[War] Horse's Mouth

Straight from the [War] Horse’s Mouth The following quotations, largely culled from U.S. military “We’re going to fight a war in space. We’re going to sources, were selected by Press for Conversion! editor, fight from space and we’re going to fight into space.” Richard Sanders. They illustrate, beyond any reasonable General Joseph W Ashy, then Commander-in-Chief of U.S. Space doubt, that the U.S. military fully intends to continue Command, August 5, 1996. militarizing space and to deploy space-based weapons. 1996: New World Vistas: Air and Space Power for the 21st Century Space Operations Doctrine “In the next two decades, new technologies will allow the “When you think about protecting this nation’s global inter- fielding of space-based weapons of devastating effective- ests, you have to remember it ness to be used to deliver energy and mass as force projec- starts with space. It’s a presence tion in tactical and strategic conflict.... These advances will with a real impact.... Because of enable lasers with reasonable mass and cost to effect very what we do in the space medium, many kills…. This can be done rapidly, continuously, and I would suggest that space is the with surgical precision, minimizing exposure of friendly fourth dimension of warfare.... forces. The technologies exist or can be developed in this Air and space power is the force time period.…. Setting the emotional issues of nuclear power of the future, and the Air Force – aside, this technology offers a viable alternative for large the nation’s Air Force – is Ameri- amounts of power in space.” ca’s only full service air force that New World Vistas: Air and Space Power for the 21st Century, is dedicated to providing air and Report, U.S. Air Force Board, 1996. space power as the sole purpose Fogleman of its existence.” General Ronald R. Fogleman “It’s politically sensi- tive, but it’s going to “Our mission is to defend the U.S. through the control and exploitation happen. Some people of air and space.” don’t want to hear General Merrill McPeak this, and it sure isn’t “Today, the ultimate high ground is in vogue, but – abso- space.” lutely – we’re going General Joseph W. Ashy, then Com- to fight in space. McPeak mander-in-Chief, U.S. Space Command We’re going to fight “In Desert Storm, we used from space and we’re space-based ballistic missile going to fight into warning, communications, space. That’s why the weather, navigation, and intel- ligence as force enhancers and U.S. has developed in some cases, mission ena- programs in directed blers.... Space systems also energy and hit-to-kill play key roles in humanitarian Ashy mechanisms. We will operations, disaster relief, drug engage terrestrial targets someday – ships, airplanes, enforcement, and peacekeep- land targets – from space. We will engage targets ing missions.... Exploiting space allows us to establish and Widnall in space, from space.” maintain ‘information dominance,’ enabling our fighting General Joseph Ashy, then commander-in-chief, U.S. Space Com- forces to operate inside the enemy’s decision loop.” mand, interview with Aviation Week Space Technology, 1996. Sheila E. Widnall, former Secretary of the Air Force FOR A MORE JUST AND Moorman “Desert Storm...was a water- PEACEFUL WORLD shed event in military space ap- Since 1931, Quakers plications because for the first For more information and in Canada have a free copy of our news- time, space systems were both worked through Canadian Friends letter, Quaker Concern, integral to the conflict and criti- Service Committee. The CFSC please contact us: cal to the outcome of the war.” works in Canada and around the CFSC, 60 Lowther Ave, General Thomas S. Moorman, Jr. Toronto ON M5R 1C7 world promoting peace, commu- 416-920-5213 The five quotations above are from “Space Operations Doctrine,” nity empowerment, restorative jus- Air Force Doctrine Document 4, July 10, 1996. [email protected] tice, equality and sustainability. www.cfsc.quaker.ca 16 Press for Conversion! (Issue # 55) December 2004 1997: Vision for 2020 “Navies and armies have evolved to protect national interests and investments. As sea commerce advanced in the 18th and 19th Centuries, nations formed navies to project power and to protect and enhance their commercial interests. Simi- larly, during the westward expansion of the continental U.S., military outposts and cavalry emerged to protect our wagon trains, settlements and railroads. Air power emerged differently because it evolved to support land and sea operations (e.g., communications and reconnaissance), not to protect national economic interests. Over time, however, air power became a separate instrument of warfare, protecting national interests and ensuring freedom of action in the air. Eventually, space power will parallel both models. For several decades, it has mainly supported land, sea, and air operations—strategically and operationally. Early in the 21st Vision for 2020. This U.S. Space Command [SPACECOM] re- Century, space will become another medium of warfare. As port was first published in February 1997. Slightly modified ver- the U.S. relies more on space-based capabilities, space forces sions have since appeared as sections within other SPACECOM may protect the country’s commercial assets in this medium. documents, such as the “Long Range Plan,” April 1998. This re- Space power will help overcome the widening gap between port’s front and back covers depict space-based laser weapons, increasing military commitments and diminishing resources.” one of which is destroying a target on the Earth’s surface. The “Future Trends: Although unlikely to be challenged by a caption reads: “Space... the war fighters’ edge.” SPACECOM “co- global peer competitor, the U.S. will continue to be chal- ordinates the use of Army, Navy, and Air Force space forces” was lenged regionally. The globalization of the world economy created in 1985 to “help institutionalize the use of space.” will also continue, with a widening between ‘haves’ and ‘have-nots.’ Accelerating rates of technological development “With regard to space dominance, will be increasingly driven by the commercial sector – not we have it, we like it, and we’re the military. Increased weapons lethality and precision will going to keep it…. Space is in the lead to new operational doctrine.” nation’s economic interest.” “The emerging synergy of space superiority with land, sea Keith Hall, Pres. Clinton’s Assistant Sec- and air superiority will lead to Full Spectrum Dominance. retary, Air Force for Space, and Director, Space power will be ... decisive in war, and preeminent in National Reconnaissance Office. Speech to any form of conflict. Increased weapons lethality will lead National Space Club, 1997. Hall to new operational doctrine... space superiority is emerging as an essential element of battlefield success and future war- “Just as by the year 1500 it was apparent that the European fare. There will be a critical need to control the space me- experience of power would be its domination of the global dium to ensure U.S. dominance on future battlefields.” seas, it does not take much to see that the American experi- “Control of space is... an ability to deny others the use of ence of power will rest on the domination of space.... Just as space, the fourth medium of warfare. Europe expanded war and its power to the global oceans, “Global Engagement is the application of precision force the U.S. is expanding war and its power into space.... Just as from, to, and through space. USSPACECOM will have a Europe shaped the world for half a millennium, so too the greatly expanded role as an active warfighter in the years U.S. will shape the world for at least that length of time.... ahead as the combatant command responsible for National For better or worse, America has seized hold of the future of Missile Defense (NMD) and space force application. Glo- war, and with it – for a time – the future of humanity.” bal Engagement combines global surveillance with the po- George and Meredith Friedman, The Future of War: Power, Tech- tential for a space-based global precision strike capability.” nology & American World Dominance in the 21st Century, 1997. “The proliferation of missiles and weapons of mass destruction requires an NMD. NMD will evolve into a mix of “The age of the gun is over.... He ground and space sensors and weapons. Existing land, sea, who controls space controls the and air missions will been hanced by space systems. Current battlefield. [Other nations] lack sea and air strategic attack missions will be augmented by the money and/or technology to the deployment of space force application systems.” compete with us in the develop- “As the US military relies more on space, our vulnerabil- ment of space-age weapons.” ity also increases, so we must protect our space assets and Interview, George Friedman, “Why be able to deny other nations from gaining an advantage the 21st could be the American Cen- tury,” Parade/Washington Post, April through their space systems.” Friedman 6, 1997. December 2004 (Issue # 55) Press for Conversion! 17 creating regional unrest.” “Future potential adversaries will challenge the US ability to maintain a comparative advantage.” “US interests and investments in space must be fully protected to ensure our nation’s freedom of action in space.” “By 2020, a robust and fully integrated suite of space and terrestrial capabilities will provide dominant battlespace awareness enabling on-demand targeting and engagement of all ballistic and cruise missiles, and if directed by the National Command Authority (the President), the ability to identify, track and hold at risk designated high value terrestrial targets.” “Control of space is the ability to assure access to space, freedom of operations within the space medium, and an ability to deny others the use of space.” “Today, policy for military space systems resembles that of aviation at the beginning of the 20th Century. In 1899, before airplanes were invented, the Hague Peace Confer- ence banned them from combat; but countries ignored this restriction during World War I.” “Treaties that maintain stability and strategic balance during the Cold War may need to change if we are to maintain 1998: world security in 2020.” “Unilateral action may appear aggressive and hostile. The Long Range Plan Strong coalitions and collective security arrangements should “The U.S. does not expect to face a global military peer ... provide strong political and economic support for a new competitor within the next two decades we have entered a generation of agreements and treaties that normalize space ‘strategic pause.’ Thus, the US military has an opportunity operations.” similar to the period between WWI and WWII a time for The Long Range Plan, published by U.S. Space Command, April exploring innovative warfighting concepts and capabilities. 1998. Just as air power developed during the 1920s and 1930s, space power will advance over the next decade. The growth “In summary, the most imme- of space power closely resembles air power’s evolution dur- diate task of the U.S. in the ing the first half of this century. Air power evolved from years ahead is to sustain and supporting war-fighters (e.g., communications and reconnais- extend its leadership in the in- sance), to air combat, and finally to strategically projecting creasingly intertwined fields of force on the battlefield. Similarly, space power started out military and commercial space. mainly as support (e.g., communications and surveillance) This requires a robust and con- and may move toward space combat operations.” tinuous presence in space.” “Now is the time to begin developing space capabilities, Air Force Colonel Frank Klotz, innovative concepts of operations for war-fighting, and or- Military Fellow, Council on For- ganizations that can meet the challenges of the 21st Cen- eign Relations (CFR), Report tury.... Even as military forces have become more downsized Space, Commerce and National in the 1990s, their commitments have steadily increased. As Security, 1998. [Editor’s note: Members of America’s elite military operations become more lethal, space power ena- “power structure” within this bles our streamlined forces to minimize the loss of blood 3,000 member group includes top and national treasure.... Space power in the 21st Century figures in government, banks, cor- looks similar to previous military revolutions, such as air- Klotz porations and the media.] craft-carrier warfare and Blitzkrieg.” “The time has come to address, among warfighters and “There is a role for military use of space. Space is a national policy makers, the emergence of space as a center medium useful for human endeavor. Human of gravity for DOD [Department of Defense] and the nation. endeavor is accompanied by conflict. Human con- “The main causes of warfare will be nationalism, ethnic separatism, religious extremism and scarce resources. flict, at its extreme, requires military solutions. The U.S. won’t always be able to forward base its forces. Space is a medium requiring exploitation for mili- Widespread communications will highlight disparities in tary purposes. Space Control is the first order of resources and quality of life — contributing to unrest in de- business.” veloping countries.” Major Kevin Kimble, U.S. Space Command lecture “to future “The gap between ‘have’ and ‘have not’ nations will widen- Air Force officers” at the U.S. Air Force Academy, 1998. 18 Press for Conversion! (Issue # 55) December 2004 Myers 1999: “Today, space-based assets transmit a significant por- “[Space is] increasingly at tion of the information the center of our national critical to military opera- and economic security…. tions…. It’s clear this reli- The threat, ladies and gen- ance on space will continue tlemen, I believe is real. It’s to grow. Traditionally, a threat to our economic we’ve talked about space as well-being. This is why we a combat multiplier in a must work together to find combat support role, and common ground between that thinking was on target commercial imperatives as we attempted to get all and the President’s tasking the warfighters to think and to me for space control and Eberhart integrate space. However, protection.” now space has become much more basic and intrinsic than General Richard B. Myers, then commander-in-chief of the U.S. Space Command, in a speech entitled “Implementing Our Vision just a force multiplier. Space is a prerequisite. It’s not a luxury for Space Control,” delivered to the U.S Space Foundation in Colo- anymore; it’s a requirement for conducting military opera- rado Springs, Colorado, April 1999. [Editor’s note: Myers became tions. Space has proven itself vital to our national interests.” the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff soon after September 11, Air Force General Ralph E. Eberhart, commander-in-chief, 2001 (on October 1).] SPACECOM and host for Joint Warrior Interoperability Demon- stration 2000. News Release, July 6, 2000. “JWID 2000.” U.S. Department of Defense. Almanac 2000 “Set our sights high, on that high frontier, and be the space “I wrote the Republican Party’s foreign policy platform... warfighters our nation needs today – and will need even more The Bush administration will be using a foreign policy plat- so in the future.” form ... written by a top executive of Lockheed Martin, the General Ralph E. Eberhart, Commander, Air Force Space Com- world’s biggest weapons manufacturer.” mand Bruce Jackson, vice president of corporate strategy and development, Lockheed Martin, in an interview with Karl Grossman, De- “Through the years, military commanders have recognized cember 2000. [Editor’s note: In a 2001 interview, Jackson admit- the advantage of ‘owning’ the high ground in battle. In World ting he was the “overall chairman of the Foreign Policy Platform Committee” at the Republican National Convention, denied that War II, the high ground was controlled by those persons who he had led the advocacy for Star Wars because “that would be an could fly over the battlefield in airplanes…. implicit conflict of interest with my day job.”] The future of the Air Force is space – a fully integrated, inseparable part of operations. Rumsfeld Into the 21st Century, [the U.S. Air Force needs to be:] 2001: Globally dominant – Tomorrow’s Air Force will likely The Rumsfeld dominate the air and space around the world…. Selectively lethal – The Air Force may fight intense, deci- Commission sive wars with great precision hitting hard while avoiding “In the coming period, collateral damage in both ‘real’ space and in computer the U.S will conduct op- cyberspace. erations to, from, in and Virtually present – Space forces compliment [sic] the physi- through space in support of cal presence of terrestrial forces. Although they are not vis- its national interests both ible from the ground, space forces provide virtual presence on earth and in space.” through their ability to supply global mobility, control the “It is in the U.S. national high ground, support versatile combat capability, ensure in- interest to ... use the na- formation dominance and sustain deterrence. The future Air tion’s potential in space to Force will be better able to monitor and shape world events.” support its domestic, eco- Almanac 2000, Air Force Space Command. [Editor’s note: This nomic, diplomatic and na- report’s cover says Space Command is “defending America through tional security objectives; the control and exploitation of space.”] develop and deploy the means to deter and defend “A key mission is space control, which means ensuring the against hostile acts di- U.S. retains access to and use of space during a conflict and rected at U.S. space assets and against the uses of space hos- that adversaries don’t. From a military point of view, space tile to U.S. interests.” is the ultimate ‘high ground.’” “If the U.S. is to avoid a ‘Space Pearl Harbor,’ it needs to Air Force Major Perry Nouis, U.S. Space Command spokes- take seriously the possibility of an attack on U.S. space sys- man, 2000. tems…. [Due to the] virtual certainty [of war in space], the December 2004 (Issue # 55) Press for Conversion! 19 U.S. must develop the means both to deter and to defend SPACEWAR, January 22, 2001. perior space capabilities, including weapons in space.” “We know from history that every medium – air, land and “Going with the conventional wisdom in the U.S. sea – has seen conflict. Reality indicates that space will be military, the [war] game assumed that the heavens no different. Given this virtual certainty, the U.S. must de- will be full of weapons by 2017.” velop the means both to deter and to defend against hostile Thomas E. Ricks, “Space is Playing Field for Newest War Game,” acts in and from space. This will require superior space ca- Washington Post, January 29, 2001. pabilities.” “The Commissioners believe the U.S. Government should Transformation Flight Plan vigorously pursue the capabilities called for in the National Space Policy to ensure that the President will have the option to deploy weapons in space to deter threats to and, if necessary, defend against attacks on U.S. interests.” “In order to extend its deterrence concepts and capabilities to space, the U.S. will require development of new military capabilities for operation to, from, in and through space.” “[It is] possible to project power through and from space in response to events anywhere in the world... Having this capability would give the U.S. a much stronger deterrent and, in a conflict, an extraordinary military advantage.... [They urged the U.S. president to] have the option to deploy Overview of Capabilities: weapons in space... and to ensure that the U.S. remains the Space weapons provide a number of distinct advantages: world’s leading space-faring nation.” Access and reach. Space weapons can attack targets that may “The U.S. Government should pursue the relevant capa- be inaccessible to other weapons, could provide access to bilities to ensure that the President will have the option to targets without concern for transit of denied airspace, and deploy weapons in space to deter threats to and, if neces- could provide global power projection to nations that pos- sary, defend against attacks on U.S. interests.” sess them. Report of the Commission to Assess U.S. National Security Rapid response. In contrast to weapons launched from ships Space Management and Organization, January 11, 2001. [Edi- or aircraft, which could take a few days to some weeks to tor’s note: The commission’s report was issued at the request of outgoing Secretary of Defense William Cohen. It was chaired by reach a theater of operations far from the U.S., space-based Donald Rumsfeld, until he became U.S. Secretary of Defense.] weapons could offer response times from several minutes to several hours. Only long-range ballistic missiles can achieve similar performances. “The freedom to operate in Distance. The great distance of space-based weapons from space is widely acknowl- earth and from other objects in space have two key advan- edged as an American vital tages. First, it makes space-based weapons less vulnerable interest…. We must plan to to attack. Second, it would help distinguish them from ter- both protect our access to restrial ballistic missiles carrying nuclear weapons. space and deny access to Difficulty of defense. Space-based kinetic-energy weapons those adversaries who want directed at surface targets are very difficult to defend against to use their own space sys- because of their very high velocity and very brief flight tems against the U.S. and our through the atmosphere. The difficulty is similar to that in- allies. Investigating today’s volved in defeating reentry vehicles from ICBMS but is com- technologies better postures plicated by the possibility of a much shorter warning time. us for tomorrow.” Transformation Flight Plan, February 22, 2001. Brig. Gen. Gary R. Dylewski, Air Force Space Command’s di- “Thank God for missile Dylewski rector of operations. defense…. missile defense is “Concepts of futuristic offensive and defensive counterspace about preserving America’s weapon systems will soon be taken out of the lab and put to ability to wield power abroad. the test with the activation of the 76th Space Control Squad- It’s not about defense. It’s ron at Peterson Air Force Base…. The control squadron, about offense. That’s exactly Air Force Space Command’s first counterspace technology why we need it.” unit, will explore future space control technologies by test- Lawrence Kaplan, “Why the Best ing models and prototypes of counterspace systems for rapid Offense is a Good Missile Defense,” achievement of space superiority.” New Republic, March 12, 2001. Kaplan “U.S. Air Force Forms Counterspace Technology Unit,” 20 Press for Conversion! (Issue # 55) December 2004 “It is time to push up the ‘space superiority throttle.’ We Strategic Master Plan have left this throttle at a low power setting for too long. We FY04 and Beyond must ensure our continued access to space, to deny space to “To fully develop and others when directed… This is a medium crucial to our mili- exploit potential Counter- tary operations and one we’ll have to fight for in the future.” space and space-based “Warfighting CINCs [Commanders in Chief] recognize Space Force Application [Space-Based Lasers] SBL’s inherent capability to support capabilities, some U.S. other [Department of Defense] DoD missions such as air policies and international defense, global surveillance, space control and target detec- treaties may need to be tion… The mere fact that the U.S. is developing means to reviewed and modified.” employ force in space may serve as a significant deterrent.” “As guardians of the General Ralph Eberhart, U.S. Air Force, Commander in Chief, North American Aerospace Defense Command & U.S. Space Com- High Frontier, Air Force mand. Statement before the Strategic Subcommittee of the U.S. Space Command has the Senate Armed Services Committee, July 11, 2001. vision and the people to space superiority today and in the future.” General Lance W. Lord, Air Force Space Command “[The Space Based Laser, could enable “21st century space warriors [will fight] from and in [space. the U.S. military This Space Corps] is just as crucial to the success of our to] deny access to vision as employing new technologies.” space,… deny in- Air Force Space Command was formed in 1982 to defend formation to/from America through space and intercontinental ballistic missile satellites [and en- operations. [Its ultimate goal is to] project global reach and gage in] defensive/ global power.” [The strategy of the Space Master Plan] will offensive counter- enable us to transform space power to provide our nation air operations.” with diverse options to globally apply force in, from, and Colonel William N. through space with modern intercontinental ballistic missiles McCasland, system ... and new conventional global strike capabilities.” program director for “Precision weapons guided to their targets by space-based the Space Based La- navigation – instant global communications for command- ser, Briefing, July 18, ers and their forces – enemy weapons of mass destruction McCasland 2001. held at risk by a ready force of intercontinental ballistic missiles 2002: – adversary missiles detected “Weapons will go within seconds of launch. This is not a vision of the into space. It’s a future. This is space to- question of time.” day!” Pete B. Teets, Undersec- “Our space team is build- retary, U.S. Air Force, ing capabilities that provide March, 2002. the President with a range of space power options to dis- “Our vision calls courage aggression or any form for prompt global of coercion against the U.S..” strike space sys- “Effective use of space-based resources provides a con- tems with the capa- tinual and global presence over key areas of the world ... bility to directly military forces have always viewed the ‘high ground’ posi- tion as one of dominance. With rare exception, whoever apply force from or owned the high ground owned the fight. Space is the ulti- through space mate high ground of U.S. military operations.” against terrestrial “Today, control of this high ground means superiority ... targets. Interna- and significant force enhancement. Tomorrow, ownership Teets tional treaties and may mean instant engagement anywhere in the world.” laws do not prohibit the use or presence of conven- “Planners should consider...the capability to deliver attacks from space.” tional weapons in space.” “[One] Mission Area, Space Force Application, focuses Joint Doctrine for Space Operations, Joint Chiefs of Staff, Au- on missions carried out by weapons systems operating from gust 9, 2002. or through space for holding terrestrial targets at risk.” December 2004 (Issue # 55) Press for Conversion! 21 2002: RAND Report, “Space Weapons - Earth Wars” By Leonard David, Senior Space energy beamed out and atmospheric Writer conditions, an energy beam can destroy a target on Earth’s surface; pace-based weapons are the Kinetic-energy weapons against mis- topic of a new report: Space sile targets. This hardware can ram SWeapons - Earth Wars. headlong into a target in space or an Authored by think-tank experts at object still within the upper reaches RAND – dedicated to help improve of Earth’s atmosphere; policy and decisionmaking through re- Space-based kinetic energy weapons search and analysis – the just released that slam into targets on the ground, study was prepared for the U.S. Air such as large ships, tall buildings, Force. and fuel tanks. Sleek and meteoroid- Bob Preston, who led the like in speed, these weapons attack RAND’s research effort, said that just targets at steep, nearly vertical tra- about all use of space from the begin- jectories; and ning has been about national security: Space-based conventional weapons “Even civilian scientific uses were un- capable of maneuvering to hit ter- dertaken in large part for security rea- restrial targets. These carry and dis- sons in the context of the Cold War. several distinct classes of weapons: pense rather exotic packages of de- There’s a pretty good point of view that Directed-energy weapons, such as struction, such as radio-frequency or says that almost everything we’ve ever space lasers. They use millions of high-power-microwave munitions. done in space has been predominately watts of power and large optics to Source: “Space Weapons For Earth motivated by a security perspective,” deliver a speed-of-light knockout Wars,” May 15, 2002

“The [Air Force Space Master Plan] vision looks 25 years Modernize [nuclear] Inter-Continental Ballistic Missiles and into the future and is summed up as follows: ‘Space develop non-nuclear prompt global strike capabilities. warfighting forces providing continuous deterrence and Transform space from being focused on Force Enhance- prompt global engagement for America and its allies ... ment to also providing a range of Force Application capa- through the control and exploitation of space.’” bilities beyond ICBMs in, from and through space. “Space warfighting forces are our people, weapon systems When challenged, pursue superiority in space through ro- and other capabilities that operate and employ space power bust space situation awareness, and defensive and offen- in, from and through space. When fully and seamlessly inte- sive counterspace capabilities. grated with other warfighting forces, space forces extend Conceiving and developing space systems responsive to the reach, precision and intensity of the war-fighter’s needs/concepts of op- U.S. military power and operations. “Today’s Space Force Application eration and fully integrated into land, Continuous deterrence and prompt glo- capabilities focus on nuclear de- sea, air and space warfighting systems.” bal engagement ensures the ability to terrence… We are aggressively “Today’s Space Force Application apply space forces when and where we modernizing our existing nuclear capabilities focus on nuclear deter- need them and that our adversary un- forces while developing an ad- rence… We are aggressively modern- derstands the advantage we possess vanced, flexible and responsive, izing our existing nuclear forces while from these forces. We will also pro- global deterrent force.” developing an advanced, flexible and vide space support to U.S. warfighters responsive, global deterrent force.” as well as our Allies and ensure our space systems are inte- “Conventional, non-nuclear prompt global strike from and grated and usable by coalition forces. Control and exploita- through space and space-based Target and Engagement for tion of space implies that we can use our space capabilities missile defense will transform AFSPC Space Force Appli- at our discretion while at the same time denying our adver- cation capabilities.” saries access to space assets at their disposal.” “A conventional strike capability, possibly in the form of a “Such a capability [nuclear and conventional] will provide Common Aero Vehicle [will be] launched by a ballistic mis- warfighting commanders the ability to rapidly deny, delay, sile, air launch system, or a space launch system.” deceive, disrupt, destroy, exploit and neutralise targets in “Expanding the role of space in future conflicts... produces hours/minutes rather than weeks/days.” a fully integrated air and space force that is persuasive in peace, “Strategy and Objectives: decisive in war and pre-eminent in any form of conflict.” Fully integrate space systems into the warfighter’s pack- Strategic Master Plan FY04 and Beyond, U.S. Airforce Space age to enable rapid, effective engagement of adversary Command, November 5, 2002. 22 Press for Conversion! (Issue # 55) December 2004 2003: and Unmanned Aerial Vehicle technologies.” More recently, the U.S. Defense Department now admits that “Secret,” “Confidential” and missile defence costs will be far higher than earlier estimates. “Canadian Eyes Only” One reason DND documents cite is work to develop: In January 2004, as a result of an Access to Information “a new platform for airborne laser, plus a new multipur- request, I [Mel Hurtig] received 306 pages of Department pose ‘kill vehicle’ and new satellites. Some observers fear of National Defence (DND) documents. Almost all were la- that BMD could accelerate... nuclear missile deployments, belled “secret,” “confidential” and “Canadian Eyes Only:” fuelling an arms race that could have an impact on [text 222 pages were “withheld” and the 84 released pages had blanked out] tensions.” blanked-out words, sentences and paragraphs. Some brief- And, in conclusion, the DND briefing notes state: ing notes were apparantly prepared for cabinet, including “BMD is perhaps one of the most important security ques- defence minister John McCallum, and successor David Pratt. tions the government will have to consider.” It’s quite clear that our DND had long ago made up Mel Hurtig, Rushing to Armageddon: The Shocking Truth its mind and strongly favours Canadian participation in the about Canada, Missile Defence and Star Wars, 2004. U.S. BMD plans. The documents explain that President Bush’s plans 2004: are far more ambitious than those of his predecessors, with “Among top-priority Air Force missions, controlling space huge increases in annual spending (2004 more than doubles is fast becoming as important as controlling the air. The na- previous years) and larger increases planned for the future. tion has come to count on air superiority in war, and now The DND briefing notes say that: must be able to count on space superiority as well, claim Air “Canada amended the NORAD agreement to specifically Force space officials. Many in the military space commu- exclude Canada and NORAD from BMD activities – a nity believe that to achieve this, the U.S. will have no choice policy that continues to this day.” but to deploy weapons in space.” This is not correct. In 1968, the Pearson government insisted James W. Canan, Aerospace American Online, February 22, 2004. that a clause be added to the NORAD agreement that: “will not involve in any way a Canadian commitment to “The U.S. plan to build a missile defence shield participate in an active ballistic missile defence.” poses a significant risk by paving the way for This clause was dropped by the Trudeau government in 1981. putting weapons into orbit.” DND notes that so far, the U.S.: Canadian Department of National Defence, report, cited by the “has spent an estimated $100 billion since 1983 on mis- Ottawa Citizen, January 9, 2004. sile defence research, and a similar amount in the 30 years before that.” “I was briefed by Pentagon and CIA on their plans to put DND also notes that the: weapons into space. So I simply know they’re going to do it.” “BMD program could present Canadian industry with sig- Georgiy Mamedov, Russian Ambassador to Canada, CBC TV, nificant commercial opportunities in strategic sectors.” October 3, 2004. And, they state that: “Washington, for the most part, is lim- iting the industrial benefits to those nations that actually endorse the concept of BMD politically.” This is exactly the kind of inducement the U.S. government used to encourage West- ern support for involvement in Iraq. Now consider this: “A significant risk associated with BMD from the non-proliferation and disarmament perspective is its rein- forcement of trends towards the weaponizing of outer space.” Moreover, the DND documents also state: “BMD could...increase the risks of fur- ther proliferation of missile technologies and weapons of mass destruction. Competitor states could seek to over- whelm missile defences through quali- tative and quantitative improvements to their missile fleets, or simply attempt to circumvent defences through aggressive exploitation of cruise missiles December 2004 (Issue # 55) Press for Conversion! 23