space weapon technology and programs

Reaching Critical WillWomen's International League for Peace and Freedom

777 UN Plaza, 6th Floor, New York, NY 11377 Tel: 212.682.1265 Fax: 212.286.8211Email: [email protected] Web: http://www.reachingcriticalwill.org

Submission to the inquiry into“Australia’s Space Science and Industry Sector”

Contents

Space Weapon Technology and Programs— Space Weapon Contractors—Page 8 Fact Sheets on the Prevention of an Arms Race in Outer Space—Page 24

Space Weapon Technology and Programs

Aegis Ballistic Missile DefenseAegis Ballistic Missile Defense is the sea-based portion of the Ballistic Missile Defense system. It incorporates the Aegis Weapon System, the Lightweight Exoatmospheric Projectile Intercept, the Standard Missile-3, and the Navy Ballistic Missile systems. It is part of the Sea-based Midcourse Defense System.Prime Contractor: Lockheed MartinSubcontractors: Boeing, Computer Sciences Corporation, General Dynamics, L-3 Communications, Orbital Sciences Corporation, Honeywell, Raytheon

Airborne LaserThe Airborne Laser is intended to destroy hostile missiles right as they are launched, before the warheads separate from the missile. It consists of a chemical laser and beam director mounted on a Boeing 747. The laser is intended to disable the missile by hitting it long enough that the heat causes sufficient damage to the missile’s body to stop its acceleration, causing the warhead to fall short of its target. It also has anti-satellite capabilities.Prime Contractors: Boeing, Lockheed Martin, Northrop GrummanSubcontractors: Analytical Graphics, Inc., Honeywell

Alternative Infrared Satellite SystemThe Alternative Infrared Satellite System program is being designed as an alternative to the Space Based Infrared program. It is supposedly easier to build but more capable. The Alternative program is intended to provide missile warning and missile defense for the US beginning in 2015.Prime Contractor: General Dynamics

Arrow InterceptorThe Arrow Interceptor is a “fragmentation warhead” used to destroy incoming ballistic missiles.Prime Contractors: Boeing and Israel Aircraft Industries

Boeing Orbital Express System

Women’s International League for Peace and Freedom Page 1

The Boeing Orbital Express System is another project aimed at developing a fully autonomous (unmanned) satellite. Like the XSS, its primary objective is to refuel and service satellites on-orbit, and, also like the XSS, it has clear military applications.Prime Contractor: BoeingSubcontractors: Ball Aerospace, Honeywell, Northrop Grumman

Common Aero Vehicle/Hypersonic Technology VehicleThe Common Aero Vehicle was originally conceived as an unmanned spacecraft that would travel at five times the speed of sound, carrying 1,000 pounds of munitions or troops from the US to anywhere in the world within two hours. In 2004, the offensive strike part of the project was cancelled and the Common Aero Vehicle was renamed Hypersonic Technology Vehicle. However, Hypersonic Technology Vehicles will use the same transportation technology, leaving plenty of room for offensive vehicles in the future. In the President’s fiscal year 2008 budget request, $32.8 million was requested for the Hypersonic Technology Vehicle. The first test of the vehicle is scheduled for 2008-09.Contractors: Aerojet, Aerospace Corporation, Alliant Techsystems, Andrews Space, Raytheon, Schafer Corporation

Common Missile Warning SystemThis system was developed to warn tactical fighters against infrared missile threats and cue countermeasures to take out the missile.Prime Contractor: BAE

Counter-Man Portable Air Defense SystemsThe Counter-MANPADS program is an initiative launched in 2003 to install anti-missile systems on commercial airliners as a countermeasure against MANPADS. MANPADS are shoulder-launched missiles that are considered to be a particular threat to airplanes and helicopters. Former Secretary of State Colin Powell once warned that "no threat is more serious to aviation" than MANPADS, which are easy to use and readily available on the black market. A 2005 Rand study estimated it would cost $11 billion to protect every US airliner from MANPADS. In addition, Aviation Week reports, “The Bush Administration has spent more that $121 million researching counter-MANPADS measures since 2003, but DHS has never committed to acquiring any specific technology.”Prime Contractors: BAE, Northrop Grumman

Defense Support ProgramThe Defense Support Program is a satellite system that warns the US military of missile launches. The 23 satellites in the system use infrared detectors to sense heat from missile plumes, in order to detect missile launches, space launches, and nuclear detonations. Defense Support Program satellites have been the spaceborne segment of NORAD's Tactical Warning and Attack Assessment System since 1970, but they are to be replaced by the Space Based Infrared System.Prime Contractor: Northrop GrummanSubcontractors: Aerojet, Aerospace Corporation

Demonstration of Autonomous Rendezvous Technology space vehicleThe technology developed here will allow spacecraft to rendezvous with other spacecraft without human interaction. As with the XSS-11 microsatellite, the capacity that enables spacecraft to maneuver around others to service them can also allow it to destroy them.Prime Contractor: Orbital Sciences Corporation

Women’s International League for Peace and Freedom

Escort programEscort satellites carry sensors and lightweight missiles to defend distant satellites against an anti-satellite attack. They can permanently or temporarily disable large satellites, giving them the ability to carry out anti-satellite attacks themselves.Prime Contractor: AeroAstro

Exoatmospheric Kill VehicleThe Exoatmospheric Kill Vehicle is the intercept component of the Ground Based Interceptor, the weapon element of the Ground-based Midcourse Defense system. It is designed to take out hostile ballistic missile targets outside the atmosphere while the missiles are in flight.Prime Contractor: RaytheonSubcontractor: Lockheed Martin

Experimental Spacecraft System-10 (XSS-10)Precursor to the XSS-11.Prime Contractor: BoeingSubcontractors: Octant Technologies, Science Applications International Corporation

Experimental Spacecraft System-11 (XSS-11)The XSS-11 is a 100 kg microsatellite that is able to “meet” with other space objects in orbit, and maneuver close to them to inspect them or perform maintenance tasks. However, defense officials and technology experts agree that the XSS-11 could easily be used as an anti-satellite weapon: “The same capacity built into XSS-11 that enables it to maneuver around another satellite it is servicing can also allow the spacecraft to disable or destroy adversary satellites, if desired.” Theresa Hitchens of the Center for Defense Information in Washington and Jeffrey Lewis of Harvard University’s Belfer Center argue, “such a satellite could house a small kinetic-kill vehicle designed to smash into a nearby enemy satellite,” while an Air Force study “raised the possibility of borrowing technology from the Army's Kinetic Energy Anti-Satellite, or KE-ASAT, program for its own microsatellites.” Lewis points out that the study's “single strongest recommendation” was “the deployment, as rapidly as possible, of XSS-10-based satellites to intercept, image and, if needed, take action against a target satellite.” John Pike, director of GlobalSecurity.org, points out that by building the XSS-11 “to be relatively cheap and easy to launch, it also may be expendable and replaceable in an anti-satellite role.” One anonymous defense official agreed that the XSS-11 “doesn't need any modifications to kill a satellite . . . It's capable of doing all the missions that KE-ASAT is intended to do -- and then some. That's been proven in the flight test.”Prime Contractor: Lockheed MartinSubcontractors: Octant Technologies, Science Applications International Corporation

Force Application and Launch from Continental United States (FALCON)FALCON, a Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA)/Air Force project, originally intended to develop a reusable Hypersonic Cruise Vehicle, a Common Aero Vehicle, and a Small Launch Vehicle, a low-cost launch system. In 2004, however, FALCON became Falcon, the Common Aero Vehicle became the Hypersonic Technology Vehicle (without offensive capabilities), and in 2005 Lockheed Martin received $11.7 million for the second phase of the Small Launch Vehicle program.Contractors: Boeing, Lockheed Martin, Northrop GrummanSubcontractors: Aerojet, Aerospace Corporation, Alliant Techsystems, Andrews Space, SpaceX


Ground-based Midcourse Defense systemLocated in Fort Greeley, Alaska, with a sister-site at Vandenberg Air Force Base in California, the Ground-based Midcourse Defense system is the heart of the US missile defense system. It is designed to intercept long-range missiles headed for the continental US. This system is theoretically dual-use, as it will be capable of shooting down satellites – “a task that is considerably easier than shooting down an intercontinental ballistic missile because satellites travel in regular, predictable orbits.” However, serious technical issues have plagued the Ground-based Midcourse Defense system. In tests, the incerceptor rockets have failed to make it out of the launch tube, and the kill vehicles (the component designed to take out the incoming missile/warhead) have failed to separate from their rockets. It also has anti-satellite capabilities.Prime Contractor: BoeingSubcontractors: Alliant Techsystems, Bechtel Corporation, Computer Sciences Corporation, Honeywell, IBM, L-3 Communications, Lockheed Martin, Miltec Corporation, Northrop Grumman, Orbital Sciences Corporation, Raytheon, Schafer Corporation, SI International, University of California

Hypersonic Cruise VehicleThe Hypersonic Cruise Vehicle is part of the FALCON weapons system. It is intended to be a reusable, autonomous (unmanned) aircraft capable of taking off from a conventional runway and striking targets 9,000 nautical miles away in less than two hours. It will be able to carry 12,000 pounds, including Common Aero Vehicles/Hypersonic Technology Vehicles, cruise missiles, or bombs. Development is to be complete by 2025.Contractors: Alliant Techsystems, Andrews Space, Boeing, Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman

Hypersonic Demonstrator AircraftAlso known as HyFly, this is a hypersonic strike demonstrator vehicle that is intended to help develop the technology hypersonic missiles.Prime Contractor: BoeingSubcontractors: Aerojet, Alliant Techsystems

Hypersonic High-Speed Strike WeaponHyStrike is inteded to be a single hypersonic strike weapon that will be launchable from air, surface, and subsurface platforms. It will also be able to hit underground targets 12 meters deep, fly at speeds of Mach 4 (4900 km/hour), and change direction in flight by using a bending body joint.Contractor: Alliant Techsystems

Israeli Short Range Missile Defense programIsrael's Ministry of Defense is developing a new terminal missile defense interceptor for low-cost, short-range ballistic missile threats. Israel and the US have agreed to jointly develop a new Short Range Missile Defense (SRMD) capability that will complement its existing Arrow and Patriot PAC-2 GEM+ systems, one optimized via its design and cost to defend against rockets with ranges of 70 - 200 km.Prime Contractors: Raytheon, Rafael Armament Development Authority Ltd.

Kinetic Energy InterceptorKinetic Energy Interceptors are missiles which are launched into space to take out enemy missiles by smashing into them, rather than by exploding near them. Kinetic Energy Interceptors also have


potential applications as anti-satellite weapons, because the same technology is necessary to destroy incoming missiles and satellites.Prime Contractors: Northrop Grumman, RaytheonSubcontractors: Aerojet, Alliant Techsystems, Analytical Graphics, Inc., Ball Aerospace, Booz Allen Hamilton, Davidson Technologies, Inc., Miltec Corporation, Orbital Sciences Corporation, Science Applications International Corporation, Schafer Corporation

Lightweight Exoatmospheric Projectile Intercept programThe LEAP program is aimed at developing and integrating miniature kinetic energy (hit-to-kill) interceptors to be used in the Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense system. The LEAP kill vehicles are intended to intercept enemy missiles within a range of 1,000 to 2,000 km away, by honing in on the missile and destroying it by direct impact. The kill vehicles would also be able to reach low-altitude satellites for an anti-satellite attack. Prime Contractor: Lockheed MartinSubcontractors: Computer Sciences Corporation, General Dynamics, Orbital Sciences Corporation

Medium Extended Air Defense SystemThe Medium Extended Air Defense System is intended to replace the US’ aging anti-aircraft system; it is to provide coverage against both aircraft and cruise missiles. It is a cooperative effort between the US, Germany, and Italy.Prime Contractors: Lockheed Martin, Raytheon, and SiemensSubcontractor: Davidson Technologies, Inc.

Miniature Kill VehicleThe Army wants multiple small kill vehicles to be housed within a carrier vehicle and used against ballistic missiles in the midcourse stage of flight. They are intended to weigh 2-10 kilograms each, and are to be launched 12 to a rocket. Once launched, the rocket’s vehicle carrier would use its own sensors to distinguish warheads from decoys and to program the kill vehicles to attack multiple targets. Originally: Schafer CorporationPrime Contractor: Lockheed MartinSubcontractor: Davidson Technologies, Inc.

Mobile Tactical High Energy LasersMobile Tactical High Energy Lasers are intended to help develop and test the first mobile Directed Energy weapon system capable of detecting, tracking, engaging, and defeating rockets, cruise missiles, short-range ballistic missiles, and unmanned aerial vehicles. Funding was cut for this program in 2004. Prime Contractor: Northrop Grumman

Multiple Kill Vehicle Payload SystemThis system will be attached to an interceptor so that it can destroy the enemy’s reentry vehicle and any other countermeasures it has on board. The kill vehicles will separate from the interceptor to take out multiple targets.Prime Contractor: Lockheed MartinSubcontractor: Aerojet

Nanosatellites/Miniature SpacecraftMicrosatellites reduce manufacturing and launch costs, which means greater access to space for the


military.Contractors: AeroAstro, Rafael Armament Development Authority Ltd., MicroSat Systems, Inc., SpaceDev, Surrey Satellite Technology Limited

Near Field Infrared Experiment (NFIRE)NFIRE is composed of a satellite with an onboard sensor and laser communication terminal, as well as two ground-based control centres. It will also carry releasable kill vehicles. Its sensor is designed to distinguish between a missile and its plume. Controversy has arisen over its kill vehicles.Contractors: General Dynamics

Operationally Responsive SpaceliftThe Air Force began the Operationally Responsive Spacelift initiative in 2003. The goal of the program is to develop reusable rockets that could be launched at a low cost on short notice. Based on studies, the Air Force decided that the best way to achieve this capability is by developing a family of modular, hybrid launch vehicles. A hybrid vehicle consists of a reusable first stage with an expendable upper stage stack. The name given to this next-generation family of hybrid vehicles is Affordable REsponsive Spacelift (ARES). The system could be in place by 2014. Contractors: Aerospace Corporation, Andrews Space

Orbital Boost VehicleThe Orbital Boost Vehicle is used in the Ground-based Midcourse Defense segment of the US Ballistic Missile Defense program. It is designed to intercept and destroy long-range enemy missiles while they are in flight (as opposed to Kinetic Energy Interceptors, which are intended to intercept and destroy enemy missiles just after they are launched).Prime Contractor: Orbital Sciences Corporation

Patriot Advanced Capability-3 (PAC-3) MissileThe PAC-3 is the anti-ballistic missile of choice for the US Ballistic Missile Defense system. Prime Contractor: Lockheed MartinSubcontractors: Boeing, Davidson Technologies, Inc., Mitsubishi, Orbital Sciences Corporation, Raytheon

Payload Launch VehicleThe Payload Launch Vehicle was part of the Ground-based Midcourse Defense system. It was the booster that flew Raytheon Exo-atmospheric Kill Vehicle. During its last test in December 2002, the kill vehicle failed to separate from the launch vehicle. (More information...)Prime Contractor: BoeingSubontractor: Lockheed Martin

Sea-based Midcourse Defense systemFormerly the Navy Theater Wide system, the Sea-based Midcourse Defense system is composed of ship-based missile defense systems intended to intercept incoming missiles above the atmosphere. It incorporates the Standard Missile-3, Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense system, and the Lightweight Exoatmospheric Projectile Intercept program. It also has anti-satellite capabilities. Contractors: Boeing, Lockheed Martin, Raytheon

Sea-Based X-Band Radar


The Sea-Based X-Band Radar is a sensor that track targets for the Ground-Based Midcourse Defense system. Prime Contractor: Raytheon

Small Launch VehicleThe Small Launch Vehicle is part of the FALCON weapons system. The goal of the program is to develop an affordable space lift capability that can quickly launch a small satellites and Common Aero Vehicles/Hypersonic Technology Vehicles into orbit. Contractors: Andrews Space, Lockheed Martin, Microcosm, Inc., Orbital Sciences Corporation, Schafer Corporation, SpaceX

Space-Based Infrared SystemThe system consists of a constellation of satellites capable of tracking ballistic missiles throughout their course. It is designed to operate worldwide 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. Prime Contractor: Lockheed Martin, Northrop GrummanSubcontractors: Aerospace Corporation, Davidson Technologies, Inc., Honeywell, Raytheon

Space Based Laser Integrated Flight ExperimentThe Space Based Laser Integrated Flight Experiment was intended to be a single satellite carrying a laser payload, a beam director, and related beam control systems. The program was cancelled in 2002. Prime Contractors: Boeing, Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman

Space Based Surveillance SystemThe Space Based Surveillance System detects and tracks space objects such as satellites and debris. The Department of Defense intends to use its data to support military operations. Prime Contractor: Northrop GrummanSubcontractors: Aerospace Corporation, Boeing, Ball Aerospace

Space Tracking and Surveillance SystemThis system will be able to detect and track ballistic missiles as well as potential ground-based kinetic energy anti-satellite weapons.Prime Contractor: Northrop GrummanSubcontractors: Aerospace Corporation, Analytical Graphics, Inc., General Dynamics, Raytheon

Standard Missile-3The Standard Missile-3 is a ballistic missile that destroys incoming ballistic missiles outside the earth’s atomosphere. It is an integral component of the Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense System. Prime Contractors: Boeing, RaytheonSubcontractor: Aerojet, Alliant Techsystems, Honeywell, L-3 Communications, Mitsubishi

Submarine-Launched Intermediate Range Ballistic Missile SystemThis system is designed to deliver a conventional missile from a submarine to targets more than 1100 miles away in 10-15 minutes. Prime Contractors: Alliant Techsystems, Lockheed Martin

Terminal High-Altitude Area Defense (THAAD)THAAD is a ground-based system that provides rapidly deployable missile defense components –


missiles, launchers, radars, fire control – that can take out incoming missiles at ranges beyond the immediate defended area. This allows the system to destroy enemy targets at various stages of their flight. THAAD is also integrated with the Aegis system, and uses PAC-3 missiles.Prime Contractor: Lockheed MartinSubcontractors: Aerojet, Analytical Graphics, Inc., Boeing, Davidson Technologies, Inc., Orbital Sciences Corporation, Raytheon

Track Illuminator LaserThe Track Illuminator Laser is designed to record information about incoming ballistic missiles right when they are launched, by projecting rapid, powerful pulses of light towards the missile. The light is reflected back to a camera, data from which is used to obtain information about the threat’s speed and elevation. It will be used in the Airborne Laser program.Prime Contractor: Boeing, Lockheed Martin, Northrop GrummanSubcontractors: Raytheon, Schafer Corporation

Upgraded Early Warning RadarUpgraded Early Warning Radar consists of updated versions of early warning radar systems used by the US. The upgrades allow the radar to search for different types of missiles, distinguish hostile objects such as warheads from other objects, and provide this data to other NMD elements using improved communications systems.Prime Contractor: Raytheon

Vertical Launching SystemThe Vertical Launching System is a type of missile-firing system used aboard submarines and ships.Contractors: BAE, L-3 Communications, Lockheed Martin, Mitsubishi, Raytheon


Space Weapon Contractors

Alliant Techsystems

ATK’s background in both weapon systems and space systems has made it a successful subcontractor in the missile defense and space weapons industry. It helps that an ATK board member, Admiral David E. Jeremiah, US Navy (ret.), was part of Rumsfeld’s commission on national security uses of space. This commission produced a document arguing the US should avoid international agreements that limit the deployment of weapons in space, and that the US needs to “develop the capability for power projection in, from, and through space.”

1. Alliant's Scramjet propulsion technology, already used by NASA, is now used in Department of Defense projects such as the Hypersonic Cruise Vehicle. This aircraft is a reusable unmanned vehicle that can travel at hypersonic speeds. It is an integral part of the Force Application and Launch from Continental United States (FALCON) program’s goal “to provide Prompt Global Strike capability to any location in the world in under two hours.” 2. ATK also provides rocket motors for space launch vehicles, stategic missiles, global strike missiles, satellites, and missile defense interceptors. In 2006, ATK received a $90 million contract to provide rocket motors to the Ground-based Missile Defense program. ATK was also selected to support a study of the Kinetic Energy Interceptor project for the US Missile Defense Agency. Kinetic Energy Interceptors are to be used in the US Ballistic Missile Defense System to take out enemy missiles en route. They also have potential applications as anti-satellite weapons. The US Navy gave Lockheed Martin and ATK $9.2 million to develop a rocket launcher suitable for the Submarine-Launched Intermediate Range Ballistic Missile System. Lockheed Martin and ATK demonstrated their launcher for the US Navy in January 2007.

ATK’s website proclaims, “ATK’s rocket motors represent a national asset, offering an affordable and sustainable way to implement America’s new space exploration initiative.”

Affordable? The Department of Defense requested more than a billion dollars from the US budget for fiscal year 2008 to fund space weapon and missile defense projects.

Not to mention the sad irony that ATK’s rocket motors are used to launch missiles and other weapons that will inevitably destroy space infrastructure and cluter space with debris, preventing the exploration of space.

Bechtel

1. When it is not building nuclear power plants, Bechtel is heavily involved in constructing Ballistic Missile Defense System command and control centers, and maintaining support structures at these bases. In Fort Greeley, Alaska, Bechtel has completed construction of the initial phase of the Ground-based Midcourse Defense system, which is the heart of the US missile defense system.

The Ground-based system is designed to intercept long-range missiles headed for the continental US. However, it is theoretically dual-use, as it will be capable of shooting down satellites – “a task that is considerably easier than shooting down an intercontinental ballistic missile because satellites travel in


regular, predictable orbits.” However, serious technical issues have plagued the Ground-based Midcourse Defense system. In tests, the incerceptor rockets have failed to make it out of the launch tube, and the kill vehicles (the component designed to take out the incoming missile) have failed to separate from their rockets. These failures are not necessarily surprising, given that the same company that built the missile defense control centers also designed the ceiling of Boston’s Big Dig tunnel that collapsed and killed a mother of three in July 2006.

2. Bechtel also manages the operation of a missile defense test range at Kwajalein Atoll in the Marshall Islands, under the charge of the US Army Space and Missile Defense Command. The work conducted there plays a central role in the development of the next generation of US long-range missiles and nuclear delivery systems. Both ballistic missiles and ballistic missile interceptors are tested here: missiles are launched from the Vandenberg Air Force Base in California 7000 kilometers from the Marshall Islands, while interceptors are launched from the Kwajalein site. It is worth noting that the Marshall Islands is also where the US conducted 67 nuclear weapon tests between 1946 and 1958, leaving behind a legacy of radioactive poisoning.

3. Bechtel is also one of three corporations that joined with the University of California in 2006 to manage and operate the Los Alamos National Laboratory, under a contract worth up to $79.7 million per year. The Laboratory’s Center for Space Science and Exploration is currently developing nuclear power and propulsion systems for outer space exploration. It also builds small satellites and satellite instruments that are used for space surveillance of threats to the US’ space assets.

Boeing

1. Boeing’s missile defense contracts more than doubled from $1,350 million in 2001 to $2,930 million in 2004, in large part due to increased spending on missile defense. As a member of the US Air Force’s Intercontinental Ballistic Missile Prime Integration team, Boeing will provide engineering, flight controls, ground subsystems, and weapons systems testing for the US Intercontinental Ballistic Missile fleet until 2012. 2. Boeing is the prime contractor for the Pentagon’s largest missile defense effort, the Ground-based Midcourse system. Boeing is currently developing, testing, and integrating all components for the system.

3. Boeing’s design for the Ground-based system’s Exoatmospheric Kill Vehicle was rejected in favor of Raytheon’s design – not because it was technologically inferior, but because it stole the design from Raytheon. The Center for Defense Information reports, “The Department of Defense spent $800 million over eight years to determine whether Boeing or Raytheon would win the EKV contract, only to be forced to hastily call off the competition in December 1998 and award it to Raytheon after discovering Boeing employees had misused proprietary software of Raytheon's.” 4. This incident did not prevent Raytheon and Boeing from teaming up to work on the Standard Missile-3. The two companies were contracted by the US Missile Defense Agency to build the


Standard Missile-3, which is intended to be used to knock out incoming ballistic missiles, for the Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense System (which is part of the Sea-based Midcourse Defense System). 5. Boeing is also one of Lockheed Martin’s subcontractors for the production of Patriot Advanced Capability (PAC-3) Missiles. The PAC-3 is used to destroy tactical ballistic missiles, cruise missiles, aircraft, and potentially satellites. The PAC-3 missile system is to be used with Lockheed Martin’s Terminal High Altitude Area Defense Weapon System. This system is intended to smash into “enemy” objects outside areas currently covered by the US’ missile defense shield, enlarging the “battlefield” during space wars. Boeing built the propulsion system, which provides the Terminal High Altitude Area Defense Weapon System interceptor with the ability to maneuver as it closes in on its targets.

6. Boeing built the Experimental Spacecraft System-10 (XSS-10), the first in a series of XSS mirosatellites. The XSS is intended to inspect, maintain, and repair orbiting spacecraft “at a lower cost and more quickly than an alternative program of replacement from the ground.” However, defense officials and technology experts agree that the XSS microsatellites have dual-applications as anti-satellite weapons. Theresa Hitchens and Jeffrey Lewis of the Center for Defense Information in Washington argue, “such a satellite could house a small kinetic-kill vehicle designed to smash into a nearby enemy satellite,” while the Air Force's 1999 Microsatellite Technology and Requirements Study “raised the possibility of borrowing technology from the Army's Kinetic Energy Anti-Satellite, or KE-ASAT, program for its own microsatellites.” Boeing’s XSS-10 proved in its test flight that it does not need any modifications to kill a satellite.

7. The Boeing Orbital Express System is another project aimed at developing a fully autonomous (unmanned) satellite. The contract, given to Boeing by the US Defense Advanced Research Project’s Agency, is worth over $100 million. Like the XSS-10, its primary objective is to refuel and service satellites on-orbit, and, also like the XSS-10, it has clear military applications. The concept of an autonomous satellite has been riddled with questions of technical and financial feasibility. Multiple tests of unmanned objects, such as the Demonstration of Autonomous Rendezvous Technology satellite, have ended in failure. Aviation Week asks who would be willing to risk billions of dollars on this technology – the answer is apparently Boeing.

General Dynamics

General Dynamics is the US’ leading producer of nuclear submarines, including the infamous Trident ballistic missile submarine. The nuclear-powered Trident submarines are the core component of the sea-based element of the United States “strategic deterrent forces.” Each submarine carries six Trident II missiles, each of which in turn carry six nuclear warheads, for a total of 144 warheads per sub. Most of the warheads are about 100 kilotons, seven times more powerful than the bomb dropped on Hiroshima. Some of the warheads are around 450 kilotons, or 30 times the Hiroshima bomb.

Since the release of the US Nuclear Posture Review and the announcement of the Prompt Global Strike Mission in 2001, Trident submarines have been subject to a number of upgrades including adaptability for cruise missiles and the new Submarine Launched Intermediate Range Ballistic Missile which is equipped with a 1,000-pound conventional payload capable of hitting a target 1,200 miles away within 15 minutes of being launched.

General Dynamics’ contributions to these submarines include the following contracts:


1. A General Dynamics subsidiary, Electric Boat, receives regular contracts from the US Navy for nuclear engineering services. Its facility in Groton, CT, maintains and operates nuclear reactors propulsion systems for Los Angeles, Trident, and Seawolf submarines, and the nuclear research submarine NR-1.

2. General Dynamics Advanced Information Systems is contracted to produce missile launcher subsystems for Trident submarines. The hardware and software included in the package monitor the submarines’ missile tubes and control the launching of missiles.

3. General Dynamics Advanced Information Systems is also contracted to help the Navy upgrade its nuclear submarines’ weapons systems to the new Trident II D5 missiles. The company is converting the weapons laboratories at the Navy’s Trident Training Facility in Bangor, WA to become fully D5-capable. The naval base in Bangor, which houses 2,364 nuclear warheads, is home to the largest stockpile (about 24%) in the US arsenal.

4. General Dynamics also designs, develops, and produces the Attack Weapon Control System for Trident submarines, extending the life of the ships and increasing their ability to attack and destroy targets abroad.

For more information on Trident and the Bangor base, see the Ground Zero Center for Nonviolent Action, http://www.gzcenter.org/.

Northrop Grumman

1. Northrop Grumman’s missile defense contracts increased fivefold from $104 million in 2001 to $534 in 2004, largely due to its acquisition of TRW, a major missile defense and space contractor. Now one of the top four missile defense contractors, Northrop Grumman is a major player in the emerging space weapons industry.

2. In June 2003, Northrop Grumman became the prime contractor on the eight-year, $4.5 billion Kinetic Energy Interceptor project for the US Missile Defense Agency. Kinetic Energy Interceptors are intended to be launched into space to take out enemy missiles by smashing into them. Kinetic Energy Interceptors also have potential applications as anti-satellite weapons, because the same technology is necessary for an attack on satellites. Northrop Grumman’s work on the Space Based Laser Integrated Flight Experiment, cancelled in 2002, could also be applied to the design of satellites capable of destroying objects in space by crashing into them. This laser experiment was intended to consist of a single satellite carrying a laser and beam controls; it would theoretically have been able to target missiles from space, rather than from the ground.

3. Northrop Grumman has supplied the North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD)’s missile attack warning system with satellites and sensors since 1970. Now, Northrop Grumman is developing a sensor for the Missile Defense Agency’s Space Tracking and Surveillance System. The sensor will detect possible hostile satellites, and relay data to missile interceptors. The 2002 contract is worth $868.7 million. As prime contractor, Northrop Grumman is responsible not just for the senor but also for two satellites and engineering support. Northrop Grumman has also developed sensors for the missile-tracking Space-Based Infrared System. The


http://www.gzcenter.org/

system consists of a constellation of satellites capable of tracking ballistic missiles throughout their flight course. It is designed to operate worldwide 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. Northrop Grumman is responsible for the program’s design, and integration with the Ballistic Missile Defense system.

4. Along with Boeing and Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman is a member of the Airborne Laser team selected by the US Air Force. The Airborne Laser is intended to destroy hostile missiles right as they are launched, before the warheads separate from the missile. Northrop Grumman’s task is to design and develop the system’s Chemical Oxygen Iodine Laser and the Beacon Illuminator Laser.

6. Northrop Grumman also contributes engineering and analysis to the Ground-based Midcourse Defense Fire Control/Communications System, which guides the interceptors to their targets. Meanwhile, for the Missile Defense Agency’s Joint National Integration Center, Northrop Grumman handles modeling and simulation for testing components of the US missile defense system.

Raytheon

1. As one of the four top missile defense contractors, Raytheon's missile defense contracts nearly tripled between 2001 and 2004, from $225 million to $647 million. 2. Raytheon designed a sensor for the Missile Defense Agency’s Space Tracking and Surveillance System that detects possible enemy satellites and relays data to missile interceptors. Raytheon also provides sensors for the Sea-Based X-Band radar, the Space-Based Infrared System, and the Upgraded Early Warning Radar, which track targets for the Ground-Based Midcourse Defense system.

3. Under subcontract to Lockheed Martin, Raytheon provides a radar system for the Terminal High-Altitude Area Defense program. Raytheon’s radar component is designed to detect and destroy incoming ballistic missiles. Lockheed Martin also subcontracted Raytheon to develop the Track Illuminator Laser for the US Air Force’s Airborne Laser program. This laser is designed to record information about incoming ballistic missiles right when they are launched, by projecting rapid, powerful pulses of light towards the missile. The light is reflected back to a camera that records data, which is used to obtain information about the missile’s speed and elevation.

4. Raytheon also builds interceptors, which are objects designed to take out enemy missiles or other space objects while they are in orbit. Its Exoatmospheric Kill Vehicle is designed to destroy ballistic missile targets outside the atmosphere, while the missiles are in flight. In addition, Raytheon is the lead subcontractor to Northrop Grumman on the eight-year, $4.5 billion Kinetic Energy Interceptor project for the US Missile Defense Agency.Kinetic Energy Interceptors have potential applications as space-based (they do not have to be launced from the ground in order to attack their targets) anti-satellite weapons, as they are designed to knock out a variety of space objects. Raytheon is developing the kill vehicle, while Northrop Grumman is working on systems engineering and integration.Raytheon, along with Alliant Techsystems and Boeing, also designed the Standard Missile-3, a ballistic missile that destroys incoming ballistic missiles outside the earth’s atomosphere. It is an integral component of the Sea-based Missile Defense System.

CorpWatch has described Raytheon as a company that “loves big noises and large civilian casualty counts.” While missile defense or space warfare do not directly result in casualties, per se, its aerospace contributions are nonetheless in keeping with this assessment. The destruction of commerical and


military space assets, through deliberate attack or space debris, would immeasurably disrupt civilian lives around the world.

Other Space Weapon Contractors

AeroAstroThough it was founded only in 1988 and employs about 60 people, AeroAstro manages to contribute significantly to the weaponization of space. It specializes in the development of microsatellites and nanospacecraft. One of AeroAstro’s current projects is the Air Force-funded Escort program. Escort satellites carry sensors and lightweight missiles to defend distant satellites against an anti-satellite (ASAT) attack. They can permanently or temporarily disable large satellites that appear threatening. Of course, the technology used to defend against an ASAT attack is the same technology necessary to conduct an ASAT attack, illustrating the fine line between defensive and offensive ASAT systems.

Programs and Products:- Escort program- Microsatellites Headquarters: Ashburn, VAWebsite: http://www.aeroastro.com/

AerojetAerojet is a major space and defense contractor specializing in missile and space propulsion and precisicion tactical weapon systems. It works on ramjet and scramjet propulsion for missiles, and is developing combined cycle propulsion for hypersonic cruise and space access applications. Founded in 1942, Aerojet's first product—Jet Assist Take Off rocket motors—provide launch power for US military planes during World War II. During the 1950s and 1960s, Aerojet built the world's largest site for rocket engine development, testing, and production at a facility near Sacramento, California. This site is now Aerojet's headquarters, and is a site of missile and space propulsion operations. In the 1970s and 1980s, Aerojet worked primarily in the field of space electronics, including satellite sensors for weather forecasting and missile detection. It also developed specialized warheads, air-dispensed munitions systems,medium-caliber ammunition, and "smart" weapons for use against tanks and other armored vehicles. In 2001, Aerojet bought General Dynamics' Space Systems and Atlantic Research Corporation, adding to weight to their already heavy hand in the aerospace industry. Today, Aerojet "is well-positioned to benefit from the increased focus on and funding of defense and space programs."

Programs and Products:- Common Aero Vehicle/Hypersonic Technology Vehicle- Defense Support Program- Force Appication and Launch from Continental United States (FALCON)- Hypersonic Demonstrator Aircraft- Kinetic Energy Interceptor- Multiple Kill Vehicle Payload System- Standard Missile-3- Terminal High Altitude Area Defense

Headquarters: Sacramento, CA


Website: http://www.aerojet.com/

Aerospace CorporationFounded in 1960, Aerospace Corporation is a federally-funded research and development center that supports military and commercial space programs. It was created by the US Air Force Ballistic Missile Division to “serve the Air Force in the scientific and technical planning and management of its missile space programs.” In the 1960s to the 1990s, Aerospace supported programs such as the Advanced Ballistic Rentry System, the Defense Satellite Communications Systems, the Defense Support Program, and anti-satellite technology tests. Today, it provides support to the Defense Support Program, the Space Based Infrared System program, the Space Based Surveillance System, the Space Tracking and Surveillance System, and the Airborne Laser program. Aerospace Corporation also evaluates technical and financial implications of emerging military and commercial space launch systems, including the Force Application and Launch from Continental United States (FALCON) program, which is working on the Common Aero Vehicle - now the Hypersonic Technology Vehicle. (See Schafer Corporation for more information on the Hypersonic Technology Vehicle.) Aerospace Corporation has also provided development support for the Operationally Responsive Spacelift, which will allow the US Air Force to rapidly put payload-bearing spacecraft into orbit and maneuver the spacecraft to any point in space.

Programs and Products:- Airborne Laser- Common Aero Vehicle/Hypersonic Technology Vehicle- Defense Support Program- Force Appication and Launch from Continental United States (FALCON)- Operationally Responsive Spacelift- Space Based Infrared System- Spaced Based Surveillance System- Space Tracking and Surveillance System

Total Defense Contracts, 1998-2003: $2,494,160,391Campaign Contributions, 1998-2003: $11,988 (Democrat), $26,995 (Republican) Headquarters: El Segundo, CAWebsite: http://www.aero.org/

Analytical Graphics, Inc.Analytical Graphics, Inc. provides software to national security and space professionals for integrated analysis of land, sea, air, and space assets. Its products support applications in battlespace management, geospatial intelligence, space systems, and national defense programs, and its software is used in projects such as the Airborne Laser, Terminal High Altitude Area Defense Weapon System, Space Tracking and Surveillance System, and Kinetic Energy Interceptor. The Satellite Tool Kit developed by Analytical Graphics is a program for simulation and visualization of space and missile operations.

Programs and Products:- Airborne Laser- Kinetic Energy Interceptor- Space Tracking and Surveillance System- Terminal High Altitude Area Defense


Headquarters: Exton, PAWebsite: http://www.stk.com/

Andrews SpaceFounded in 1999, Andrews Space provides space systems technology for the Department of Defense and NASA. It has worked on projects such as the Operationally Responsive Spacelift, and the Hypersonic Cruise Vehicle, Common Aero Vehicle, and Small Launch Vehicle for the FALCON weapons system.

Programs and Products:- Common Aero Vehicle/Hypersonic Technology Vehicle- Hypersonic Cruise Vehicle- Operationally Responsive Spacelift- Small Launch Vehicle

Headquarters: Seattle, WAWebsite: http://www.andrews-space.com/

Ball AerospaceBall Aerospace is owned by Ball Corporation, a metal and plastic packaging supplier. Ball Aerospace was formed in 1956 by a group of scientists from the University of Colorado to build controls for miltary rockets. It was later given a contract to build one of NASA’s first spacecraft, the Orbiting Solar Observatory. Ball now provides imaging, communications, and information technologies to the aerospace defense industry. It is part of Boeing’s Orbital Express team, which intends to demonstrate autonomous techniques for on-orbit refueling, reconfiguration, and repair of satellites. Ball provided Northrop Grumman’s Tactical High Energy Laser team with beam alignment and stabilization assembly. This team has demonstrated that directed energy weapons can successfully track and destroy multiple missies in flight. Ball is also working on Northrop Grumman’s Kinetic Energy Interceptor project and Space Based Surveillance System. It nearly doubled its sales in the last five years, to $672.3 million in sales in 2006, and employs about 3000 people.

Programs and Products:- Boeing Orbital Express System- Kinetic Energy Interceptor- Mobile Tactical High Energy Laser- Space Based Surveillance System

Headquarters: Boulder, COWebsite: http://www.ballaerospace.com/

Booz Allen HamiltonBooz Allen is a global consulting firm with more than 18,000 employees on six continents. It is currently conducting a study for the US government on its space industrial base to determine the industry’s capabilities and viability over the next 15 years. Booz Allen also receives contracts for specific missile defense and space weapon projects. For example, it provides performance analysis and systems engineering and integration for Northrop Grumman’s Kinetic Energy Interceptor project, and


support on the Missile Defense Agency’s project to test the national missiles defense system.

Programs and Products:- Ground-based Midcourse Defense System- Kinetic Energy Interceptor

Total Defense Contracts, 1998-2003: $3,031,707,940Campaign Contributions, 1998-2003: $43,020 (Democrat), $162,650 (Republican) Headquarters: McLean, VAWebsite: http://www.boozallen.com/

Carlyle GroupCarlyle Group is a private investment firm that “invests in the opporunities created in industries strongly affected by changes in government policies.” It has tred controversial waters since its inception, employing high-profile people with political connections. The Bush family in particular has strong connections to the firm. It has been noted that George W. Bush will be able to benefit financially from his own administration’s decisions, through his father’s investments. Carlyle is the leading private equity investor in the aerospace and defense industries, completing 23 transaction representing a combined purchase total of more than $7.4 billion.

Total Defense Contracts, 1998-2003: $9,334,962,462Campaign Contributions, 1998-2003: $507,821 (Democrat), $1,132,124 (Republican) Headquarters: Washington, DCWebsite: http://www.carlyle.com/eng/index.html

Computer Sciences Corporation (CSC)CSC is a major Department of Defense contractor for missile defense engineering, software development, and systems integration, and has held contracts with the Missile Defense Agency since 1988. Under a $250 million contract, CSC engineered the Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense Weapon System software in 2005. The software guides interceptors to incoming ballistic missiles. Currently, Aegis Weapon Systems software is on 68 US Navy cruisers and destroyers stationed around the world, and there are plans to install the system on an additional 18 destroyers. CSC was also contracted to provide scientific, engineering, and technical support to the Ground-based Midcourse Defense program.

Programs and Products:- Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense System- Ground-based Midcourse Defense System Total Defense Contracts, 1998-2003: $6,789,832,719Campaign Contributions, 1998-2003: $91,540 (Democrat), $243,900 (Republican) Headquarters: El Segundo, CAWebsite: http://www.csc.com/

Davidson Technologies Inc.Founded in 1996, Davidson Technologies provides management, technical, and engineering services to the government and to missile defense prime contractors such as Boeing, Lockheed Martin, and


Raytheon. The President of Davidson Technologies, Dr. Julian Davidson, was the first Director of the Advanced Ballistic Missile Defense Agency responsible for all US ballistic missile defense advanced technology development. After leaving the government, he held management positions with Science Applications International Corporation and Booz Allen Hamilton. He was also a chairman of the Technology Assessment Committee of the US Space Command.

Programs and Products:- Kinetic Energy Interceptor- Medium Extended Air Defense System- Miniature Kill Vehicle- Patriot Advanced Capability-3 Missile- Space Based Infrared System- Terminal High Altitude Area Defense Weapon System

Headquarters: Huntsville, ALWebsite: http://www.davidson-tech.com/

HoneywellHoneywell Space Systems designs, developes, and produces control systems and subsystems for satellites, launch vehicles, missile defense, and strategic missiles. As a component supplier for various defense projects, Honeywell’s products include navigation systems for satellites, electronics, satellite launchers, and missile defense boosters. It has participated in many Boeing and Orbital Sciences missile defense projects, and hopes to extend into the Japanese missile defense industry. With over $1 billion in space- and missile defense-related sales per year, Honeywell is the largest non-prime contractor in the aerospace industry.

Programs and Products:- Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense- Airborne Laser- Boeing Orbital Express System- Ground-based Midcourse Defense System- Space-Based Infrared System- Standard Missile-3

Total Defense Contracts, 1998-2003: $6,135,622,361Campaign Contributions, 1998-2003: $348,577 (Democrat), $809,134 (Republican) Headquarters: Phoenix, AZWebsite: http://www.honeywell.com/

L-3 CommunicationsL-3 is a prime contractor in command, control, and communications, and surveillance and reconnaissance for many industries, including missile defense. It provides sensor and instrumentation design, system integration, and aircraft modification to the US ballistic missile defense system. In 2001, L-3 purchased Coleman Research, which specializes in making targets that are used to simulate incoming warheads in missile defense tests. In 2005, L-3 absorbed Titan Corporation, which is an IT firm that, among other things, produces targeting systems for missile defense. This acquition made L-3 the sixth largest defense contractor in the US.


Programs and Products:- Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense- Ground-based Midcourse Defense System- Standard Missile-3- Vertical Launching System

Total Defense Contracts, 1998-2003: $5,233,392,435Campaign Contributions, 1998-2003: $155,850 (Democrat). $185,710 (Republican)Headquarters: New York, NYWebsite: http://www.l-3.com; http://www.titan.com/

Microcosm, Inc.Established in 1984, Microcosm is a space systems engineering firm that specializes in reducing space mission costs. Microcosm developed the Scorpius family of liquid-fueled small rockets for the Pentagon under a $25 million per year contract. Microcosm’s Sprite Mini-Lift vehicle, part of the Scorpius family, is designed to be launched on eight hours’ notice. US Air Force Brig. Gen. Simon “Pete” Worden, who is in charge of briefing the Pentagon on this initiative, has said that small communication and reconnaissance satellites, and weapons for striking in space or on the ground, are among the possible payloads for quick reaction launchers such as Sprite. It is contracted to develop a Small Launch Vehicle for the FALCON program.

Programs and Products:- Force Application and Launch from Continental United States (FALCON)- Small Launch Vehicle

Headquarters: El Segundo, CAWebsite: http://www.smad.com/ns/nsframessr3.html

MicroSat Systems, Inc.Founded in 2001, MicroSat is a small business that designs, builds, integrates, tests, and operates satellites. It also builds spacecraft subsystems, such as data storage and solar arrays. MicroSat's primary focus is on small satellite systems that enable multiple satellites to be launched as secondary payloads on larger launch vehicles, or single satellites on smaller space launch vehicles, for one quarter to one tenth the cost of launching conventional satellites.

Programs and Products:- Microsatellites

Headquarters: Littleton, COWebsite: http://www.microsatsystems.com/

Miltec CorporationMiltec specializes in the design, development, integration, and testing of missiles and aerospace technologies. Miltecs’ Kinetic Warhead Evaluation is computer code that predicts damage to a ballistic missile payload from interaction with a Kinetic Energy Weapon. Miltec also provides a variety of optics and electronics analysis, design, integration, and test capabilities for infrared systems and lasers,


supporting various segments of the US missile defense system.

Programs and Products:- Kinetic Energy Interceptor- Ground-based Midcourse Defense System

Headquarters: Huntsville, ALWebsite: http://www.miltecmissiles.com/

Octant TechnologiesSince 1997, Octant has provided engineering services to aerospace companies and the US government on all aspects of control systems design, simulation, and implementation, with an emphasis on spacecraft systems. Octant was responsible for the flight software, mission simulator, and onboard guidance, navigation, and control for both the [Experimental Spacecraft System] XSS-10 and XSS-11 projects.

Programs and Products:- Experimental Spacecraft System-10 (XSS-10)- Experimental Spacecraft System-11 (XSS-11)

Headquarters: San Jose, CAWebsite: http://www.octanttech.com/

Orbital Sciences CorporationOrbital was founded in 1982 to “make space technology more affordable, accessible, and useful to millions of people on Earth.” Since then, Orbital has helped develop space technology that endangers civil space assets and makes outer space less accessible to people on Earth. Over the last ten years, Orbital has provided launch vehicles for various US missile defense systems, including the Kinetic Energy Interceptor program, the Experimental Satellite System-11 (XSS-11), and the Space-Based Surveillance System. Orbital also built the Orbital Boost Vehicle, which is used in the Ground-based Midcourse Defense system. It is designed to intercept and destroy long-range enemy missiles while they are in flight. Orbital also designs, builds, and launches target vehicles for programs such as the Patriot Advanced Capability-3 (PAC-3) Missile, the Terminal High Altitude Area Defense Weapon System, the Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense Program, and Lightweight Exoatmospheric Projectile Intercept missile defense programs. Target vehicles are “threat simulators” used to test missile defense systems. Orbital also designed, built, and launched the Demonstration of Autonomous Rendezvous Technology space vehicle under a $47 million NASA contract. The technology developed here will allow spacecraft to rendezvous with other spacecraft without human interaction. As with the XSS-11 microsatellite, the capacity that enables spacecraft to maneuver around others to service them can also allow it to destroy them. The debris created by such collisions cluters outer space and inadvertently destroys other space assets. With its range of products, Orbital isn’t really making space affordable to “millions of people” so much as it is capitalizing on the global space market, which exceeds billions of dollars each year.

Programs and Products:- Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense- Demonstration of Autonomous Rendezvous Technology


- Experimental Satellite System-11 (XSS-11)- Ground-based Midcourse Defense System- Kinetic Energy Interceptor- Lightweight Exoatmospheric Projectile Intercept- Orbital Boost Vehicle- Patriot Advanced Capability-3 (PAC-3) Missile- Space-Based Surveillance System- Terminal High Altitude Area Defense Weapon System

Total Defense Contracts, 1998-2003: $606,017,074Campaign Contributions, 1998-2003: $47,500 (Democrat), $313,948 (Republican) Headquarters: Dulles, VAWebsite: http://www.orbital.com/

Rafael Armament Development Authority Ltd.Rafael is a former subdivision of the Israeli Ministry of Defense and is considered a governmental firm. Rafael’s space systems division develops and manufactures propulsion systems for micro- and minisatellites. Rafael has partnered with Raytheon to develop a missile defense interceptor for the Israel Defense Forces. The design for the kinetic energy interceptor is based on Lockheed Martin’s PAC-3 missile. The partnership allows Raytheon to ensure the interceptor is compatible with the US military’s missile defense systems, thus providing the US with a low-cost air defense option for the future.

Programs and Products:- Israeli Short Range Missile Defense program- Microsatellites

Headquarters: Haifa, IsraelaWebsite: http://www.rafael.co.il/

Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC)SAIC’s involvement with the aerospace industry ranges from space station and shuttle safety contracts with NASA to engineering and software contracts with private companies and US government agencies on missile defense and space weapon technology. SAIC worked on both the Experimental Spacecraft Satellite-10 and –11 (XSS-10 and XSS-11) microsatellites, developed by Boeing and Lockheed Martin respectively. SAIC is also a systems engineering subcontractor on the Kinetic Energy Interceptor project. In 2004, SAIC was given an $18 million extention on their contract from the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) to conduct a study into the feasibility of integrating NATO’s various missile defense systems. Not surprisingly, after determining that the integration was possible, SAIC received a $95 million contract to design and operate the integration procedures. Duane P. Andrews, Executive Vice-President of SAIC, was part of Rumsfeld’s commission on national security uses of space. This commission argued the US should avoid international agreements that limit the deployment of weapons in space, and that the US needs to “develop the capability for power projection in, from, and through space.” SAIC’s missile defense contracts more than tripled between 2001 and 2004, from $47 million to $169 million.

Programs and Products:


- Experimental Spacecraft Satellite-10 (XSS-10)- Experimental Spacecraft Satellite-11 (XSS-11)- Kinetic Energy Interceptor

Defense Contracts, 1998-2003: $10,598,835,883Campaign Contributions, 1998-2003: $773,913 (Democrat), $1,339,501 (Republican) Headquarters: San Diego, CAWebsite: http://www.saic.com/

SI InternationalSI provides information technology and networking solutions to the US military in areas of space and missile defense systems engineering, military satellite communications, command and control systems, and net-centric warfare technology. It’s goal is to design integrated information systems that can “extend US dominance in the exploitation of space.” Customers include the Missile Defense Agency, Air Force Space Command, and NORAD.

Programs and Products:- Ground-based Midcourse Defense System

Headquarters: Reston, VAWebsite: http://www.si-intl.com/

Space Development Corporation (SpaceDev)SpaceDev, founded in 1997, designs, manufactures, markets, and operates micro- and nanosatellites, hybrid rocket-based orbital manueuvering and orbital transfer vehicles, and sub-orbital and orbital hybrid rocket-based propulsion systems. SpaceDev has been awarded contracts by NASA, Boeing, the Missile Defense Agency, and the US Air Force.


Headquarters: Poway, CAWebsite: http://www.spacedev.com/

Space Exploration Technologies Corporation (SpaceX)SpaceX is developing a family of launch vehicles that will “reduce the cost and increase the reliability of space assets”. Established in 2002 by the founder of PayPal and Zip2 Corporation, SpaceX has already developed two launch vehicles and been awarded a $100 million contract to launch satellites on its Falcon rockets for the US Air Force’s DARPA/FALCON program. It is also contracted to develop a Small Launch Vehicle for FALCON.

Programs and Products:- Force Application and Launch from Continental United States (FALCON)- Small Launch Vehicle

Headquarters: El Segundo, CAWebsite: http://www.spacex.com/


Surrey Satellite Technology Limited (SSTL)SSTL was formed in 1985 by the University of Surrey to commercialize the results of its small satellite engineering research. It has taken part in 23 small satellite missions, from concept development to in-orbit operations. In 2000, SSTL built SNAP-1, a nanosatellite capable of “inspecting” other satellites in-orbit – in testing, SNAP-1 came within nine meters of another satellite and took pictures. SSTL insists its satellites are for peaceful uses only, “although its collaboration with the Chinese government on the 2000 mission has raised a few eyebrows among US military officials, prompting some to speculate on whether China is secretly developing ‘parasitic satellites’ as space weapons.”


Headquarters: Guildford, UK (University of Surrey)Website: http://www.sstl.co.uk/


Fact Sheets on the Prevention of an Arms Race in Outer Space

Preventing an Arms Race in Outer SpaceA backgrounder on the militarization and weaponization of outer space

DefinitionsMilitarization of Outer Space: Space has been militarized since the earliest communication satellites were launched. Today, militaries all over the world rely on satellites for command and control, communication, monitoring, early warning, and navigation with the Global Positioning System. Therefore, “peaceful uses” of outer space include military uses, even those which are not at all peaceful—such as using satellites to direct bombing raids or to orchestrate a “prompt global strike” capability, which is “the ability to control any situation or defeat any adversary across the range of military operations.”

Weaponization of Outer Space: Space weaponization is generally understood to refer to the placement in orbit of space-based devices that have a destructive capacity. Many experts argue that ground-based systems designed or used to attack space-based assets also constitute space weapons, though are not technically part of the “weaponization of outer space” since they are not placed in orbit. Some also argue that weapons that travel through space in order to reach their targets, such as hypersonic technology vehicles, also contribute to the weaponization of space. Many elements of the US ballistic “missile defense” system currently being developed or planned could constitute space weapons as well, as many possess “dual-use” characteristics, allowing them to destroy space assets as well as ballistic missiles.

Preventing an Arms Race in Outer Space (PAROS): The overwhelming majority of UN member states are concerned that the weaponization of outer space will lead to an arms race and insist that a multilateral treaty is the only way to prevent such an arms race, emphasizing that this treaty would not limit space access, but would prevent such limitations. In 2006, Russia argued that if all states observe a prohibition on space weaponization, there will be no arms race. Russia and China also support establishing an obligation of no use or threat of use of force against space objects and have submitted a draft treaty to the UN on preventing the placement of weapons in outer space. (See the fact sheet on Outer Space and the United Nations.)

Effects on arms control and nuclear disarmamentThe weaponization of space will destroy strategic balance and stability, undermine international and national security, and disrupt existing arms control instruments, in particular those related to nuclear weapons and missiles. These effects will inevitably lead to a new arms race. Space weaponization would seriously disrupt the arms control and disarmament process. The United States' withdrawal from the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty in 2001 and the development of US ground- and sea- based “missile defenses” have already increased tensions with Russia and have led to increased missile proliferation.

The deployment of these technologies or the development of space-based technologies will likely cause Russia, as well as the United States (in response to Russia), to make smaller and smaller reductions of their nuclear arsenals and to reject the development of new treaties to regulate nuclear weapons and their delivery systems. China would likely build more warheads to maintain its nuclear deterrent, which could in turn encourage India and then Pakistan to follow suit.


The United States: The biggest obstacle to keeping space for peaceThe United States is aiming to dominate outer space militarily. While as far as anyone knows there are currently no weapons deployed in space, the US policy on outer space is concerning. In the US National Military Strategy, the Joint Chiefs of Staff urge for “full spectrum dominance” and the 2006 US National Space Policy explains that the US will “preserve its rights, capabilities, and freedom of action in space; dissuade or deter others from either impeding those rights or developing capabilities intending to do so; take those actions necessary to protect its space capabilities; respond to interference; and deny, if necessary, adversaries the use of space capabilities hostile to US national interests.”

The United States rejects treaties “limiting its actions” in outer space. Furthermore, US space policy firmly opposes “the development of new legal regimes or other restrictions that seek to prohibit or limit US access to or use of space,” and insists that “proposed arms control agreements or restrictions must not impair the rights of the United States to conduct research, development, testing, and operations or other activities in space for US national interests.” In a United Nations forum in 2006, a US State Department official said, “The high value of space systems has led the United States to study the potential of space-related weapons to protect our satellites from potential future attacks, whether from the surface or from other spacecraft. As long as the potential for such attacks remains, our Government will continue to consider the possible role that space-related weapons may play in protecting our assets.”

The United States is developing space weapons and further entrenching its economy in the military-industrial complex. The Department of Defense requested more than a billion dollars from the US budget for fiscal year 2008 to spend on programs that could provide anti-satellite and space-based weapons capabilities. Dozens of aerospace defense contractors are taking advantage of the Bush administration’s push for increased spending on space domination. While the technology itself is highly controversial, it presents major business opportunities to companies that know how to overcome moral, logistical, and financial roadblocks.

War has always been highly profitable, and dominance of outer space leads to further profits in conventional warfare. As the Air Force Space Command stated in its 2003 Strategic Master Plan, “the ability to gain space superiority (the ability to exploit space while selectively disallowing it to adversaries) is critically important and maintaining space superiority is an essential prerequisite in modern warfare.” Superiority in conventional warfare relies on military assets in space, especially satellites, which are used for intelligence, remote sensing, navigation, and monitoring, among other things. Since the US currently asserts its political will through force, protection of its own space assets and disturbance of others’ is key to guaranteeing US dominance.

Outer Space and the United NationsA backgrounder on what is being done to prevent an arms race in outer space at the UN

For many years, a ban on weapons in outer space has been a potential subject for disarmament negotiations within the United Nations. Several multilateral UN fora have taken up the issue:

United Nations General AssemblyThe United Nations General Assembly is consensus-building body, where issues of international peace and security are collectively discussed among all UN member states. Its regular session convenes in September of each year, and after two weeks of General Debate, it breaks up into six specialized


committees. Every member state is entitled to participate in each of the committees, where they consider proposals relevant to the substantive topics covered by the committee, and recommend resolutions for adoption by the General Assembly. While these resolutions are not legally binding, they can be normative—that is, they can indicate the establishment of customs, standards, and guidelines for appropriate behavior. Resolutions adopted by consensus also indicate substantive areas of agreement that are ripe for negotiation and can enable the creation of new treaties and the emergence of international legal norms. Furthermore, they demonstrate global governmental opinion, showing which governments support peace and security, and which choose to remain outside of or even impede the development of international cooperative security.

The General Assembly's work on disarmament is conducted through one of its main committees, the First Committee on Disarmament and International Security. Each year in the First Committee and then again in the General Assembly as a whole, a resolution on the prevention of an arms race in outer space (PAROS) is introduced and adopted by an overwhelming majority of UN member states. In fact, every country in the world votes in favor of negotiating a treaty on PAROS—except for the US, which has voted “NO” for the past three years, and Israel, which has abstained. The US administration argues that the existing multilateral arms control regime is sufficient, and that there is no need to address a non existent threat. As one US representative said in 2006, “there is no—repeat, no—problem in outer space for arms control to solve.”

The PAROS resolution reaffirms the importance of the 1967 Outer Space Treaty, saying that PAROS efforts are in conformity with that Treaty. However, the resolution also notes that the current outer space legal regime “does not in and of itself guarantee the prevention of an arms race in outer space.” The PAROS resolution calls for states, especially those with space capabilities, to refrain from actions contrary to the objective of PAROS and to “contribute actively” to that objective. It argues for consolidation and reinforcement of the outer space legal regime, and says the Conference on Disarmament (see below) is the place for a new treaty on PAROS to be negotiated.

A PAROS treaty would complement the 1967 Outer Space Treaty, which aims to preserve space for peaceful uses, if it prevented the use of space weapons and the development of space-weapon technology and technology related to so-called “missile defense.” A PAROS treaty would also prevent any nation from gaining a further military advantage in outer space and would hopefully reduce current military uses of outer space.

In recent years, the UN General Assembly has started to move beyond merely calling on the Conference on Disarmament to commence negotiations on PAROS, to recommending measures on transparency and confidence-building in outer space. Many states have called on space-capable states to guarantee transparency in their outer space activities and to engage in confidence-building measures. In 2005, 2006, and 2007, Russia has introduced a resolution on transparency and confidence-building measures in outer space activities. As with the PAROS resolution, the overwhelming majority of member states vote in favour of this resolution, with only the US objecting and Israel abstaining.

In 2007, the UN Secretary General released a report on “Transparency and confidence-building measures in outer space,” which contained perspectives on the matter from Austria, Bangladesh, Kenya, and Portugal on behalf of the European Union. The European Union proposed the development of a comprehensive code of conduct on space objects and space activities, and suggested guidelines for the general principles, scope, and participation for such a code. The EU is planning to submit a code of


conduct to the Conference on Disarmament for further consideration.

Conference on Disarmament (CD)PAROS has been a longstanding agenda item in the CD, the primary body where UN disarmament treaties are negotiated. The Conference established an “ad hoc committee” on PAROS in 1985 to examine and identify “through substantive and general consideration, issues relevant to [PAROS].” This committee lasted until 1994, though it made little progress. Annual CD reports suggested that the Western group of states, and in particular one state—presumably the United States—had been blocking the negotiation of a treaty banning weapons in space, or a treaty banning anti-satellite weapons, despite having made a proposal along these lines in 1981 that helped lead to the establishment of the ad hoc committee. The US stated openly in 1990 that it “has not identified any practical outer space arms control measures that can be dealt with in a multilateral environment.”

The CD did not reestablish the ad hoc committee in 1995. Since negotiating the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty in 1996, the CD has been unable to reconvene any ad hoc committee or pursue negotiations on any subject. Despite this deadlock, certain states, particularly Russia and China, have continued to push for the CD to negotiate measures related to PAROS. In 2002, they submitted a joint working paper on “Possible Elements for a Future International Legal Agreement on the Prevention of the Deployment of Weapons in Outer Space, the Threat or Use of Force Against Outer Space Objects.”

In 2008, Russia and China submitted a draft treaty for a ban on weapons in outer space to the CD, based on the elements outlined in their 2002 working paper. The US administration dismissed the proposal out-of-hand, characterizing the offer to make preserve space for peaceful uses “a diplomatic ploy by the two nations to gain a military advantage.” (See fact sheet on the draft treaty for more information.)

UN Committee on Peaceful Uses of Outer Space (COPUOS)Also referred to as the Outer Space Committee, COPUOS was established in 1959 by the UN General Assembly in resolution 1472 (XIV) to review international cooperation in and devise UN programmes related to the peaceful use of outer space, encourage research and dissemination of information on outer space, and consider legal issues arising from the exploration of outer space. The Committee, which has 67 member states, and its two subcommittees—the Scientific and Technical Subcommittee and the Legal Subcommittee—meet annually in Vienna and their decisions are implemented by the UN Office for Outer Space Affairs.

In June 2007, COPUOS adopted debris mitigation guidelines, which had been developed by a working group on space debris in the Scientific and Technical Subcommittee over the past few years. The guidelines include measures to be considered for mission planning, design, manufacture, and operational (launch, mission, and disposal) phases of spacecraft and launch vehicle orbital stages. Member states have pledged to implement these guidelines within their national licensing or other applicable mechanisms “to the greatest extent feasible.”

The 2007 session of COPUOS also agreed on a draft resolution on the practice of states and international organizations in registering space objects to be submitted to the General Assembly, and approved a workplan for the United Nations Platform for Space-based Information for Disaster Management and Emergency Response (UN-SPIDER).


Preventing the placement of weapons in outer spaceA backgrounder on the draft treaty by Russia and China

On 12 February 2008, the Foreign Minister of Russia introduced a draft treaty, submitted by Russia and China, to the Conference on Disarmament (CD), the UN's primary body for negotiating disarmament treaties. The draft treaty is called the “Treaty on the Prevention of the Placement of Weapons in Outer Space, the Threat or Use of Force Against Outer Space Objects”—also known as PPWT.

The draft PPWT is the first draft treaty on outer space formally introduced to the CD, though it is based on elements proposed in a working paper to the CD in June 2002 by Russia, China, Viet Nam, Indonesia, Belarus, Zimbabwe, and Syria.

Overview of the draft treatyThe preamble of both the 2002 paper and the draft treaty emphasizes the need to keep outer space free from “military confrontation” and open to peaceful uses and exploration for the “development of humankind”. It also notes that while existing arms control and disarmament agreements relevant to outer space “play a positive role ... in regulating outer space activities,” they are insufficient to “effectively prevent the placement of weapons and an arms race in outer space.” It argues for “examination of further measures in the search for effective and verifiable bilateral and multilateral agreements in order to prevent an arms race in outer space.”

The draft treaty’s articles expand upon the elements contained the 2002 working paper. It defines certain terms, such as “outer space,” “outer space object,” and “weapons in outer space.” It specifies that the latter means

any device placed in outer space, based on any physical principle, specially produced or converted to eliminate, damage or disrupt normal function of objects in outer space, on the Earth or in its air, as well as to eliminate population, components of biosphere critical to human existence or inflict damage to them.

It subsequently explains, “a weapon will be considered as ‘placed’ in outer space if it orbits the Earth at least once, or follows a section of such an orbit before leaving this orbit or is stationed on a permanent basis somewhere in outer space,” and describes “use of force” or “threat of force” as meaning

any hostile action against outer space objects including, inter alia, those aimed at their destruction, damage, temporarily or permanently injuring normal functioning, deliberate alteration of the parameters of their orbit, or the threat of these actions.

The draft goes on to explain that states parties to the treaty undertake not to place in orbit “any objects carrying any kind of weapons,” not to install them on celestial bodies or other space structures, not to use or threaten to use force against outer space objects, and not to encourage any other parties to do so. It emphasizes the treaty will not impede the rights of states parties “to explore and use outer space for peaceful purposes in accordance with international law.” For matters of transparency and compliance, the draft provides for voluntary confidence-building measures. On verification and compliance enforcement, the draft provides for the possibility of subsequent negotiation of an additional protocol and for the establishment of an executive organization for the treaty, which will consider complaints of treaty violations, organize and conduct consultations with states parties, and “take measures to put an end to the violation of the Treaty by any State Party.”


Analysis of the draft treatyThe draft treaty does not settle all of the questions government and non-government experts have asked over the years, such as:

• What implications will the current militarization of space have for this treaty? Space has been militarized since the earliest communication satellites were launched; today, militaries all over the world rely heavily on satellites for command and control, communication, monitoring, early warning, and navigation. Most states accept that “peaceful purposes of outer space” include military uses, even those which are not at all peaceful—such as using satellites to direct bombing raids or to orchestrate a “prompt global strike” capability. The use of space objects to conduct war on Earth is not addressed by this treaty.

• The militarization of space also presents many problems of “dual use technologies”—some space objects can be used for commercial or military purposes or as weapons. The draft treaty does not address how it will deal with dual-use space-based objects. Would any space object that can be maneuvered to intentionally crash into another space object be considered a space weapon? It is advertised as an autonomous rendezvous space-based object intended to fix other space objects, but its capacity to maneuver around another satellite also allows it to disable or destroy its target.

• Many experts have asserted a treaty should also ban ground-based weapons aimed at attacking space assets, including ground-based ballistic missile defense systems. However, intercontinental ballistic missiles and missile interceptors, which could be used to attack space objects, travel on a sub-orbital trajectory. While some might travel through space, they never maintain sufficient velocity to achieve orbit. The draft treaty says states parties shall not “resort to the threat or use of force against outer space objects,” but it does not restrict the development, testing, or deployment of missile defense systems or other ground-based anti-satellite systems, only systems placed in orbit or installed on structures or bodies in outer space.

• The draft treaty does not ban development or testing of space weapons, only their use. So then, would China’s test in January 2007 of an anti-satellite weapon or the US shoot-down of a failed satellite in 2008 be considered a violation of the treaty? If states are allowed to continue developing and testing weapons, won’t this defeat the stated purpose of the treaty—which is ostensibly “strategic stability” and “political equilibrium”.

• There are many diverging opinions on verification of a PPWT: some have argued for a normative treaty without verification provisions, others say it cannot be effectively verified, and some argue that verification should not be separated from other aspects of the treaty and that it should be addressed in the course of negotiations. The indication that verification “may” be covered by an additional protocol suggests the possibility of no or limited verification measures.

Media reactionThe mass media presented the introduction of the draft treaty as a “showdown” between the United States and Russia/China over “competing international treaties, one banning the production of nuclear materials and the other trying to prevent an arms race in space.” The Washington Times quoted an unidentified US official as saying, “We put our FMCT [fissile materials cut-off treaty] draft forward in May 2006 and have been pushing it all along, before there was any talk of a treaty on outer space.”


This statement is incorrect, because an ad hoc committee on PAROS was established in the CD in 1985, the UN General Assembly has adopted annual resolutions on PAROS with an overwhelming majority for over twenty years (according to China’s Foreign Minister Yang Jiechi), and Russia and China introduced possible elements for a PAROS treaty in 2002 (see above).

The Washington Times further (mis)reported, “Now Russia and China have linked negotiations on the FMCT” to the PPWT. Russia and China actually used to link the two items, and if they did so now it would be nothing new, as the Times suggests it is. However, in 2007 Russia agreed to adopt the compromise programme of work proposed by the CD's rotating presidents, which called only for negotiations on an FMCT, thus dropping its linkage to PAROS. The Chinese delegation rejected this programme of work, and continues calling for a “balanced and comprehensive programme of work,” though it has not specifically demanded simultaneous negotiations this year.

The Associated Press reported that Washington called the introduction of the draft “a diplomatic ploy by the two nations to gain a military advantage,” and said Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov’s introduction of the treaty “came with an implied threat.” It noted Minister Lavrov’s comment “that the nuclear arms race was started with a view to preserving the monopoly to this type of weapons [sic], but this monopoly was to last only four years,” implying Lavrov meant Russia would “catch up” to the United States in developing space weapons just as it did with nuclear weapons. However, unreported by the Associated Press, Lavrov went on to lament the waste of material and other resources on weapons “at the expense of finding solutions to the problem of development.”

In addition, the Associated Press reported, “Washington rejects the [draft treaty] because it feels it is only directed at U.S. military technology and allows China and Russia to fire ground-based missiles into space or use satellites as weapons of war.” This statement exemplifies the spin put on issues that challenge US military dominance—the draft treaty would prohibit the use of space-based weapons by all states parties, not just the United States, and does not limit any state party’s use of ground-based missiles, not even the United States’.

The Associated Press article goes on to report, “The U.S. says it is committed to ensuring the use of space for peaceful purposes, but insists that it will pursue programs to ensure that its satellites and other spacecraft are protected.” However, the US delegation stood alone in voting against the annual PAROS resolution in the UNGA in 2005–2007, and released a National Space Policy in October 2006 opposing “the development of new legal regimes or other restrictions that seek to prohibit or limit US access to or use of space,” and arguing it will continue to “dissuade or deter others from impeding [its right to operate in space] . . . and deny, if necessary, adversaries the use of space capabilities hostile to US national interests.” In addition, its programs to “protect” its satellites and other spacecraft include some of the most aggressive technologies yet to be unleashed on the international community. Minister Lavrov noted in his introduction

It is well known that there is inseparable relationship between strategic offensive and defensive armaments ... The desire to acquire an anti-missile “shield” while dismantling the “sheath”, where the nuclear “sword” is kept is extremely dangerous. And if one also places on the balance pan the “global lightning strike” concept providing for striking with nuclear and conventional strategic means targets in any point of the Globe in a matter of an hour after a relevant decision has been made, the risks for strategy stability and predictability become more than obvious.

Response to the draft treaty in the CD


Response to the draft in the CD has been limited, though several delegations have publically offered their perspectives in plenary meetings:

Argentina: On 3 March, Argentina's Foreign Minister Mr. Jorge Taiana welcomed the draft treaty. He suggested it could be fruitful to establish an ad hoc committee on the issue to explore it further.

Algeria: On 14 February, Algeria's Ambassador Hamza Khelif took note of draft PPWT, and indicated his delegation has communicated it to their capital for consideration. He said he would like discussions on the issues of outer space to provide sufficient time to examine the proposal. However, the draft PPWT is based on elements proposed in 2002 and on substantive discussions that took place in the CD in 2006 and 2007—it should not be new information for capitals.

Brazil: On 14 February, Ambassador Paranhos of Brazil welcomed the draft PPWT. In the past, the Brazilian delegation has been a strong proponent in the CD of preventing the weaponization of outer space, and in his farewell statement, Ambassador Paranhos said, “It is of utmost importance that this negotiating forum takes the lead in ensuring that the outer space remains a peaceful domain.”

Canada: On 12 February, welcoming “Russia’s efforts to energize discussions” on PPW, Canada’s Ambassador Grinius said his delegation had “submitted detailed comments” on the draft. He also highlighted the Hague Code of Conduct (HCOC) as “a valuable and existing” transparency and confidence-building measure (TCBM) and suggested it would be unrealistic to create TCBMs ones when “existing ones ... are regrettably falling into disuse.” Ambassador Grinius also argued, “the dividing lines between civil and military issues in space are increasingly irrelevant in practical terms,” and called for greater cooperation among the UN’s space-related institutions and between the UN Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space and the CD.

European Union: On 28 February, Mr. Jerman of Slovenia, on behalf of the European Union, said work is needed to achieve consensus on definitions and an “effective and robust verification system” for an outer space security treaty. He argued, “it is not sufficient to only refer to a possible future additional protocol” as suggested in the draft PPWT. In the meantime, Mr. Jerman said, the EU “wishes to focus on a pragmatic and incremental approach,” through transparency and confidence-building measures. The EU plans to present these measures to the CD for discussion. They will presumably be based on the concrete proposals that the EU submitted to the Secretary-General, which were included in his report of 17 September 2007.

Germany: On 19 February, Ambassador Bernhard Brasack of Germany welcomed the draft treaty. He argued, “Clear delimitations between purely peaceful uses and distinct military uses have become a meaningless fiction. Just as an example: Space tracking and surveillance capabilities for monitoring debris, following satellites for avoiding potential collisions, inherently also have a potential for offensive space applications.” With this in mind, Ambassador Brasack suggested elaboration through discussion on three issues “not yet sufficiently covered by the draft”: the relationship between a potential new instrument and the existing ones, particularly the Outer Space Treaty; the dangers posed by the development and testing of anti-satellite weapons; and compliance and verification mechanisms. He also remarked, however, that “meaningful discussions” in the CD on space security issues “will only be possible if the CD agrees to a Programme of Work.”

Group of 21: On 28 February, speaking on behalf of the Group of 21, Syria’s Ambassador Faysal


Khabbaz Hamoui raised concerns over the inadequate existing legal instruments “to deter further militarization of outer space or prevent its weaponization” and emphasized the necessity of further measures that effectively provide for verification. He further lamented the development of missile defense systems and other “advanced military technologies ... which have, inter alia, contributed to the further erosion of an international climate conducive to the promotion of disarmament and the strengthening of international security.” Ambassador Hamoui argued, “it is time to start negotiation in the Conference on Disarmament on matters related to the Prevention of Arms Race in Outer Space,” and referred to UNGA Resolution 62/20, which recommends the establishment of an ad hoc committee in the CD in 2008. He said the draft treaty submitted by Russia and China “is a good basis for further discussion toward adopting an international binding instrument.”

Kazakhstan: On 4 March, the Foreign Minister of Kazakhstan welcomed the draft treaty in the CD.

Malaysia: On 14 February, Malaysia's Ambassador Hsu King Bee said the draft PPWT is “a positive step,” and expressed hope “that the CD would set an objective to approach the issues in a comprehensive manner, engaging in structured substantive discussions with a view for an early commencement of negotiations, for an international legally binding treaty.” She also proposed the “establishment of Ad Hoc Committee with the appropriate mandate agreeable to all,” and called for a “moratorium on the testing of all kinds of weapons and on the deployment of weapons in outer space.”

Netherlands: On 4 March, the Foreign Minister of the Netherlands welcomed the draft treaty in the CD.

Romania: On 4 March, the Foreign Minister of Romania welcomed the draft treaty in the CD.

Sri Lanka: On 12 February, Sri Lanka’s Ambassador Dayan Jayatilleka congratulated China and Russia’s collaboration on the draft PPWT and “did not see why a fissile material treaty should take priority over the draft treaty submitted.”

Switzerland: On 14 February, Ambassador Jürg Streuli of Switzerland welcomed the draft treaty, though he said, “a number of technical and legal points still needed to be worked out,” and recognized the need to overcome “significant political obstacles.”

Ukraine: On 4 March, the Foreign Minister of Ukraine welcomed the draft treaty in the CD. Minister Khandogiy suggested that substantial discussion on outer space in the CD should focus on providing greater transparency of space programmes; expanding the scope of information about space objects in orbit; and developing rules of behaviour while performing activities in space, including establishing a Code of Conduct.

More information

Reaching Critical Willwww.reachingcriticalwill.org

Global Network Against Weapons and Nuclear Power in Spacewww.space4peace.org

Western States Legal Foundationwww.wslfweb.org


Space Security Indexwww.spacesecurity.org

These fact sheet were produced by the Reaching Critical Will project of the Women's International League for Peace and Freedom.web: www.reachingcriticalwill.org email: [email protected]


space weapon technology and programs

Documents