Beyond the Horizon: Reality of War in Space
Space is a gift to human-kind. Do we really need to militarize space?
Good day, my fellow humans!
Today, I want to share my thoughts on the role of space warfare in geopolitics. I was personally amazed to realize how significant the prospect of conflict in space has become. One could hardly imagine how such an inaccessible realm is becoming increasingly relevant to earthly geopolitics.
Before we start, here are some interesting facts:
Total number of “Active Satellites” in space today is around 9900.
Total amount of space debris is in orders of millions.Scientific models estimate the total number of space debris objects in Earth orbit to be in the order of:
• 29,000 — for sizes larger than 10 cm
• 670,000 — for sizes larger than 1 cm
• More than 170 million — for sizes larger than 1 mm.
This is bound to increase and a cause for great concern as the idea of Space warfare is becoming a reality, as we speak. The amount of space junk is increasing and this is a consequence of multiple years of negligence.
I have had a deep connection with space, and satellites and owing to my previous experience in building a Nano Satellite — Parikshit under the guidance of ISRO, I felt compelled to write this article. It aims to shed light on the harsh realities of space warfare and the escalating issue of space debris, urging awareness and action.
Space offers tremendous benefits to humanity
The reasons to explore the universe are as vast and varied as those for exploring forests, mountains, or the sea. Since the dawn of humanity, we have sought to learn about the world around us, find new resources, and improve our existence.
Let me begin by explaining why space is of such immense importance to humanity. There are countless reasons, and I will highlight some less commonly discussed ones. We know that the cost of reaching space has dropped by orders of magnitude in the past decade. Recent times have seen breakthroughs in space missions, space exploration, and even its role in revolutionizing the pharmaceutical industry. Yes, you heard that right!
In-space manufacturing represents the next evolution of humanity’s industrial capacity, with elements produced in orbit having the potential to change the course of history. Formulation challenges that limit access to key therapies on Earth can be addressed by processing in micro-gravity. Studies conducted in micro-gravity often yield surprising results that advance scientific understanding of natural phenomena back on Earth. But for the pharmaceutical industry, space offers more than just fundamental discoveries. We’ve already had our first drug test using automated manufacturing in space, with capsules successfully returned to Earth.
And it’s not just drugs; countless experiments on stem cells and bio-printing artificial tissue — usually hindered by Earth’s gravity — have been conducted aboard space labs. These experiments are in high demand, with giants like Eli Lilly and Merck sending their research skywards. NASA, established over half a century ago, provides ample evidence of how space benefits humanity here on Earth.
While space offers immense benefits and has been a catalyst for incredible advancements in various fields, it is also becoming a contested domain. The very qualities that make space so valuable for peaceful exploration and development also make it a potential arena for conflict. As nations and private entities race to stake their claims, the specter of space warfare looms ever larger.”
The growing threat of space warfare
Now, let us address the growing threat of space being used for warfare.
In 2019, the United States established its “Space Force”. This was taken as a joke and mocked by quite a few around the world until 2022, when reality soon caught up with the satire as Russia launched a hyper-sonic missile in its first destructive test of a direct-ascent anti-satellite weapon. This event signaled a new era where space warfare was no longer a concept to be joked about but a serious and imminent threat. A prime example of what followed was the use of “AcidRain malware” by Russia to disable Ukraine’s space-based assets.
In 2023, Houthi militants in Yemen launched a ballistic missile towards the Israeli town of Eilat. The Israeli Defense Forces successfully intercepted it with an Arrow 3 missile, marking the first time in history that a military conflict’s physical aspect occurred in space.Now, let us address the growing threat of space being used for warfare.
The strategic value of space
Space, particularly the area directly around Earth, has become increasingly valuable both economically and strategically. Satellites in orbit are used for everything from weather forecasting and navigation to internet connectivity and television broadcasts. These services are now crucial cogs of the modern world.
Geostationary orbits are located at about 22223 miles from Earth. Satellites in this orbit never move from the perspective of Earth — i.e as long as it’s placed on the equator, it will always stay right above that point. This narrow slice of space is incredibly busy, and is invaluable for services like television broadcasting and military communications. In addition, satellites in orbit are crucial for services like weather forecasting, navigation, internet connectivity. These services are not just conveniences; they are integral to the functioning of the modern world as we know it.
For instance, GPS technology, which relies on a constellation of satellites, is vital for everything from financial transactions to guiding agricultural machinery. The benefits of space-based technologies are immense, driving advancements in various sectors, including communication, navigation, and even pharmaceuticals
Vulnerabilities of satellites
Despite their importance, satellites are incredibly vulnerable. They can be easily tracked, and without any defensive geography in space, they are exposed targets. There is secrecy that comes with satellites but with a fundamental drawback. We do not know “what” it does, but we do know “where” it is. This vulnerability was recognized as far back as 1967, during the height of the space race, when the world’s nations drafted the Outer Space Treaty to prevent the militarization of space. However, the treaty left significant gaps, particularly regarding conventional arms in orbit.
Militarization and the Big 3
“Space has no defensive geography to maximize.” The militarization of space has been steadily increasing, with the United States, Russia, and China leading the way. Offensive space weaponry falls into two categories: kinetic weapons, which physically collide with satellites, and non-kinetic attacks, which render satellites unusable without direct contact. While the capabilities of these nations remain shrouded in secrecy, occasional tests and maneuvers provide glimpses of their potential.
The U.S. has demonstrated the ability to intercept satellites from space, Earth-to-Space and Space-to-Space attacks. US, along with Russia and China have demonstrated the capability to maneuver and survey satellites at almost all distances, during their satellites with their own Rendezvous and Proximity Operations.
The development of satellites with robotic arms and projectiles indicates a growing focus on offensive space capabilities. Kosmos 2543, a Russian satellite that was initially launched as a sub-satellite from the larger Kosmos 2542 in November 2019, was believed to be for observational purposes. However, in July 2020, Kosmos 2543 launched a projectile in space, which was viewed by the international community as a potential space weapon due to the projectile’s rapid relative speed. This event raised concerns about the satellite’s offensive capabilities and marked a significant moment in the discussion about the militarization of space
The Risks of Space Warfare
The implications of space warfare are profound. Unlike traditional warfare, where defensive geography can play a role, space offers no such protection. The robotic arm satellite, satellites inside of satellites, arms on satellites, and satellites as projectiles themselves have all taken to space in the last decade, and these are just the capabilities we are aware of! From a strategic standpoint, space warfare could rapidly spiral into a devastating chain reaction. Without any real defense, what is to stop a one-for-one response to an attack on a satellite? Taken together, these offensive capabilities still seem fairly rudimentary: targeted strikes, ramming, grappling etc. But the implications of using any such capability is staggering. A single attack on a satellite can create debris that jeopardizes other satellites, potentially leading to a cascade of collisions — a scenario often compared to mutually assured destruction in nuclear warfare.
From a strategic standpoint, space warfare could rapidly spiral into a devastating downward spiral. Without any real defense, what is to stop a one for one response to an attack on a satellite? This brings us to the ripple effect of attacks on satellites.
Space Debris and the Kessler Effect
Space debris, often referred to as “space junk,” consists of defunct satellites, spent rocket stages, and fragments from collisions or explosions in space. The Kessler Effect describes a scenario where the density of objects in low Earth orbit becomes so high that collisions between objects generate a cascade of additional debris. This debris, in turn, triggers further collisions, potentially leading to a situation where entire orbital regions become so cluttered that they are rendered unusable. The consequences of such a chain reaction could be catastrophic, disrupting critical satellite services such as GPS, weather forecasting, communications, and more. This would not only jeopardize military and civilian satellites but also threaten the long-term sustainability of space activities, making it a dire concern for the global community.
One stark example of the dangers posed by space debris occurred after Russia’s 2021 direct-ascent anti-satellite test. The resulting debris field increased the risk to the International Space Station (ISS), forcing astronauts to take shelter as a precaution. Even small fragments traveling at high speeds can cause significant damage, and with each new piece of debris, the likelihood of further collisions increases.
Mitigation of these risks?
The U.S. Department of Defense has developed a strategy focused on “architecture resilience,” building large constellations of satellites to ensure that no single satellite is crucial. This approach makes it harder for any adversary to significantly diminish U.S. space capabilities.
The Dangers of Full-Scale Space Militarization
The militarization of space poses significant risks to the benefits that satellites provide to humanity. Essential services like GPS, weather forecasting, and global communications are all at stake. As space becomes increasingly militarized, there is a growing concern that the same destructive potential seen in nuclear warfare could be mirrored in space.
The challenge lies in preventing the escalation of space warfare, as the technology used is conventional and easily accessible. While the world grapples with how to address these threats, the hope is that space warfare remains a theoretical defense rather than a devastating reality.
A Call for Non-Proliferation
We benefit immensely from the services that satellites provide. Entire sectors of the economy rely on global positioning systems, which are crucial for their existence. Meteorological satellites have enhanced forecasting accuracy, saving countless lives by improving our ability to predict severe weather. The technological divide between urban and rural areas is narrowing thanks to the connectivity provided by satellite internet. Moreover, the benefits of satellites are only increasing — each year, as launch costs decrease and technology advances, innovators continue to find new ways to harness the value that Earth’s orbit offers.
The parallels between nuclear and space militarization are striking. Just as nuclear non-proliferation has been a global priority, so too must the world focus on preventing the proliferation of space weaponry. The consequences of space warfare would be catastrophic, not just for the nations involved, but for the entire planet. The answers on how to solve this conundrum are not there yet. One can merely hope that all understand the implications of letting earthly conflict stretch into the stars, and that mutually assured destruction in space remains a theoretical form of defense, rather than a devastating reality.
As we continue to rely more on space-based technologies, it is imperative that international efforts focus on maintaining the peaceful use of space. The potential for conflict in space is growing, but with the right measures, it can remain a realm of cooperation rather than confrontation.
The future of space should be about cooperation, not conflict. What can we do to make sure space remains a peaceful frontier?
Let’s talk — do you think we need to militarize space, or should we focus on keeping it peaceful? Drop your thoughts in the comments.
I hope this article has offered valuable insights to all my readers. I would love to hear your thoughts and suggestions in the comments. Together, we can grow by sharing our knowledge and learning from one another.
P.S. I’ve just embarked on my blogging journey with Substack, and my colleagues suggested that I also share my work on Medium. I’d love for you to subscribe to my substack newsletter!
