Results from the three-year Joint Space Control Operations-Negation (JSCO-N) program will support the acquisition of counter-satellite capabilities as well as development of procedures and training methods for those who might one day put them to use, according to the "FY 2004 Annual Report" from Thomas Christie, the Pentagon's director of operational test and evaluation.

Space control is military jargon for the ability to ensure one's own access to satellite capabilities while denying space-based services to adversaries. It encompasses both defensive measures designed to protect satellites as well as what the Pentagon refers to as negation -- measures to counter or destroy enemy satellite capabilities.

The report said the JSCO-N effort is focused on negation, which "may target an adversary's space capability by using a variety of permanent and/or reversible means to achieve five possible effects: deception, disruption, denial, degradation and destruction."

The program, led by U.S. Air Force Space Command and supported by the space branches of the Army and Navy, was initiated in March 1994 "to address the threat of an adversary using space to threaten friendly space-based services" such as communications, navigation and intelligence gathering, the report said. But the negation measures described in the report would be equally effective against satellites providing these same services to U.S. adversaries.

The JSCO-N effort includes three "field tests," according to the report, released in mid-January. The first of those, Terminal Fury 05, was scheduled to take place in December, according to the report. It was to be followed by Terminal Fury 06 and Unified Endeavor 06, according to the report.

"The JSCO-N made significant strides in drafting a concept document that captures current 'best practices' in command and control of space control negation capabilities," the report says. "JSCO-N has been conducting extensive coordination and liaison with space control negation operators and stakeholders."

U.S. Army Lt. Col. Chris Conway, a Pentagon spokesman, did not respond to a request for comment for this story.

Space control also is covered in a recently released Air Force document called the 2004 Transformation Flight Plan, which was posted online in early January. Unlike a previous version, the 2004 plan does not include a list of hardware and other systems that are needed for the space control mission.

The 2003 Transformation Flight Plan listed weapons including ground-based lasers, air-launched missiles and space-based radio frequency transmitters capable of disrupting or destroying other satellites.

But the updated plan reiterates the Air Force's intention to develop such systems. "The ability to deny an adversary's access to space services would be essential if future adversaries choose to exploit space in the same way the United States and its allies can," the 2004 Transformational Flight Plan, which was signed by Gen. John Jumper, Air Force chief of staff, and James Roche, the recently departed service secretary, states.

In fact, the Air Force has for at least the past few years been working on systems for neutralizing enemy satellite capabilities. The service announced in October 2004 that one such system, designed to disrupt satellite radio-transmissions, is now being fielded.

The 2004 plan describes temporary and reversible measures as preferred options for negating an adversary's space capabilities. Such temporary measures could include disrupting the flow of electrical power to an adversary's satellite ground stations, according to the plan.

Theresa Hitchens, vice president of the Center for Defense Information, a think tank here, said the two documents likely will be a cause for concern among foreign governments opposed to space weapons. The Air Force may have omitted a wish-list of anti-satellite systems in the 2004 Transformation Flight Plan to avoid triggering the international alarm bells that rang out after the previous version hit the streets, she said.

If that was the intent, the Pentagon may be in for a disappointment, said Hitchens, an outspoken opponent of space weapons. The fact that the Air Force is developing doctrine and conducting exercises in counterspace operations is "arguably scarier" than any list of desired space control hardware.

Jack Spencer, a senior defense analyst at the Heritage Foundation, another think tank here, said the omission of space control weapons from the 2004 Transformation Flight Plan was not necessarily driven by politics. The Air Force may have left the list out because it anticipates revising its plans for future high-tech systems amid tightening budgets and an upcoming Quadrennial Defense Review, he said.

Spencer said he was glad that the Air Force appears to be making space control a priority, but would like to see more of a commitment to deploying such systems.

"I'd like to see the doctrine translate into money being spent and metal being bent," Spencer said. "There has been plenty of good talk, but I'd like to see a little more walk."