 Staff
at NORAD -- the North American Aerospace Defense Command -- at Cheyenne
Mountain, Colo.
PETERSON AIR FORCE BASE, Colo. (AP) - As Russia and the Bush
Administration squabble over proposals for a U.S. anti-missile defense
system, planners at Air Force Space Command are drawing plans for
space-based equipment that would be far more advanced.
They have discussed ways to disrupt enemy
satellites, such as creating micropaint satellites that could fire
paintball-like substances to blind satellites or sending beams of light to
temporarily confuse satellite equipment.
For now, these are only concepts, said Col. Chuck
Carpenter, the Space Command's deputy director of plans and programs. But
the Space Command has other projects in the works and a 20-year plan to
guide them.
``Our charter is to think, think long and hard on
how to defeat potential adversaries,'' said Lt. Col. Dan Ziegler, the
Command's chief of strategy, policy and doctrine. The Space Command spends
$12 million to $15 million a year out of its $8.8 billion budget
researching space warfare concepts, according to Capt. Adriane Craig.
While the Space Command planners aren't advocating
covert space warfare,
there is a clandestine element to some of their ideas.
The tactics under consideration would temporarily disable a satellite
rather than cause permanent damage, giving the attacker ``a fair amount of
deniability,'' Carpenter said. A direct attack, on the other hand, could
be
considered an act of war, and blowing up a satellite could create debris that could damage U.S. satellites.
Planners fear the same satellite disabling techniques could also be used
against U.S. satellites at some point, including the increasingly crucial
global positioning systems run by Space Command at nearby Schriever Air
Force Base.
A national advisory commission headed by Donald Rumsfeld before he became
secretary of defense reported the nation's military and commercial
satellite
system risks a ``space Pearl Harbor'' without defensive measures.
Rumsfeld in May announced a major reorganization of the Pentagon space
programs to increase the importance of space in strategic planning.
However,
talk of building a national missile defense system has been widely
criticized by Russia and U.S. allies who say it would violate key security
treaties. China and France have also urged maintaining the non-militarization of space.
Ziegler said it is pointless to begin debating whether a micropaint
satellite or a space laser could be considered an offensive weapon,
because
``there is no sense in making a policy if we don't even have a weapon.''
``Thinking is not a violation of any treaty,'' Ziegler said.
Robert Pfaltzgraff, a senior analyst for the Institute of Foreign Police
Analysis in Cambridge, Mass., said planning for space-based warfare is
essential.
``If they are not looking at all these possibilities they are not earning
their keep as far as I am concerned,'' he said. ``I would hope that they
are
looking at all these technologies and more we do not know about. The
Russians have historically looked at as many of these things as they could
afford.''
In an interview with The Associated Press, Space Command planners laid out
the 20-year plan they presented to the Air Force, though it is only a
sketch of what's to come.
First on the agenda is a high-flying infrared sensor system to replace
existing launch-detection satellites. The planners declined to say how
much
time the new technology could shave off an early-warning alert.
After the high-flying sensor system is deployed, a lower-level infrared
system would be developed to guide defensive missiles to intercept
attacking
missiles. Both the high-flying and lower-level systems are in Space
Command's plan for the next six years.
Planners don't expect to have space-based radar before 2012.
A longer-range plan calls for sending up a demonstration version of a
laser
around 2020, though how such a laser might be used in space has yet to be
determined.
``Seventeen consecutive miracles are going to have to happen for us to get
there,'' said Carpenter, noting Space Command has to compete with other
services and even others in the Air Force for weapons money.
Also being considered is development of a shuttle that could carry weapons
to space and then release them to descend on their targets. The method
would
avoid stationing weapons in space, a potential violation of the 1972
Anti-Ballistic Missile treaty, considered a pillar of arms control and
deterrence.
Operating from space has been a dream for planners.
From a budget standpoint, ``space is a cheap place to operate. There is no
rent and no living costs,'' Lt. Col. Donald Magee said.
There are no plans to put troops in space, though. ``If we ever need boots
on the moon we will call the Army,'' Ziegler said.
|
