Supraglobal Space Command

[EndtheMadnessNow]

Space Command’s Lt. Gen John Shaw Says Space Is 'Under Threat'

In an exclusive interview, the military branch’s second in command talks about junk in orbit, cyberattacks, satellite vulnerabilities, and Russia's war in Ukraine.

In 2019, former president Donald Trump formed a new military branch by splitting the Space Force off from the Air Force and reviving an older organization called the Space Command to take charge of military operations in space. Both are now tasked with protecting US interests and deterring conflict in space. At first they struggled to attain legitimacy; the Space Force was spoofed on the internet [and Mad Max Maxine wanted to abolish Space Force] and even as a Netflix show. But the Biden administration has since proposed a 25 percent larger budget for the new branch, signaling the growing prominence of space security within the Defense Department.

Last month, Shaw, the second-in-command, published a paper titled “Sailing the New Wine-Dark Sea” in the inaugural issue of the military journal Aether. There, he argues that the US military should treat space as an “area of responsibility,” territory that needs to be maintained and defended, not merely traversed by spacecraft. In his paper and this exclusive conversation with WIRED, Shaw frequently makes historical references—his paper’s title alludes to The Odyssey—and connects challenges in space to those faced by the Navy and Air Force.

"The way modern warfare in the 21st century works, it depends on space."

Could you clarify for our readers the difference between the Space Command and Space Force?

The way our Department of Defense is set up, we have services that recruit and train people. Think of the United States Air Force: It recruits airmen, it trains pilots and other career fields, and it produces airplanes. But the other part of our Department of Defense is the combatant commands that actually conduct warfighting. If there is an operation to be done in space, the Space Force might be the service that gives us the capability, but the Space Command will conduct those operations. These combatant commands are independent of the services, and those commanders report directly to the secretary of defense.

What are those biggest threats?

Our primary potential adversaries are China and Russia, which have clearly already demonstrated multiple ways that they would hold our space capabilities at risk. We’ve seen this in 2007, when China tested an anti-satellite missile that blew up one of their own satellites. By the way, today we’re still tracking thousands of pieces of debris from that test. That represents a threat to safety and navigation in space. Not a good event.

And then, most recently, Russia did the same thing on the 15th of November last year, blew up one of their satellites. And now we have hundreds more pieces of debris that we’re tracking because of that. In addition, they continue to develop other capabilities: satellite and navigation signal jamming capabilities; directed energy capabilities from the ground that could be used to dazzle, disrupt, or even damage satellites in low earth orbit, and so on.

So why are China and Russia doing this? Because they see what space means to modern warfare, and how dependent our terrestrial forces are on space capabilities. And they want to hold them at risk, because they’re actually afraid of the capabilities that our space assets bring to bear.

What do you think should change, or could change, with the Space Command moving forward? Are there any policy changes you’d like to see, or issues or technologies you’d like to see the Space Command pay more attention to?

One thing in particular General Dickinson and I are interested in is, up until now, most of our attention in the space domain has been focused on our area of responsibility, 100 kilometers out. And we feel we need to look much further, out to the cislunar sphere, or we call it ex-GEO, or just beyond GEO [geostationary orbit]. Because we think a lot of activity is going on there.

And we want to support and encourage new technologies that will give us new capabilities. Nuclear thermal propulsion and nuclear electric propulsion, these kinds of emerging technologies are ones we’re interested in.

Excerpts from his paper on US Space Command:

For the first time in military history, a military AOR is not defined by geographic lines on a map. In fact, the etymology of the word geographic is Greek and means “drawn on the earth.”

In light of this key distinction, a better term defines the US Space Command AOR: astrographic, which means “drawn on the stars.” All other combatant commands’ AORs are defined by latitude and longitude lines on a map or geographic features.

Proposition Alpha Prime

The area NOT in the US Space Command area of responsibility is the most special place in the cosmos.

The place in the universe not covered by the space AOR, that is, 100km of altitude and down—approximately 1x10-24 percent of the known universe—is the most special place in the cosmos and will remain so for millennia to come. We do not explore space simply for the sake of exploring space; we do it for the benefit of humankind. And those humans live on Earth. It is critical to remember this fact. Human activity in
space starts below 100km, and these operations and efforts certainly apply to US Space Command.


Proposition Two:

The word “global” is increasingly insufficient to fully describe the political/military range of national security considerations.

How might the Department remedy this? About 15–20 years ago, the word “supra-national” was introduced to discuss threats that superseded the borders of nation-states. Given the command’s domain and responsibilities, a new term may be warranted:

supraglobal, or those things that are relevant to military or political matters that encompass the globe and relevant activities in the space beyond it.

The English language does not have a word that adequately conveys a sense of that which lies beyond the global terrain, but supraglobal could be a remedy.
....
Proposition Three

The concept of key terrain must be reimagined in the space domain.
Key terrain is a concept as old as warfare and requires nuanced conceptual thinking in different domains. In doctrine, key terrain is defined as “any locality, or area, the seizure or retention of which affords a marked advantage to either combatant.” But such advantages are gained differently from one domain to another.

Proposition Four

The military space area of responsibility has relevance for everyone. The ways in which US Space Command, with the help of its service components, operates within the AOR is relevant to all activity in space. At a baseline level, the AOR directly enhances Joint and combined operations across the globe and beyond.
...
The general population of Earth benefits as well, even if most people may not be aware of it. Nearly every person across the planet is an end user of space capabilities, and day-to-day life activities are protected by the formation of the AOR. Since its inception, the global positioning system (GPS) has enabled over $1.4 trillion in US economic benefits. Whenever people visit a gas station and pay at the pump or use an ATM, they are using space.

In 2020, the global space economy increased to $447 billion with approximately 80 percent of the total due to commercial endeavors. By some estimates, another 17,000 satellites will be launched by 2030, most with commercial origins.

ÆTHER: A JOURNAL OF STRATEGIC AIRPOWER & SPACEPOWER - SAILING THE NEW WINE-DARK SEA (PDF)

Supra Et Ultra ~ (Above And Beyond) in surveillance.


Æther Journal


I'll see ya in the Aether.