funding has actually been allocated to the space program. This critical underfunding, taken together with other constraints such as the country’s high military casualty rate, may provide the West with the leeway needed to press Russia further to end the war in Ukraine. It may also make Putin a more dangerous opponent of the West should he feel cornered without options.

Daria Novak served in the U.S. State Dept.

Photo: Photo: Backdropped against black space above Earth’s horizon, the International Space Station’s (from left) Zvezda service module, Zarya module, and Unity module are pictured following the undocking of Space Shuttle Atlantis on Sept. 18, 2000, during the STS-106 mission. (NASA)

Quick Analysis

Politicizing the U.S. Military Part 2

In 2022, Bishop Garrison, the senior advisor to the secretary of defense for human capital and diversity, equity and inclusion. said the “need for diversity, equity and inclusion should be a consideration or a part of all decisions in the military.” A Tampa Free Press story notes that he U.S. military and Pentagon have turned into a “vast DEI bureaucracy under the Biden administration. The Biden administration has spent hundreds of millions of dollars on diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) initiatives…since President Joe Biden took office in January 2021.” The report is based on an Arizona University study which stated “The sole purpose of the U.S. Armed Forces is to defend the nation against its external enemies. The service academies train officers committed to fulfilling this mission. This mission—defense of the nation—makes the U.S. Armed Forces arguably the most important institution in the United States…Given its importance, the U.S. Armed Forces should not be a laboratory for social experimentation, especially one based on Critical Race Theory, a contentious and abstract social theory. Yet, as this Commission Report on Civic Education in the Military shows in great detail, Critical Race Theory is promoted within Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) training throughout the military from the Pentagon through the ranks and in our service academies. Critical Race Theory is based on an assumption that no matter what progress is made on ensuring equal rights for minorities, ‘white privilege’ and ‘sub-conscious’ racism continues to prevail among whites, no matter their professed support for diversity and inclusion in their workplace, community, or immediate and extended families. Critical Race Theory assumes that racism is systemic from the very founding of the United States and that the U.S. Constitution was drafted to ensure the white privilege of slaveholders. Whatever the appearance of progress—constitutional amendments and legislation to protect equal rights for racial minorities—is a façade that still preserves white privilege. Critical Race Theory is based on assumptions, not empirically derived evidence, and is by nature divisive. Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion programs, which rely on Critical Race Theory, should not be seen as workplace sensitivity training.” Its not only about DEI. In a press release issued on June 12, The Department of Defense Announced “Environmental Justice Listening Sessions…to solicit input from the public on its environmental justice (EJ) strategy. DOD is updating its EJ Strategy in accordance with Executive Order (E.O.) 14096, Revitalizing Our Nation’s Commitment to Environmental Justice for All, and to pursue a whole-of-government approach to advancing EJ.” 14096 was issued by Biden in 2023. A 2022 Federal Times study, using data from a Reagan National Defense survey, disclosed that the actions of some presidents have predominantly caused the perception that the Defense Department is overly politicized. Breitbart reports that “The vast majority of U.S. active duty military members believe the Pentagon has become politicized, according to data obtained exclusively by Breitbart News. Sixty-eight percent of active duty members say they have ‘witnessed a growing politicization,’ while 53 percent say the military has become ’too politicized.’ Sixty-eight percent also say such politicization would impact their decision to encourage their children to join the military.” The politicization comes at a substantial cost. A National Review article reported that “The Department of Defense wants taxpayers to foot a $114 million bill for its ‘diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility’ programs. The FY 2024 President’s Budget request demonstrates the DoD’s commitment to DEIA and includes $114.7 million for dedicated diversity and inclusion activities.” The cost of politicization is also seen in discouraging enlistment in the military. In 2023, the military fell short of its recruitment goal by an astounding 41,000. A Military Times report stated that “One possibility [for missing recruitment goals] that is increasingly resonating with veterans is that the military is too ‘woke.’ Sen. Tommy Tuberville, R-Ala., for example, is among a group of Republican senators who have repeatedly blamed recruiting problems on the Biden administration for trying to build a ‘woke Army.’” Photo: Dept. of Defense