![]() ![]() Space Command - which had been deactivated since 2002 - and create the U.S. in a ‘long-term strategic competition’Ī competition for space dominance between the United States and rival powers China and Russia prompted the Trump administration and Congress in 2019 to re-establish U.S. “e are only starting to grapple with… what space warfighting really means,” Shaw said. Conceivably, naval or aerial forces would be called upon to take retaliatory action. If that happened, the Defense Department would have to decide how to respond to that threat. Those questions are now being debated as Space Command develops what Shaw describes as “space warfighting doctrine.” A laser blinding a satellite is just an example of the types of attacks the U.S. “But how do we change that? How do we make it more difficult for a potential adversary to think they could succeed in depriving us of our space capabilities?” John Hyten, the vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, “likes to talk about satellites as being ‘big fat juicy targets.’” “It is impossible to overstate the importance of space-based systems to national security,” Air Force Secretary Frank Kendall said in a keynote speech at the symposium. ![]() But as the Pentagon has grown increasingly dependent on space, satellites are becoming strategic assets and coveted targets for adversaries. Military space assets like satellites and ground systems typically have been considered “support” equipment that provide valuable services such as communications, navigation data and early warning of missile launches. satellites from attacks and figuring out how to respond if hostile acts do occur. This puts Space Command in charge of protecting U.S. Space Command is responsible for military operations in the space domain, which starts at the Kármán line, some 100 kilometers (62 miles) above the Earth’s surface. the protection afforded by the IHL rules that restrict belligerents' choice of means and methods of warfare, including in outer space, on the understanding that acknowledging the applicability of IHL neither legitimizes the weaponization of or hostilities in outer space, nor in any way encourages or justifies the use of force in outer space.U.S.the potentially significant human cost for civilians on earth of the use of weapons in outer space.The ICRC recommends that future national and multinational discussions and processes acknowledge: conclusions and recommendations that States are invited to consider.the existing limits to such use under international law, notably the Outer Space Treaty, the UN Charter and international humanitarian law, including prohibitions and limitations on the use of certain weapons, means and methods of warfare,.the potential human cost of the use of weapons in outer space,.In line with its humanitarian mission and mandate, the International Committee of the Red Cross submits this position paper to the United Nations Secretary-General to contribute its expertise to the discussion on the issues outlined in General Assembly Resolution 75/36. This is because technology enabled by space systems permeates most aspects of civilian life, making the potential consequences of attacks on space systems a matter of humanitarian concern. The use of weapons in outer space – be it through kinetic or non-kinetic means, using space- and/or ground-based weapon systems – could have significant impacts on civilians on earth. While space objects have been employed for military purposes since the dawn of the space era, the weaponization of outer space would increase the likelihood of hostilities in outer space, with potentially significant impacts for civilians on earth. People are offered satellite phone connection in order to contact family members to inform them that they are safe. ICRC initiates restoration of family links to residents living in tents. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |