The dragon and the space: about space warfare in China

Part I. The history of space warfare

to the second part of the article

introduction

An old meteorological satellite called FENGYUN 1 C, launched by China, caused a global stir years after it ended its operation and drifted aimlessly in its orbit. This satellite was chosen by China to be used as a target for an anti-satellite weapon developed by it, and tested for the first time on 11.1.2007. The satellite, which circled the Earth in a polar orbit at an altitude of about 850 km, was hit by a missile launched a few minutes before from the Chinese space base Xixhang. Upon impact, the satellite exploded into many fragments, which have been moving in orbit ever since, and threaten to damage satellites and space assets of other countries, and worse, are a constant reminder of the dangers of space warfare systems.

In this article I will discuss the technological aspects of China's space warfare system, the international consequences of the Chinese satellite destruction experiment and the long-term consequences of the design of space policy in various countries, as a response to the demonstration of the ability to destroy satellites demonstrated by China. I will also briefly review the various international treaties that outline ways for activity in space, as adopted by most of the UN member states. In conclusion, I will dwell a little on China's possible motives for destroying the satellite, and the consequences of this experiment on China's space policy on the one hand, and that of the United States on the other. It should be emphasized that the scope of the issues related to and tangential to the experiment of destroying the Chinese satellite is extremely extensive, and it is appropriate to dedicate research to them on a much larger scale, and I hope that I will have the opportunity to do so in the future.

Before I state the essence of the Chinese experiment to destroy a satellite, I will go ahead and elaborate a little on space warfare, for its various issues:

It seems that the average reader of the 21st century does not need to explain that space is an essential asset of the first rank, for every country in the world, especially for a technological country equipped with various space assets. The space makes it possible to place aid arrays for the armies operating on the ground. Satellites today enable precise attack capabilities with the help of navigation and guidance of weapons. Advanced intelligence capabilities make extensive use of photography and imaging satellites, in a wide range of the electromagnetic spectrum.

Satellites provide global control, communication, control and command capabilities. Meteorological assistance and an array of communication satellites helps the economy and development of many countries, and is essential for their military forces. It is unthinkable to imagine today a modern army that would give up the enormous advantages afforded by satellites and advanced combat doctrines that build in the advantages of space.

Types of space warfare

In general, the field of space warfare can be divided into three categories:
1. Warfare into space
2. Space warfare
3. Warfare from space

Warfare into space will include a variety of offensive measures designed to damage enemy satellites, either permanently or temporarily. Included in this category are anti-satellite missiles, high energy weapons (mainly lasers) for disrupting the activity of satellites and destroying them; combat satellites to be launched towards targets in space; and various jamming systems designed to interfere with the proper operation of the satellite. In this context, it is worth noting that during the war between the United States and Iraq in 2003, Iraq widely blocked the transmissions of the American GPS satellites. The GPS blocks are designed to prevent these satellites. Guide precision guided munitions to Iraqi ground targets. Warfare into space can be conducted from ground, air, sea or spacecraft platforms. The most familiar name for anti-satellite warfare is ASAT (Anti Satellite). ASAT can be a missile, an energy weapon (such as a laser), a projectile weapon or parasitic satellites (the meaning of parasitic satellite - a satellite capable of maneuvering in space and reaching a meeting with the target satellite, interfering with it, blocking its field of vision, clinging to it and causing it to be taken off course and burned in the atmosphere, etc. "B.).

Space warfare means space-space warfare, that is, the activation of combat systems permanently stationed in space, and their purpose is to attack other space assets. This category includes space mines, laser satellites, cannons of various types, parasitic satellites and electromagnetic jamming systems that are in space and whose purpose is to disrupt the ability of satellites to operate properly. Exploding satellites are satellites armed with explosives and used to attack enemy satellites. Satellites explode near the target or when they collide with it. These satellites must have maneuverability, in order to get close to the enemy satellite. A space mine is a satellite placed in orbit and equipped with a target detection system, and capable of detonating when an enemy satellite passes near it. Attack satellites are used as a platform for weapons, but do not explode themselves.

A satellite armed with a nuclear warhead allows the destruction of satellites in a large area in space, as opposed to point destruction, which is carried out by combat satellites or space missiles. Satellites exposed to the electromagnetic pulse (EMP) created by the nuclear explosion will be damaged, even if spray from the explosion does not harm them. American experiments from the sixties of the twentieth century showed that after the explosion a belt of radioactive radiation remained, which also affects passing satellites. The weakness of this weapon comes from a wide impact radius and the indiscriminate impact between enemy satellites and friendly satellites.

Warfare from space means using combat systems stationed in space against targets on Earth. In this category we can name combat systems against anti-aircraft missiles (surface-to-surface missiles) that use a powerful laser; Placing nuclear warheads in orbit (in order to increase their survivability on the one hand and reduce the warning time of the adversary on the other hand); Kinetic weapons directed at ground targets; and disruption of ground combat systems by using various means from space.

A brief history of space warfare systems

In the context of this essay, it is worth noting two historical systems of space warfare: the USSR's satellite interception system, which was based on ground launchers, and the US ASAT missile system, which was based on an aerial platform carried on top of F-15 fighter jets. The anti-satellite weapon system of the USSR was operational for at least a decade, while the American system carried out a number of checks and tests, and the first successful interception of a satellite was carried out on September 13.9.1985, 1988, but it was not put into operational use. The program came to an end and was canceled in XNUMX, mainly due to political pressure against the operational deployment of a system to fight against satellites, and fear that the USSR would develop parallel capabilities. After the dissolution of the USSR and the opening of classified archives, it is now known that an anti-satellite warfare system was developed and tested, and was even operational for most of the XNUMXs. Apparently Russia has not retained these capabilities.

The American anti-satellite system was supposed to be extremely accurate, and achieve the destruction of the satellite through a kinetic impact on it, without the use of an explosive warhead. This mode of operation was chosen especially in order not to create a large amount of spray in space, which could damage additional satellites beyond the satellite the missile is aimed at. It is interesting to note that the USSR originally developed space warfare systems equipped with a nuclear warhead (a derivative of the ABM-1 (Galush) anti-missile missile) and later deployed an operational system equipped with an explosive warhead designed to create a large spray.

UN activity against an arms race in space

Diverse activities of the United Nations are designed to achieve the goal of preventing weaponization in space, and preventing the deployment of various systems of space warfare (including warfare into space, in space, and from space)[1]. The UN's activity against the weaponization of space is carried out through several mechanisms, including UNIDIR - United Nations Institute for Disarmament Research (founded in 1980 according to the resolution of the UN General Assembly) and - PAROS, Prevention of Arms Race in Outer Space, an activity carried out within the framework of the United Nations and approved by the General Assembly.

Major international conventions dealing with the prevention of the weaponization of space were created over the years, when the basic document of human activity in space (sometimes called the Magna Carta of space) is the Outer Space Treaty, which was ratified by the UN General Assembly on 10.10.1967. [2] Among the articles of this treaty, it is important to note in the context of space warfare Article 3, which calls for space applications for peaceful purposes, Article 4, which deals with preventing the placement of nuclear weapons in space. The drafters of the treaty did not take into account the placement of anti-satellite weapon systems in space, which are not nuclear, or anti-satellite systems that would be launched from Earth. Therefore, the Outer Space Treaty does not prohibit warfare against satellites. Accompanying activity appears in other treaties and resolution proposals of the UN General Assembly, especially the desire to avoid space activity that would create fragments and fragments (Space Debris). The United Nations began a research activity on space debris and spray in 1999, by the United Nations Office for Outer Space Affairs (OOSA). Contrary to the Outer Space Treaty, which was ratified by most of the member states of the UN, the international activity led by the organization against space spray and orbital debris is not very successful. In 2007, UN guidelines were published in connection with fragments, spray and space debris[3], however, the number of countries that ratified the policy proposed to reduce the phenomenon of fragments and debris in space is extremely limited, and it is worth noting that the USA opposes these decisions (mainly due to the development of anti-missile systems ballistics it is developing as part of the NMD initiative, which are designed to hit an adversary's warheads while in space. Such an impact will create many space fragments, even though the American warhead will not use explosives).

The UN itself recognizes the difficulties in implementing its decisions and proposals on the prevention of systems for space warfare. A document published by UNIDIR back in 1993 insists on the technical difficulties inherent in the supervision and monitoring of a boycott of space warfare systems.[4] A previous document of UNIDIR [5] offers various ways to promote the ban on the placement of space combat systems, however, no operative and binding decisions came out of the conference where it was presented. It goes without saying that, against the background of the lack of an internationally binding framework to prevent the placement of combat systems in and into space, various countries considered themselves freed from the shackles of the norms that began to take shape among the international community. When these countries included the USA, the USSR (later Russia) and China, it goes without saying that the influence of discussions in the corridors and committees of the UN was only a call to action, without the ability to have a real influence.

The International Academy of Astronautics published a study dealing with the management of the movement in space of satellites in different orbits[6] which also discusses the issue of space fragments and presents ways to deal with the problem. It should be emphasized, however, that the origin of the space debris described in this study is from launch failures and random oppositions between satellites, and not as a result of space warfare. At the same time, the increasing preoccupation with the problem of space fragments also reflects on the issue of anti-satellite weapons, and can result in the transition of countries interested in these weapons to the high energies, and especially laser weapons, which do not produce space fragments, or unfortunately, produce fragments in a small amount (for example, if caused An explosion to a compressed tank located in the satellite and containing fuel for example).

[1] See Outer space and global security, UNIDIR, UN press, 2003, preface

[2] For the full text of the Outer Space Treaty, and of other treaties approved by the UN See:
[3] See the decision here:
[4] See: Technical problems in the verification of a ban on space weapons, UNIDIR, UN press, NY, 1993

[5] Prevention of an arms race in outer space: a guide to the discussions in the conference on disarmament, UNIDIR, UN Press, NY, 1991

[6] Cosmic study on space traffic management, International Academy of Astronautics, France, 2006

Tal Inbar - MD Head of the Center for Space Research, Fisher Institute for Strategic Air and Space Research

to the second part of the article