DOCSLIB.ORG

Space and Defense Issue

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Space and Defense Issue SPACE and DEFENSE Volume Five Number One Summer 2011 Coalitions in Space: Where Networks are Power by James Clay Moltz The 2010 National Space Policy: Down to Earth? by Joan Johnson-Freese Operationally Responsive Space: Past, Present, and Future by Stuart Eves Space Deterrence or Dominance? by Dwayne Liller EISENHOWER CENTER FOR SPACE AND DEFENSE STUDIES Space and Defense Scholarly Journal of the United States Air Force Academy Eisenhower Center for Space and Defense Studies Editor-in-Chief Ambassador Roger Harrison, [email protected] Director, Eisenhower Center for Space and Defense Studies Academic Editor Dr. Michael Gleason, Lt Col, USAF U.S. Air Force Academy, USA Associate Academic Editors Dr. Damon Coletta U.S. Air Force Academy, USA Dr. Peter Hays National Security Space Office, USA Dr. Schuyler Foerster U.S. Air Force Academy, USA Lt Col Deron Jackson U.S. Air Force Academy, USA Reviewers Andrew Aldrin John Logsdon United Launch Alliance, USA George Washington University, USA James Armor Agnieszka Lukaszczyk ATK, USA Space Generation Advisory Council, Austria William Barry Molly Macauley NASA, France Resources for the Future, USA Frans von der Dunk Scott Pace University of Nebraska, USA George Washington University, USA Paul Eckart Xavier Pasco Boeing, USA Foundation for Strategic Research, France Andrew Erickson Wolfgang Rathbeger Naval War College, USA European Space Policy Institute, Austria Joanne Gabrynowicz Scott Trimboli University of Mississippi, USA University of Colorado, Colorado Springs, USA Dana Johnson James Vedda Northrop Grumman, USA Aerospace Corporation, USA Theresa Hitchens Rick Walker United Nations, Switzerland Digital Consulting Services, USA Wade Huntley Annalisa Weigel Independent Researcher, USA Massachusetts Institute of Technology, USA Jonty Kasku-Jackson David Whalen National Security Space Institute, USA University of North Dakota, USA Ram Jakhu George Whitesides McGill University, Canada NASA Headquarters, USA Roger Launius Ray Williamson National Air and Space Museum, USA Secure Word Foundation, USA Space and Defense Scholarly Journal of the United States Air Force Academy Eisenhower Center for Space and Defense Studies Volume Five ▪ Number One ▪ Summer 2011 Introduction 3 Ambassador Roger Harrison Articles Coalition Building in Space: Where Networks are Power 5 James Clay Moltz The 2010 National Space Policy: Down to Earth? 23 Joan Johnson-Freese Operationally Responsive Space: The Past, Present, and Future 39 Stuart Eves Space Deterrence or Dominance? 49 Dwayne Liller Introduction Ambassador Roger G. Harrison Editor-in-Chief All of the articles submitted for this edition of scalable, and by 2000, Europe was a our journal deal, in one way or another, with legitimate competitor, too. Commercial an essential change in the relative position of companies increased their share of space the United States in space, or – to put the activity, and became supra-national, moving matter rather more bluntly – the decline of offshore to places like the Bahamas and U.S. space power and what to do about it. I Luxemburg. And here came China with both should add quickly that the decline is relative, commercial programs and offensive ASAT and the base against which it’s measured is programs that brought into serious question arbitrary. What is treated as a base was in fact the central proposition of “space control” a high point. It came in the 1990s, when the ideology, i.e. that the U.S. could control former Soviet space program was in disarray, “access to space” and therefore space itself. the Europeans had not yet found their That seems to have become a hollow – albeit competitive edge and the prospect of China as in some circles still hallowed – claim. a power space player was, at best, on the horizon, no bigger than a man’s hand. The The Obama space policy and strategy are U.S. was, for that decade, the unchallenged meant to deal with this new reality, and with “shepherd of space” to use Everett Dolman’s the sobering prospect of budget shortfalls as evocative imagery. It was possible to imagine far as the eye can see. Operating in space the world accepting the United States as a sucks resources at a frightening rate, a bad benevolent hegemon, setting rules to benefit quality to have when the overall pie is all while remaining (as hegemonic powers shrinking. All of our authors seem to accept generally do) somewhere outside the rules this new reality. They focus on its ourselves. At least this vision of “space implications, which might be summed up in control” was possible for U.S. observers to two thoughts: in the future, the United States conjure. The rest of the world was simply will need to collaborate with other nations in annoyed. space, and get more out of every dollar spent. The era of autarky is over. It isn’t necessarily “declinism” to point out that the vision has faded. In space, as in golf, What should we do now? That is the subject it isn’t possible to win by preventing the other all our authors address, and I shall leave them guy from doing better, and the circumstances to speak for themselves. But there is one that led to U.S. domination in the 1990’s omission – not just from these articles, but began to change as the century turned. By from the national dialogue on security space in then, the Russian Federation had regained its general – that I must point out. In all the balanced, and reminded us that it was a near discussion of vaguely defined rules of the peer competitor with technology in some areas road, and norms, voluntary codes of conduct – notably rocket motors – that was still the and “transparency and confidence building best in the world. The European Arianne measures” there is a tendency to forget that launcher had proven both reliable and space is subject to binding international law in 4 Roger Harrison/Introduction the form of the Outer Space Treaty of 1967. That treaty speaks to issues that are no longer relevant: no one planned even in 1967 to station nuclear missiles on the moon. But also has pertinent things to say about consultation, and interference with the satellite operations of other states. It was meant to begin a process which – had it been taken seriously – might have allowed the evolution over time of a legal structure for space to deal with the problems of crowding and debris that we face now. It might even have been a framework for the discussion of curbing an arms race in space. None of this potential was realized, largely because both the Soviet Union and the United States preferred freedom of action to any legally binding regime in space. The Treaty was signed, ratified, and then largely ignored. I pointed this out recently to a room full of government space analysts, listing the sorts of things the OST addresses, sometimes in specific terms. Someone commented: “We could never get that sort of thing now.” Perhaps not. Luckily, we already have that sort of thing. It may be time to burrow in the archives, dust off the OST and ask ourselves whether its relevant to the concerns we now have in space – and if not, how it can be improved. RGH Coalitions in Space: Where Networks are Power James Clay Moltz Naval Postgraduate School Abstract: This study begins with the widely largely bilateral (and a few multilateral) recognized problem of 21st century space treaties that banned certain extremely harmful vulnerabilities. To address this challenge, it activities. Fortunately, thanks to these limited proposes the new concept of an “allied space mechanisms and policies of self-restraint, the network” as a possible means of both Cold War in space ended without any direct reducing risks and enhancing space power. attacks on either side’s satellites or other Such a concept would move beyond realist, spacecraft. Cold War “balancing” in space, and instead would require new forms of technical and Yet, since the end of the Cold War, there has political cooperation in the military sector been very little further progress made toward among participating states. In thinking about strengthening international space security future space security this study argues that mechanisms, while there has been a spread of trans-national networks and alliances offer space technology and an expansion in the considerable untapped potential, with possibly number of actors capable of doing harm in significant benefits particularly for the United space. China broke an informal 22-year States, which—unlike China and Russia— moratorium against kinetic-kill anti-satellite already has established military alliances with tests in January 2007 by destroying its own a number of countries possessing or now Fen-Yung 1C weather satellite at 525 miles developing advanced space capabilities. up, creating more than 3,000 pieces of hazardous debris. In response, India has The challenge of achieving security in space vowed to develop an anti-satellite capability. has traditionally been viewed as purely a In the face of the 2002 U.S. decision to national security matter. Until 1991, space withdraw from the Anti-Ballistic Missile activity was dominated by the hostile U.S.- (ABM) Treaty and the Navy’s February 2008 Soviet rivalry, which prevented active security destruction of an ailing satellite with a full cooperation in space beyond a series of tank of hydrazine (U.S. 193)—although at low restraint-based agreements. Other space altitude and with no long-lasting debris— actors remained too weak to matter. In terms Russia stated that it would respond to any of space operations, the two superpowers kept future U.S. action to weaponize space with its apart from one another except for occasional, own program. Among new actors, Iran publicity-serving civilian missions like the successfully orbited a satellite in 2009, and 1975 Apollo-Soyuz flight.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Rules for the Heavens: the Coming Revolution in Space and the Laws of War
    RULES FOR THE HEAVENS: THE COMING REVOLUTION IN SPACE AND THE LAWS OF WAR John Yoo* Great powers are increasing their competition in space. Though Russia and the United States have long relied on satellites for surveillance of rival nations’ militaries and the detection of missile launches, the democratization of space through technological advancements has allowed other nations to assert greater control. This Article addresses whether the United States and other nations should develop the space-based weapons that these policies promise, or whether they should cooperate to develop new international agreements to ban them. In some areas of space, proposals for regulation have already come too late. The U.S.’s nuclear deterrent itself depends cru- cially on space: ballistic missiles leave and then re-enter the atmosphere, giving them a global reach without serious defense. As more nations develop nuclear weapons and intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) technology, outer space will become even more important as an arena for defense against weapons of mass destruction (WMD) proliferation. North Korea’s progress on ICBM and nuclear technology, for example, will prompt even greater in- vestment in space-based missile defense systems. This Article makes two contributions. First, it argues against a grow- ing academic consensus in favor of a prohibition on military activities in space. It argues that these scholars over-read existing legal instruments and practice. While nations crafted international agreements to bar WMDs in outer space, they carefully left unregulated reconnaissance and commu- nications satellites, space-based conventional weapons, antisatellite sys- tems, and even WMDs that transit through space, such as ballistic missiles.
    [Show full text]
  • SPEAKERS TRANSPORTATION CONFERENCE FAA COMMERCIAL SPACE 15TH ANNUAL John R
    15TH ANNUAL FAA COMMERCIAL SPACE TRANSPORTATION CONFERENCE SPEAKERS COMMERCIAL SPACE TRANSPORTATION http://www.faa.gov/go/ast 15-16 FEBRUARY 2012 HQ-12-0163.INDD John R. Allen Christine Anderson Dr. John R. Allen serves as the Program Executive for Crew Health Christine Anderson is the Executive Director of the New Mexico and Safety at NASA Headquarters, Washington DC, where he Spaceport Authority. She is responsible for the development oversees the space medicine activities conducted at the Johnson and operation of the first purpose-built commercial spaceport-- Space Center, Houston, Texas. Dr. Allen received a B.A. in Speech Spaceport America. She is a recently retired Air Force civilian Communication from the University of Maryland (1975), a M.A. with 30 years service. She was a member of the Senior Executive in Audiology/Speech Pathology from The Catholic University Service, the civilian equivalent of the military rank of General of America (1977), and a Ph.D. in Audiology and Bioacoustics officer. Anderson was the founding Director of the Space from Baylor College of Medicine (1996). Upon completion of Vehicles Directorate at the Air Force Research Laboratory, Kirtland his Master’s degree, he worked for the Easter Seals Treatment Air Force Base, New Mexico. She also served as the Director Center in Rockville, Maryland as an audiologist and speech- of the Space Technology Directorate at the Air Force Phillips language pathologist and received certification in both areas. Laboratory at Kirtland, and as the Director of the Military Satellite He joined the US Air Force in 1980, serving as Chief, Audiology Communications Joint Program Office at the Air Force Space at Andrews AFB, Maryland, and at the Wiesbaden Medical and Missile Systems Center in Los Angeles where she directed Center, Germany, and as Chief, Otolaryngology Services at the the development, acquisition and execution of a $50 billion Aeromedical Consultation Service, Brooks AFB, Texas, where portfolio.
    [Show full text]
  • ODQN 10-1.Indd
    National Aeronautics and Space Administration Orbital Debris Quarterly News Volume 10, Issue 1 January 2006 Collision Avoidance Maneuver Performed by NASA’s Terra Spacecraft Inside... The Terra spacecraft, often referred to as the ignator 1983-063C, U.S. Satellite Number 14222) fl agship of NASA’s Earth Observing System (EOS), would come within 500 m of Terra on 23 October, successfully performed a small collision avoidance GSFC and SSN personnel undertook a more de- Large Area Debris maneuver on 21 October 2005 to ensure safe passage tailed assessment of the coming conjunction. Collector (LAD-C) by a piece of orbital debris two days later. This ac- The Scout debris was in an orbit with an alti- Update ........................2 tion demonstrated the effectiveness of a conjunction tude similar to that of Terra (approximately assessment procedure implemented in 2004 680 km by 710 km), but its posigrade Revision of Space by personnel of the NASA Goddard inclination of 82.4° and different orbit Shuttle Wing Leading Space Flight Center (GSFC) and the plane meant that a collision would have Edge Reinforced U.S. Space Surveillance Network occurred at a high velocity of near- (SSN). The trajectories of Terra ly 12 km/s. By 21 October Carbon-Carbon Failure and its companion EOS space- refi ned analysis of the Criteria Based on craft are frequently com- future close approach Hypervelocity Impact pared with the orbits of indicated that the miss and Arc-Jet Testing ...3 thousands of objects distance was only ap- tracked by the SSN proximately 50 m with Object Reentry to determine if an an uncertainty that Survivability Analysis accidental collision yielded a probability Tool (ORSAT) – is possible.
    [Show full text]
  • Introduction Ronald Reagan’S Defining Vision for the 1980S— - and America
    © Copyright, Princeton University Press. No part of this book may be distributed, posted, or reproduced in any form by digital or mechanical means without prior written permission of the publisher. Introduction Ronald Reagan’s Defining Vision for the 1980s— -_and America There are no easy answers, but there are simple answers. We must have the courage to do what we know is morally right. ronald reagan, “the speech,” 1964 Your first point, however, about making them love you, not just believe you, believe me—I agree with that. ronald reagan, october 16, 1979 One day in 1924, a thirteen-year-old boy joined his parents and older brother for a leisurely Sunday drive roaming the lush Illinois country- side. Trying on eyeglasses his mother had misplaced in the backseat, he discovered that he had lived life thus far in a “haze” filled with “colored blobs that became distinct” when he approached them. Recalling the “miracle” of corrected vision, he would write: “I suddenly saw a glori- ous, sharply outlined world jump into focus and shouted with delight.” Six decades later, as president of the United States of America, that extremely nearsighted boy had become a contact lens–wearing, fa- mously farsighted leader. On June 12, 1987, standing 4,476 miles away from his boyhood hometown of Dixon, Illinois, speaking to the world from the Berlin Wall’s Brandenburg Gate, Ronald Wilson Reagan em- braced the “one great and inescapable conclusion” that seemed to emerge after forty years of Communist domination of Eastern Eu- rope. “Freedom leads to prosperity,” Reagan declared in his signature For general queries, contact [email protected] © Copyright, Princeton University Press.
    [Show full text]
  • The Influence of Space Power Upon History (1944-1998)*
    * The Influence of Space Power upon History (1944-1998) by Captain John Shaw, USAF * My interest in this subject grew during my experiences as an Air Force Intern 1997-98, working in both the Office of the Deputy Undersecretary of Defense for Space, and in SAF/AQ, Space and Nuclear Deterrence Directorate. I owe thanks to Mr. Gil Klinger (acting DUSD(Space)) and BGen James Beale (SAF/AQS) for their advice and guidance during my internships. Thanks also to Mr. John Landon, Col Michael Mantz, Col James Warner, Lt Col Robert Fisher, and Lt Col David Spataro. Special thanks to Col Simon P. Worden for his insight on this topic. A primary task of the historian is to interpret events in the course of history through a unique lens, affording the scholar a new, and more intellectually useful, understanding of historical outcomes. This is precisely what Alfred Thayer Mahan achieved when he wrote his tour de force The Influence of Sea Power upon History (1660-1783). He interpreted the ebb and flow of national power in terms of naval power, and his conclusions on the necessity of sea control to guarantee national welfare led many governments of his time to expand their naval capabilities. When Mahan published his work in 1890, naval power had for centuries already been a central determinant of national military power.1 It remained so until joined, even eclipsed, by airpower in this century. Space, by contrast, was still the subject of extreme fiction a mere one hundred years ago, when Jules Verne’s From the Earth to the Moon and H.G.
    [Show full text]
  • Reagan's Victory
    Reagan’s ictory How HeV Built His Winning Coalition By Robert G. Morrison Foreword by William J. Bennett Reagan’s Victory: How He Built His Winning Coalition By Robert G. Morrison 1 FOREWORD By William J. Bennett Ronald Reagan always called me on my birthday. Even after he had left the White House, he continued to call me on my birthday. He called all his Cabinet members and close asso- ciates on their birthdays. I’ve never known another man in public life who did that. I could tell that Alzheimer’s had laid its firm grip on his mind when those calls stopped coming. The President would have agreed with the sign borne by hundreds of pro-life marchers each January 22nd: “Doesn’t Everyone Deserve a Birth Day?” Reagan’s pro-life convic- tions were an integral part of who he was. All of us who served him knew that. Many of my colleagues in the Reagan administration were pro-choice. Reagan never treat- ed any of his team with less than full respect and full loyalty for that. But as for the Reagan administration, it was a pro-life administration. I was the second choice of Reagan’s to head the National Endowment for the Humanities (NEH). It was my first appointment in a Republican administration. I was a Democrat. Reagan had chosen me after a well-known Southern historian and literary critic hurt his candidacy by criticizing Abraham Lincoln. My appointment became controversial within the Reagan ranks because the Gipper was highly popular in the South, where residual animosities toward Lincoln could still be found.
    [Show full text]
  • Highlights in Space 2010
    International Astronautical Federation Committee on Space Research International Institute of Space Law 94 bis, Avenue de Suffren c/o CNES 94 bis, Avenue de Suffren UNITED NATIONS 75015 Paris, France 2 place Maurice Quentin 75015 Paris, France Tel: +33 1 45 67 42 60 Fax: +33 1 42 73 21 20 Tel. + 33 1 44 76 75 10 E-mail: : [email protected] E-mail: [email protected] Fax. + 33 1 44 76 74 37 URL: www.iislweb.com OFFICE FOR OUTER SPACE AFFAIRS URL: www.iafastro.com E-mail: [email protected] URL : http://cosparhq.cnes.fr Highlights in Space 2010 Prepared in cooperation with the International Astronautical Federation, the Committee on Space Research and the International Institute of Space Law The United Nations Office for Outer Space Affairs is responsible for promoting international cooperation in the peaceful uses of outer space and assisting developing countries in using space science and technology. United Nations Office for Outer Space Affairs P. O. Box 500, 1400 Vienna, Austria Tel: (+43-1) 26060-4950 Fax: (+43-1) 26060-5830 E-mail: [email protected] URL: www.unoosa.org United Nations publication Printed in Austria USD 15 Sales No. E.11.I.3 ISBN 978-92-1-101236-1 ST/SPACE/57 *1180239* V.11-80239—January 2011—775 UNITED NATIONS OFFICE FOR OUTER SPACE AFFAIRS UNITED NATIONS OFFICE AT VIENNA Highlights in Space 2010 Prepared in cooperation with the International Astronautical Federation, the Committee on Space Research and the International Institute of Space Law Progress in space science, technology and applications, international cooperation and space law UNITED NATIONS New York, 2011 UniTEd NationS PUblication Sales no.
    [Show full text]
  • Ridley Scott's Dystopia Meets Ronald Reagan's America
    RIDLEY SCOTT’S DYSTOPIA MEETS RONALD REAGAN’S AMERICA: CLASS CONFLICT AND POLITICAL DISCLOSURE IN BLADE RUNNER: THE FINAL CUT Fabián Orán Llarena Universidad de La Laguna “The great owners ignored the three cries of history. The land fell into fewer hands, the number of dispossessed increased, and every effort of the great own- ers was directed at repression.” (John Steinbeck, The Grapes of Wrath) Abstract Blade Runner has been the object of multiple inquiries over the last three decades. However, this essay analyzes the socio-political discourse of the text, one aspect yet to be elucidated. Taking as basis the 1992 re-edited version (Blade Runner: The Final Cut), the essay studies the film as a critical and contextualized response to Ronald Reagan’s presidency (1981-1989). The essay scrutinizes how the materiality of the socio-economic system presented in the film, and the discourses that revolve around it, embody a critical representation of the policy-making and cultural discourse of Reaganism. Thus, the ensuing text characterizes the film as a (counter) 155 narrative that deconstructs the conservative ideology of the 1980s. Keywords: Reaganism, supply-side theory, hegemony, underclass, Off World. Resumen Blade Runner ha sido objeto de múltiples consideraciones durante las últimas tres décadas. No obstante, este ensayo analiza el discurso político-cultural del film, un aspecto aún por dilucidar. Tomando como base el remontaje de 1992 (Blade Runner: The Final Cut), se estudia el film como una respuesta crítica y contextualizada a la presidencia de Ronald Reagan (1981-1989). El ensayo escruta cómo la materialidad del sistema socio-económico presentado en el film, y los discursos que se construyen en torno al mismo, son una representación crítica de las políticas y el discurso cultural del Reaganismo.
    [Show full text]
  • Ronald Reagan and Executive Power” Examines the Use and EXECUTIVE POWER of Presidential Powers by Ronald Reagan, the Fortieth President of the United States
    We the People: The Citizen and the Constitution is a nationally acclaimed civic education program for upper elementary, secondary, and post-secondary school students that focuses on the history and principles of the U.S. Constitution and Bill of Rights. We the People is a program of the Center for Civic Education, whose mission is to promote an enlightened and responsible citizenry committed to democratic principles and actively engaged in the practice of democracy in the United States and other countries. February 6, 2011, marks the one-hundredth anniversary of Ronald Reagan’s birth, providing an occasion for teaching and learning about President Reagan’s contributions to American constitutionalism and citizenship. To this end, the Center for Civic Education and the Ronald Reagan Presidential Foundation have collaborated to produce this lesson. The lesson and materials to enhance this curriculum can be found at www.civiced.org/reagan. RONALD REAGAN PURPOSE OF THE LESSON “Ronald Reagan and Executive Power” examines the use AND EXECUTIVE POWER of presidential powers by Ronald Reagan, the fortieth president of the United States. It explores Article II of the Constitution, which grants the president executive pow - ers. When you have completed this lesson, you should be able to explain and discuss how President Reagan exer - cised his authority under Article II of the Constitution concerning war powers, domestic policy, and foreign pol - icy. You should be able to explain how the brevity and ambiguity of Article II allows presidents to interpret these powers, especially in relation to Congress. You should be able to evaluate and take positions on the constitutional issues raised by the exercise of these powers, drawing on specific examples from Ronald Reagan’s presidency.
    [Show full text]
  • Tailoring Deterrence for China in Space for More Information on This Publication, Visit
    C O R P O R A T I O N KRISTA LANGELAND, DEREK GROSSMAN Tailoring Deterrence for China in Space For more information on this publication, visit www.rand.org/t/RRA943-1. About RAND The RAND Corporation is a research organization that develops solutions to public policy challenges to help make communities throughout the world safer and more secure, healthier and more prosperous. RAND is nonprofit, nonpartisan, and committed to the public interest. To learn more about RAND, visit www.rand.org. Research Integrity Our mission to help improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis is enabled through our core values of quality and objectivity and our unwavering commitment to the highest level of integrity and ethical behavior. To help ensure our research and analysis are rigorous, objective, and nonpartisan, we subject our research publications to a robust and exacting quality-assurance process; avoid both the appearance and reality of financial and other conflicts of interest through staff training, project screening, and a policy of mandatory disclosure; and pursue transparency in our research engagements through our commitment to the open publication of our research findings and recommendations, disclosure of the source of funding of published research, and policies to ensure intellectual independence. For more information, visit www.rand.org/about/principles. RAND’s publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors. Published by the RAND Corporation, Santa Monica, Calif. © 2021 RAND Corporation is a registered trademark. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data is available for this publication. ISBN: 978-1-9774-0703-0 Cover: Long March 5 Y2 by 篁竹水声 Limited Print and Electronic Distribution Rights This document and trademark(s) contained herein are protected by law.
    [Show full text]
  • Six Months to Go: Where the Presidential Contest Stands As the General Election Begins
    May 10, 2012 Six Months To Go: Where the Presidential Contest Stands as the General Election Begins William A. Galston Table of Contents Summary 1 Where We Are Now and How We Got There 1 The Mood of the Country 3 The Issues 5 Ideology 7 What Kind of Election Will 2012 Be? 9 Referendum or Choice? 9 Persuasion or Mobilization? 13 It’s the Electoral College, Stupid 16 Conclusion: The Known Unknowns 22 Endnotes 23 SUMMARY arack Obama’s standing with the American people hit bottom in the late Bsummer and early fall of 2011. Since then, the president has recovered the political ground he lost during the debt ceiling fiasco and now enjoys a narrow edge over Mitt Romney, the presumptive Republican nominee. The standard political and economic indicators suggest that the 2012 election will be close. And the historic level of partisan polarization ensures that it will be hard-fought and divisive. William A. Galston is the Ezra K. Zilkha Since Vietnam and the Iranian hostage crisis, Republicans have effectively used the Chair in Governance issue of national security against Democrats. Barring unforeseen events, Romney Studies and senior will not be able to do so this year. Nor will a focus on hot-button social issues yield fellow at Brookings. significant gains for the challenger. Instead, to an extent that Americans have not seen for at least two decades, the election of 2012 will revolve around a single defining issue—the condition of the economy. In 2008, Barack Obama defeated John McCain in large measure because the people saw him as more able to manage the economy at a moment of frightening crisis.
    [Show full text]
  • Securing Japan an Assessment of Japan´S Strategy for Space
    Full Report Securing Japan An assessment of Japan´s strategy for space Report: Title: “ESPI Report 74 - Securing Japan - Full Report” Published: July 2020 ISSN: 2218-0931 (print) • 2076-6688 (online) Editor and publisher: European Space Policy Institute (ESPI) Schwarzenbergplatz 6 • 1030 Vienna • Austria Phone: +43 1 718 11 18 -0 E-Mail: [email protected] Website: www.espi.or.at Rights reserved - No part of this report may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or for any purpose without permission from ESPI. Citations and extracts to be published by other means are subject to mentioning “ESPI Report 74 - Securing Japan - Full Report, July 2020. All rights reserved” and sample transmission to ESPI before publishing. ESPI is not responsible for any losses, injury or damage caused to any person or property (including under contract, by negligence, product liability or otherwise) whether they may be direct or indirect, special, incidental or consequential, resulting from the information contained in this publication. Design: copylot.at Cover page picture credit: European Space Agency (ESA) TABLE OF CONTENT 1 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................. 1 1.1 Background and rationales ............................................................................................................. 1 1.2 Objectives of the Study ................................................................................................................... 2 1.3 Methodology
    [Show full text]