|
Paying the Bills for Space Control
Active for Justice, 13 April 2001
by Loring Wirbel
|
|
For the advocates of total planetary domination through space, who occupy
virtually every level within the defense bureaucracy these days, the first
months of the incoming Bush administration represent the proverbial best and
worst of times. Certainly, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld is a full-blown
advocate of militarizing space in order to insure U.S. control of world
resources, as spelled out in the Rumsfeld Commission's January 2001 report to
"Assess U.S. National Security Space Management and Organization." And missile
defense is a pet project of the entire Bush team ? regardless of whether it
works and who it alienates ? though the fiscal details will not be known until May.
Nevertheless, the Pentagon was placed on notice in late January that the
Bush team intends to scrutinize weapons procurement very carefully, and is
likely to pare down some expensive systems in order to improve troop readiness.
At this year's National Space Symposium, held April 9-12 at the Broadmoor in
Colorado Springs, it began to dawn on the lead representatives of the space
national security establishment that space-based imperialism could be very
expensive.
The National Reconnaissance Office, the nation's largest intelligence
agency, was the first to be placed on notice that it needs to get its fiscal
house in order. The agency was wracked with continuous budget scandals in the
mid-1990s, leading to the resignation of top staff. During the Clinton
administration, the NRO won approval for a new generation of imaging spy
satellite called the 8X Future Imagery Architecture. The initial contracts
awarded in the $25 billion program, to Boeing Corp. units in El Segundo and Seal
Beach, are one of the few factors cushioning the effects of the economic
downturn in southern California.
But on other fronts, the NRO hasn't been so lucky. It wanted a
multi-function space radar system called Discoverer II, but Congress killed the
bulk of the project last year, leaving only a transitional fund to allow the NRO
keep minimal study of the program alive. And the agency's latest generation of
listening satellites, called the Integrated Overhead SIGINT (Signals
Intelligence) Architecture, or IOSA, was supposed to be followed by IOSA-2, a
network made up of smaller, more agile listening satellites. IOSA-2 never won
approval.
The Bush transition team was examining even bigger changes in the NRO's
mission, and as a result, NRO Director Keith Hall resigned April 11. Hall may
go down as the first victim of the struggle between imperial bluster and
budgetary realities.
As befits the type of military leader for whom all offense is another type
of defense, none of the speakers at Space Symposium saw any irony in the
Rumsfeld Commission's warning of a "Space Pearl Harbor." The United States, of
course, maintains a military tens of times the size of any potential adversary,
and could not be threatened by a space adversary under any circumstance. But
the first Rumsfeld Commission, which examined missile-defense in 1998, concluded
that we had to be terrified of tiny North Korean intermediate-range missile
programs, so it is not surprising that the second Rumsfeld Commission saw
threats where none existed.
The newer commission calls for reorganizing space assets to attract the
president's direct attention, forming a special advisory group in the near term,
a Space Corps in the next few years, and eventually a full-fledged Department of
Space. The report called for expanded military capabilities in space to "deter
attack, strengthen intelligence, and defend our capabilities." It also called
for examining the Outer Space Treaty and other international treaties to "shape"
the treaties for U.S. interests.
Already, though, members of the service-specific Space Commands within the
Pentagon are complaining that the reorganization would prevent them from having
their own space weapons. Air Force Maj.Gen. Designee Mike Hamel, the director
of space operations and integration for the Space Command, said that the Air
Force has too much expertise to give it up to a centralized space regime. Rear
Adm. Robert Nutwell, the deputy assistant secretary of defense for command,
control, communications, intelligence, and space, said that the Defense
Department wants to be sure the Navy, Army, and Air Force all can preserve their
own space missions in the new structure.
Former Air Force Secretary Whit Peters was the most critical of the
commission report, saying that it calls for continuous operations in space,
without showing how operations like cyberwar and ground war truly require that
presence. He said there is not enough money in the budget to take on the type
of duties the Space Command talks about in its literature, and that all space
forces will have to go through the type of paring that the NRO faced last year.
Carol Staubach, director of advanced systems and technology at the NRO,
said that the U.S. is forsaking any long-range research spending on space
intelligence, in favor of solving short-term problems. The result could be a
serious deterioration of intelligence satellite capabilities in the future, she
said. A special presidential commission on the NRO issued a report last
November, calling for the creation of a special Office of Space Reconnaissance
within NRO, which would be capable of bending rules and busting budgets in order
to come up with revolutionary new snooping platforms. Staubach said that NRO
can't perform detailed work on creating such an office until the program is
approved by Congress, though it is making initial studies on how to change its
long-range research.
But despite all the soul-searching, chutzpah remained in heavy supply, from
the "Arsenal of Freedom" speech by Lockheed-Martin executive vice president Al
Smith, who called for a "new order of battle" in space; to Space Command chief
Gen. Ed Eberhard, who indicated that the command would take even greater strides
in using space to aid "warfighters" in the future.
Advertising displays on the show floor of the symposium were toned down
from years past, perhaps in recognition that too much bombast does not make for
good PR. But the cheerleaders for the Rumsfeld Commission's report may face a
future problem as vexing as moral criticism: the inability to pay for all the
plans to dominate the planet through space.
|