THE SPACE

The Cartesian mind of human beings struggles to comprehend the vastness of space. Therefore, it is necessary to subdivide space in a conventional and understandable way. This artificial division allows for the delineation of various spaces by characterizing them based on the benefits they can bring to humanity. Starting from the closest space to the farthest from Earth, three distinct zones can be defined.

Circumterrestrial Space: Centered around the Earth, this zone begins at an altitude of a few hundred kilometers and extends to around 40,000 kilometers. These boundaries are entirely artificial, defined by the limits of possible satellite orbits. The lowest orbits cannot be below 200 kilometers, while the highest, for geostationary satellites, are around 36,000 kilometers. There is a void between the maximum altitude of conventional aircraft (around 40 kilometers) and the beginning of circumterrestrial space. This region, inaccessible to planes and unusable for satellite applications, is only traversed by ballistic missile trajectories and launchers aiming to reach satellite altitudes. Defined this way, circumterrestrial space is where most of the major space-related interests are concentrated, as the majority of satellite exploitation possibilities depend on access to this narrow band, which is small compared to the vastness of space. This paper will focus primarily on this accessible near-space, whose strategic stakes are already well established.

Solar and Lunar Space: This space is defined within the limits of the solar system, excluding Earth and the circumterrestrial fringe. This region could present interests in the longer term. It is reasonable to believe that technological advances will eventually allow for its exploitation, starting with our natural satellite, the Moon. For now, unfortunately, the current international context of systematic research for rationalization and efficiency does not encourage the exploration of our solar system. If the race to the Moon, initiated by the United States in the 1960s, aimed to restore national prestige and demonstrate American technological superiority, it quickly showed its limits once the goal was achieved. Today, no one would propose a large lunar program with such limited practical interest. Only significant technical progress in space access and a considerable reduction in costs could reignite interest in solar and lunar space. This space will only be addressed in this paper through the space epic of the Apollo program, which remains one of the greatest events of the 20th century.

Deep Space: This extends beyond the limits of the solar system and, paradoxically, despite its infinity, has very limited practical use for humanity. To date, only scientific research has utilized this space through observation. The domains of this fundamental research primarily involve explaining the genesis of our world and understanding its evolution. Of course, these objectives are of great importance to science, but they lack direct political or strategic interests and do not attract significant funding. Additionally, current technology and the uncompressible duration of travel imposed by sub-light speeds do not allow for access to this space in the near future. Moreover, the outcomes of such operations would be minimal in comparison to the cost, and the pragmatism of today's societies would balk at such a disproportion. Strategically, deep space offers few major interests and, therefore, will not be discussed further in this paper.

Like the ocean depths, circumterrestrial space is inherently hostile to humans. The absence of oxygen and gravity, combined with low temperatures and harmful radiation, are significant obstacles to human presence in space. This difficulty is a major hindrance to the efficient exploitation of this environment. A constant human presence would ensure the maintenance and energy supply of satellite systems, which would increase their lifespan. Additionally, it would provide the possibility of direct attacks on enemy satellites or ballistic missiles. The new Sea Launch concept, developed in collaboration between three companies (Boeing, Kvaerner, and RSC Energia), uses a mobile and semi-submersible oil platform. It eliminates geographical and environmental constraints and offers flexibility and discretion, which holds significant military interest. Despite the experience gained over the past fifty years, satellite launches remain a difficult and costly technique. In 1998, only 160 satellites were launched worldwide, despite unprecedented growth in communications, particularly in the field of telephony.

To be a player in space, it is essential to meet several criteria. Access to space is still limited to countries with the technology, financial resources, and, above all, a clear political will.

Faced with the new global disorder stemming from the end of the Cold War and new types of international crises, space technologies are proving to be valuable military tools for satellite-owning powers. Military strategists and aerospace experts believe that observation and surveillance satellites provide armies with invaluable information on enemy forces, their positions, military potential, troop movements, and strategic infrastructure (airports, ministries, main roads, railways, etc.). Control of information, central to modern wars and 21st-century conflicts, is now an indispensable geostrategic resource for winning a battle. Thierry Garcin, an expert on the subject, gives a clearer idea of the functions of satellites: "Satellites allow for communication, observation, tracking hostile forces, proposing and updating a target plan, analyzing the space capabilities of others, sending or interpreting a political signal, hiding or disinforming." Recent conflicts illustrate the increasing prominence of military space activities.

It is thus legitimate to ask whether space is on the verge of becoming a battleground for rivalry between major powers and a key contributor to defense strategy.

A critical tool for collecting, analyzing, and disseminating information on a global scale, a favored location for the installation of space weaponry, and a significant multiplier of military operational capabilities, space could itself become a theater of confrontation between great powers. Moreover, in a geostrategic environment characterized more than ever by instability and the emergence of various threats, it remains an essential element of any defense strategy focused on crisis prevention and control of information.

Through high-tech space technology, which plays a role in multiplying operational capabilities in space, the latter could, in the more distant future, become the scene of total warfare, and remain a key element in defense strategy.

I-HIGH SPACE TECHNOLOGY AND MULTIPLICATION OF OPERATIONAL CAPACITIES IN SPACE

From launching hyperspectral satellites to the spaceplane, including communication and positioning systems, space technologies have proven to be valuable tools for developing military operational capabilities.

11. Spy Satellites 

The new means under consideration include satellites capable of seeing through camouflage, an orbiting radar monitoring troop and vehicle movements, more powerful communication satellites providing soldiers with mobile-like connections, and orbital sensors that can track ballistic missiles. The Pentagon's wishlist includes both offensive and defensive potential – such as a military spaceplane, a space-based laser, and a re-entry vehicle capable of dropping bombs of any size. During the current decade, the National Reconnaissance Office and the Pentagon plan to virtually replace their entire inventory of observation satellites at a cost exceeding $60 billion. The plan is to acquire a fleet of devices with sharper eyes than the optical imaging satellites available today, and finally to purchase equipment capable of providing continuous visual data of a target, unlike current models. One of the technologies being evaluated is hyperspectral satellites, capable of taking images in hundreds of visible and infrared wavelengths. Such satellites could, for instance, reveal a tank hidden by camouflage netting because infrared imaging would detect the heat emitted by the engine. Another technology being considered is a network of orbital radars that would continuously emit signals bouncing off the Earth's surface and detect mobile targets like trucks or missile launchers in all conditions – cloudy, stormy, or night-time. "If you're a bad guy and you move, we'll see you move," summarizes Robert Dickman, Deputy for Military Space at the Office of the Under Secretary of the Air Force. The military already uses radar planes to spot moving ground targets, as during surveillance of the "Highway of Death," the main route between Kuwait and Iraq during the Gulf War. Additionally, in 1994 and 2000, the National Administration and Space Agency (NASA) successfully orbited radars aboard the space shuttle. But to achieve the global and constant radar coverage that the Pentagon wants – a system that wouldn't risk pilots' lives or use foreign airspace – a constellation of at least two dozen high-energy satellites in low orbit would be required. "We'd like to be able to launch by the end of the decade," Dickman specifies, "but space radar is a big challenge, both technologically and financially." One possibility is represented by the Technology Satellite of the 21st Century, or TechSat 21, a concept being studied by the Air Force Research Laboratory. Instead of large satellites the size and weight of cars, TechSat 21 would use "virtual satellites" – groups of microsatellites weighing 136 kg each. Each microsatellite would have a bistatic receiver that would not only detect its own radar signals reflected by the Earth's surface but also those of its neighbors, improving the resolution of the images collected. Researchers are confident that mass production of microsatellites working in groups will render current expensive devices obsolete. Among the advantages is the fact that when a microsatellite fails, the entire system doesn't need to be replaced. Additionally, flexibility will be greater, as operators will be able to conduct different missions simply by reconfiguring the groups. For example, the same group of microsatellites could initially be dispersed to provide planetary radar coverage, then regroup within hours for in-depth research of small sectors.

12. Global Positioning System (GPS) 

The main difference between the next generation of GPS satellites – named GPS III – and current models is that they will have separate signals for civilian and military use. This will make it harder to jam military signals. The importance of such capability was highlighted two years ago when engineers from the Air Force Research Laboratory used instructions downloaded from the Internet to build an amateur device for $7,500 that could easily drown GPS signals in electronic noise. This demonstration confirmed fears that any enemy with little more than internet access could counter a smart bomb attack. Scheduled for readiness by the end of the decade, GPS III will avoid this by emitting a more powerful and focused signal than existing equipment provides. Such narrow beams will be virtually impossible to jam without expensive and sophisticated devices. GPS III satellites will also have improved clocks. The more precise the time information sent by satellites, the more accurately receivers can calculate the distance traveled by the signals and then triangulate a position using measurements from at least three satellites. With better GPS positioning data, satellite-guided weapons will be able to hit their targets more precisely – within less than a meter, compared to an average of six meters today.

13. Elastic Bandwidth 

Approximately half of the roughly 700 operational satellites are American; among them, 110 are military satellites used for navigation, communication, weather forecasting, imaging, surveillance, and early warning of missile launches. The problem is that each branch of intelligence agencies and the military is connected to these satellites by a proprietary system, which experts call a "stovepipe" because they all send information between a ground station and space but are poorly equipped to distribute data across a large network. "What we don't want is what we have today: scattered, independent databases," says Hugo Poza, Senior Vice President of Homeland Security at Raytheon. "The retention of information enabled 9/11. It wasn't a technology failure; it was a network failure." The Pentagon hopes to overcome these shortcomings with what it calls a transformational communications system, a giant web capable of managing and distributing all military information. With this network, for example, if a surveillance drone captures an image of moving Al-Qaeda members, the photo will be immediately transmitted to special forces units on the ground, in time to intercept the enemy. One of the major deficiencies that this system aims to correct is the existing lack of bandwidth in remote and underdeveloped regions of new conflicts. Detailed images taken by unmanned Predator and Global Hawk planes can easily overwhelm military networks, particularly in places like Afghanistan, where telecommunications infrastructure is barely existent. In an extended effort to increase bandwidth, the military hopes to begin replacing traditional radio signal transmission technologies with advanced laser optical beam systems. The Pentagon has requested $200 million in the next budget to accelerate the launch of laser communications, which according to the agency can support even the heaviest traffic while circulating information faster around the globe by transmitting it instantly from one satellite to another. Work is also underway on new narrowband systems, used for voice communications or low-data-rate communications between soldiers who can carry only limited equipment in the field. The multisatellite Mobile User Objective System, scheduled for launch in 2008, will provide voice and data services similar to cell phones with portable terminals.

14. Redefining Satellites 

Today's satellites are large and complex, making their launch expensive. Once in orbit, there is also no simple or inexpensive way to maintain them. That's why the idea of upgradable satellites is so appealing to the defense industry, whose engineers are borrowing ideas from computer science to design a "plug-and-play" satellite that can be reprogrammed with new software or inspected, refueled, and repaired in orbit. The first step is represented by a joint effort between DARPA (Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency), NASA, Boeing, and Ball Aerospace and Technologies Corp. to build a model of a repairable satellite called NextSat within a few years. Then, in late 2006, this team hopes to launch a smaller satellite, ASTRO (short for Autonomous Space Transport Robotic Operations), to conduct an orbital rendezvous with NextSat and prove that the two satellites can dock. If this demonstration is successful, full development of a fleet of modifiable satellites will follow. However, these new technologies also have a dangerous side. A spacecraft capable of inspecting, refueling, or reprogramming a satellite could also disable it, destroy it, or reprogram it. An enemy microsatellite would be difficult to detect and could even be contained within a larger, seemingly harmless satellite. A worrying sign of such a possibility, a Hong Kong newspaper cited Chinese sources in 2000 claiming that China had already conducted a ground test of a "parasite" satellite, which could attach itself to an enemy satellite and destroy it later if necessary. This report has not been confirmed. Among the most coveted items on the military's list is a spaceplane, a reusable unmanned vehicle that can be launched at short notice. It could drop or refuel satellites, place them in new orbits, or replace their equipment and software. It could also act as a temporary satellite for surveillance or communication missions. As General Ed Eberhart, Commander-in-Chief of NORAD (North American Aerospace Defense Command) and US Space Command, points out, such a plane could also be useful for "putting steel on a target." The idea of a spaceplane has been around for 40 years. The National Aerospace Plane program, created to design a supersonic jet capable of transporting payloads into space or bombing targets around the globe within hours, was abandoned in 1994. Engineers realized that the plane would never be able to reach orbital speed on its own. Now, NASA has allocated $4.8 billion for a Space Launch Initiative to develop a replacement for the shuttle, in the form of another two-stage reusable vehicle, far less expensive to maintain and fly. The Department of Defense has joined this program. The first demonstration of this spaceplane in its military version is expected around the end of the decade, and the Pentagon hopes to have an operational unmanned vehicle by 2014. This spaceplane, known as the Space Operations Vehicle (SOV), will be a carrier capable of transporting a range of different payloads and will probably be no larger than the space shuttle. In a separate program, the Pentagon is developing a smaller unmanned spaceplane called the Space Maneuver Vehicle (SMV), which could be launched by the SOV, a rocket, or even a high-altitude aircraft. Boeing has already built a scaled-down model and dropped it from a helicopter to demonstrate its landing capabilities. Among the payloads the SMV could carry is the Common Aero Vehicle, a re-entry vehicle that would drop bombs of various sizes. Tests of the SMV could begin in 2006. Eberhart imagines the spaceplane as a temporary satellite, capable of placing and then retrieving the SMV in orbit. He envisions it as part of a program to extend the use of current spacecraft – the so-called "Operationally Responsive Spacelift" program – and eventually provide soldiers with "realtime imagery and signals intelligence, including an early warning of missile attacks." In the meantime, Lockheed Martin is building a prototype to launch satellites within 24 hours of an order from the Pentagon. According to Bruce Jackson, Vice President of Strategy and Planning at Lockheed Martin Space Systems, "We need to be able to go into space in a matter of hours to replace or launch military satellites or eliminate gaps in surveillance coverage."

II- SPACE, THE FUTURE THEATER OF MILITARY OPERATIONS

The emergence of new threats, the militarization of space—which has seen an unprecedented surge in activities—and the rapid development of new technologies used in recent conflicts remain the preludes to an impending confrontation and a full-scale war in space.

21. Aerospace Warfare as Seen by Americans and Russians

It is extremely interesting to observe the convergence between American and Russian military thinking regarding future combat modes. The latter inherits directly from Soviet tradition. One might even think that the excessive focus of French strategic thought, itself lacking, could be advantageously counterbalanced by paying more attention to developments in Russia, particularly in planning and intelligence organizations.

What we know about Russian perceptions of future warfare is quite instructive. The rapid development of new technologies first showed their military effects during the Gulf War. This has led to the emergence of an essentially new type of warfare: "sixth-generation warfare"—aerospace warfare. As Russian Defense Minister Pavel Grachev noted in early 1993, "future wars will begin with offensive aerospace operations from both sides." In such a war, there will be no front line, and space will emerge as an independent theater of military operations. Since strategic objectives can be achieved through massive aerospace strikes during the initial phase, victory could be secured without the need for ground forces to occupy territory.

Regarding space specifically, Russian military leaders view it as a potential strategic theater. The Gulf War demonstrated the growing role and importance of military space support systems (communications, navigation, reconnaissance, early warning, etc.). At the same time, the nature of space-based threats is being reassessed, particularly with the emergence of developing countries capable of deploying objects into orbit for support functions. According to Russian military officials, "It is now impossible to exclude the possibility that the main issue of war will move to space, if it hasn’t already."

The United States is striving to achieve space supremacy because space is synonymous with reconnaissance, communications, command and control, target designation, and tactical space systems. Russia has felt the need to have its own space forces to counter the enemy, create anti-missile systems, and conduct space surveillance. Preparation for space warfare is deemed necessary.

Based on the latest prospective studies conducted in the United States on future military use of space, especially under the initiative of the US Air Force (and perhaps also Russian intelligence services), it is clear that America's ambition is to transform space into a full-fledged strategic theater and to achieve military dominance there. This ambition involves a shift in the strategic paradigm, as described earlier, based on the widespread use of constellations, tactical mini-satellites, and flexible, economical, and responsive space access systems.

According to the Spacecast 2020 study, space must fulfill three major strategic functions: global vision ("Global View"), global reach ("Global Reach"), and global power ("Global Power").

• Global vision refers to all C3I functions at the heart of the RMA (Revolution in Military Affairs), which are expected to provide battlefield transparency.
• Global reach refers to the ability to deploy all necessary space assets over a theater of operations whenever required.
• Global power includes capabilities for space defense, space offense, and force projection from space.

The most promising concepts are the TransAtmospheric Vehicle (TAV), capable of performing a wide range of military missions (placing small payloads into low orbit, anti-satellite operations, strategic precision bombing of terrestrial targets), and constellations of satellites armed with multifunctional lasers.

We will not go into further detail. The essential takeaway is that the United States intends to fully exploit all theoretical utilities of space (observation, intelligence, communication relay, firepower) over the long term. Transforming the environment into a full-fledged strategic theater requires being able to conduct the full range of military operations there. According to the Russian assessment, space appears to Americans as the domain with the most significant long-term military potential. It is no coincidence that they are considering exploiting the potential of hyper-altitude with the most promising current destructive technology—lasers (instant lethality, impossible to evade), which may one day be able to neutralize ballistic-nuclear vectors.

22. Militarized Space: Subject of Debate or Done Deal?

The weaponization of space could take several forms. First, there is the threat from space strike or orbital bombardment systems. Orbital bombardment weapons are systems that operate in space for one or more orbits and strike terrestrial, maritime, or aerial targets. Second, there are anti-satellite (ASAT) weapons designed to degrade, damage, or permanently destroy enemy satellites. Finally, there are anti-ballistic missile (ABM) defense systems. Some variants of ABM systems can be deployed in outer space and used to destroy ballistic missiles during their boost and midcourse phases of flight. Hypothetical weapons such as space-based lasers or missile interceptors using kinetic energy may be capable of fulfilling these three functions.

The development, testing, and deployment of space-based ABM defense systems could threaten current peaceful uses of outer space and challenge the explicit right of all countries to access it. The implicit authorization to use space may favor the first country to deploy such weapons. Space launchers may then have to risk being fired upon by space-based weapons to access outer space. Given the enormous economic significance of outer space for the international community and its importance for maintaining global peace and security, not to mention the wealth of extraterrestrial resources, other countries could accelerate the R&D of terrestrial and space technologies to break this monopoly on militarization, thus precipitating a space arms race.

Since the end of World War II, space has become a strategic issue, offering a wide field for military experimentation during the Cold War up to the collapse of the Soviet bloc. Earth observation satellites, telecommunications satellites, and the GPS system—whose role proved crucial during operations in Afghanistan for navigating B-52 bombers—have all been used for military purposes for about 50 years and can be considered "space weapons."

Space weapons can be classified into four major categories:

1. Directed-energy weapons, including electronic jamming devices for transmissions and telecommunications and laser weapons.
2. Kinetic-energy weapons against missiles, which intercept and destroy missiles during their flight phase.
3. Kinetic-energy weapons against surface targets, targeting ground or surface-based targets such as ships, missile silos, and anti-aircraft shelters from space.
4. Space-based conventional weapons against surface targets, systems that could use proven technologies such as nuclear warheads launched from space.

These systems have undeniable advantages, such as easy access to targets and rapid deployment within minutes or hours, unlike conventional means, which take time to reach their destination. Afghan and Kosovo conflicts exemplify wars fought far from the rear base. Space weapons are also less vulnerable to attacks than conventional systems.

However, there are drawbacks. Space weapons are relatively static, and their orbits can be observed, analyzed, and predicted. All laser-based systems require the launch of very large satellites, necessitating heavy-lift launchers, making them very expensive. For these weapons to be effective, they must be deployed in large numbers to ensure they hit the right targets at the right time. The Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI), or "Star Wars," and its offshoot, "Missile Defense," proposed by Republican administrations from Ronald Reagan to George W. Bush, are programs of such budgetary and technological scale comparable to the U.S. entry into World War II after the attack on Pearl Harbor. These programs require close control of a revitalized U.S. industrial base, increasing budgets, and broader societal support.

However, there are legal limitations, such as the obligations the United States and most spacefaring powers have signed up to, especially during the Cold War and the Vietnam conflict. This mainly includes the 1967 Treaty on the Use of Outer Space, which is part of international law and explicitly bans the use of weapons of mass destruction in space. Despite these legal restrictions, the United States interprets that these bans could be lifted in cases of self-defense.

Japan's decision to deploy a constellation of four military observation satellites—two of which should be launched by the end of 2007—responds to the North Korean missile that flew over Japanese territory in the summer of 1999. This missile went undetected by U.S. surveillance systems supposed to protect Japan under the defense treaties signed between the two countries. This situation perfectly illustrates how a threat can legitimize the non-respect of one of the basic principles of Japan’s space policy, which is the peaceful use of space.

23. Space Technologies at the Center of New Conflicts

With the new global disorder following the end of the Cold War and the emergence of new types of international crises, space technologies have proven to be valuable military tools for countries that own satellites. Military strategists and aerospace experts consider observation and surveillance satellites to provide armies with invaluable information on the adversary’s forces, positions, military potential, troop movements, or strategic infrastructures (airports, ministries, main roads, railways, etc.). Information dominance, which lies at the heart of modern wars and 21st-century conflicts, is now an indispensable geostrategic resource for winning battles. Thierry Garcin, an expert on the subject, gives a clearer idea of the functions of satellites: "Satellites enable communication, observation, tracking of hostile forces, proposing and updating target plans, analyzing the space capabilities of others, delivering or interpreting political signals, and hiding or disinforming."

The conflicts following the Cold War illustrate this rise in military space power. Space technologies played an increasing role during the Gulf War (1991), NATO’s air campaign in Serbia (1999), and more recently, the U.S. intervention in Afghanistan (2001). The international response against Saddam Hussein, orchestrated by the Pentagon and the White House, allowed the U.S. to experiment with high-precision GPS-guided missiles launched against the dictator's infrastructure and troops, map and strike Iraqi targets, and manage the deployment of U.S. troops and vehicles in the desert. Therefore, the U.S. Army relied heavily on space assets to maintain a decisive advantage over the Iraqi armed forces, which were unfamiliar with these high-tech operations.

Furthermore, space capabilities have become a decisive factor in protecting international peace and security, especially during international crises, by using observation and surveillance satellites as deterrents to monitor zones of tension. The “first great victory for American space,” according to experts, took place during the Cuban Missile Crisis (1962). The second was during the Gulf War in 1991, when the U.S. successfully bombed Iraq’s military installations with GPS precision-guided missiles.

Anti-Satellite Warfare

The first form of warfare that could emerge in space involves, as we've seen, the destruction or neutralization of enemy satellites. This is primarily a war for control of information. Before being able to destroy or jam a satellite, one must first be able to locate it precisely. This requires massive installations (ground radar networks, trajectory calculation centers...) such as those of NORAD (North American Air Defense Command) in the United States. Initially developed to detect any ballistic missile attack from the former USSR, this network also allows the tracking of over 5,000 space objects and provides predictions of when a specific satellite will pass over a given point. A specialized command center, the U.S. Space Command, is located at Peterson Air Force Base in the United States. This advanced warning system centralizes all information from ground installations as well as satellites and allows for the detection of any tactical missile launch in risk areas and the characterization of their trajectories in less than two minutes. Thus, the means used to provide information to neutralize ballistic missiles are partly the same as those needed to neutralize enemy satellites.

France, though very discreet on this subject, remains in the race. An experiment with a "GRAVE" radar based on new technology, capable of "tracking" satellites and thus providing overflight predictions and location data, took place two years ago and seems to have attracted renewed attention. According to some "open" sources, it is planned that such a radar will be equipped by the French Air Force and integrated into its future SCCOA (Air Operations Command and Control System) network, which will be compatible with its counterpart ACCS (Allied Command and Control System), to be equipped by most major European countries. Once the satellite is located, it must still be either destroyed or neutralized.

The United States has programs and systems allowing them to destroy or damage satellites in low Earth orbit and geostationary orbit. They have already successfully destroyed a satellite in low Earth orbit using an anti-satellite missile launched from an F-15 fighter at high altitude. For the destruction of satellites in higher orbit, they considered the Brilliant Pebbles program, consisting of anti-satellite satellites (currently, the project has been abandoned). They are also studying the possibility of blinding satellites using laser beams or particle beams emitted from Earth, aircraft, or other satellites (like the modified Boeing 747 ABL: Airborne Laser). However, it should be noted that the destruction of a satellite by explosion will produce many debris that will remain in orbit, potentially blocking access to those orbits for a long time. This is especially problematic since space is already becoming cluttered with debris from out-of-service satellites or rocket remnants. Therefore, a widespread destruction of satellites is unlikely. Only very targeted, non-repeated actions are "reasonable," as generalized destruction could render space inaccessible for everyone. In the more distant future, this solution will likely be abandoned. The more probable approach at present is to blind satellites using beams or jam them more conventionally. This is the most likely avenue for now.

Control of access to space should not be neglected. However, it is important to identify the most effective means of doing so without overestimating this threat for now. In the short term, this threat is minor, but it is expected to evolve rapidly. While there may be other current priorities, Europeans should at least maintain technological vigilance in these areas to be prepared when the time comes.

Observation Satellites, Surveillance, Remote Sensing, Guided Missiles, Satellite-Guided Bombs, Electronic Eavesdropping, Real-Time Information Transmission, and Secure High-Bandwidth Communication remain the primary means for future aerospace confrontations, making space an integral part of defense activities for major powers.

III- SPACE: A CRUCIAL CONTRIBUTOR TO DEFENSE STRATEGY

Providing superior operational capabilities and command of military operations, the use of space is increasingly seen as essential to any defense strategy focused on crisis prevention and information control.

31. Future Threats to the World

311. The Threat of Ballistic Proliferation

A new type of threat is on the horizon, first revealed during the Gulf War. Everyone remembers the threat posed by Iraqi Scud missiles during the conflict. These missiles, difficult to detect without advanced warning satellites, were suspected of carrying chemical or biological warheads, and their range, combined with the difficulty of interception, threatened Israel and aimed to draw other countries into the conflict. It was a combination of the low effectiveness of these very crude missiles and American high technology, symbolized by the Patriot anti-missile missiles, that this threat was contained (even if the effectiveness of the Patriots was more psychological than real).

Since then, many unstable countries have developed, acquired, and improved ballistic missile technology, including Syria, India, Pakistan, and North Korea. In January 2000, Scud missile parts were intercepted in the United Kingdom while en route to Libya. These were improved Scud missiles with a range that could reach much of the Mediterranean basin from Libya. As for the warheads carried by these missiles, while the nuclear threat is relatively contained, the main risk lies in the use of chemical, bacteriological, or biological warheads by unstable countries. This threat was already considered during the Cold War, and we all remember Ronald Reagan's dramatic announcement about the United States' decision to develop a global anti-missile system called SDI (Strategic Defense Initiative, commonly known as Star Wars). Certainly, this announcement was primarily aimed at drawing the Soviet Union into a ruinous technological race. Given the declared ambitions and technological possibilities of the time, as well as the economic state of the USSR, one can be convinced of this idea, especially when a few years later, the Soviet Union collapsed.

Since then, the United States, more aware of the economic and technical realities of implementing this initial project and less concerned about the now-defunct Soviet threat, has reoriented the project. It has now been divided into two other programs. One, called NMD (National Missile Defense), aims to protect the United States from a limited ballistic attack of up to 200 missiles. The second part, called TMD (Theater Missile Defense), is designed to protect U.S. armed forces deployed and operating on foreign territory. Thus, the threat posed by the proliferation of cheap and rudimentary ballistic missiles is very real and will only grow. This threat must therefore be taken seriously. Likewise, the U.S.'s soon-to-be-realized ability to offer ballistic missile protection for their own troops or allied forces could destabilize the global economic and diplomatic balance if Europe lacks this capability.

312. The Threat of Unstable Countries Accessing Space

Although space is currently accessible only to relatively stable countries (in terms of launcher control), it is not unreasonable to believe that soon, some more "unstable" nations will also have access, albeit in a limited way. Many already possess communication and even observation satellites (with limited capabilities) launched by countries with launchers willing to sell their services. It is not possible, for ethical reasons, to prevent some from accessing this information or communication systems. These systems also have indispensable applications for civilian populations. In modern conflicts, it is clear that if only one of the two belligerents has space systems, it gives them a significant advantage. However, if both belligerents have space capabilities, even in unequal proportions, the advantage of the one with more and better systems is no longer as decisive. We must not forget that an enemy's ability to inflict even minor losses just once can significantly influence public opinion and, therefore, the outcome of a conflict.

Thus, while it is not feasible to prevent some countries from accessing space, it seems worthwhile to control it (through interception, jamming, etc.).

32. The Use of Space Resources for Crisis Prevention and Management

Space resources play an essential role in the political, diplomatic, and strategic phases of risk prevention and threat analysis. They are equally important in the operational management of crises.

321. Crisis Prevention

In the crisis prevention phase, the goal is to gather as much information as possible through reconnaissance, localization, and interception, for instance, to form an independent analysis of the situation and decide on appropriate actions. Space systems play a crucial and unique role due to their discretion and non-aggressive nature in observing latent risks of crises before they escalate into real threats. Space resources are therefore an indispensable and irreplaceable tool for political decision-makers, allowing them autonomy of judgment and decision-making in the face of potential crises. If a state wishes to develop an independent assessment of crises and be able to implement the appropriate political actions to contain them, it must have all-weather satellite intelligence with short access times for high-resolution imagery and listening capabilities.

322-Crisis Management 

Crisis management stems from political objectives, materialized by defining a desired end-state across various domains: social, military, economic, humanitarian, and institutional. When a crisis erupts, satellites remain essential tools, complementing other means (drones, overflight capabilities, human intelligence) to manage the situation. If required, the deployment of forces must be swift to meet the needs of distressed populations or to stop ongoing atrocities. This cannot happen without intelligence, which must be gathered as quickly as possible. The more complex the situation (distance, inadequate infrastructure, diplomatic constraints), the more challenging it becomes to ensure successful execution without proper localization, intelligence, and communications. Thus, space assets become increasingly indispensable.

323-Crisis Resolution 

This phase involves ensuring the security of populations against potential guerrilla or terrorist movements in the crisis zone. Simultaneously, reconstruction efforts and economic revival must be organized, transferring power to local authorities as soon as possible. The need for intelligence remains, although the urgency for access to information decreases. For deployed troops in anti-guerrilla operations, satellite systems provide essential support, including positioning, telecommunications, and communication intelligence (Comint).

33-Space's Contribution to Four Strategic Functions 

Space plays a significant role in the four strategic functions, although it cannot fulfill any single function independently. Initially reserved for meeting strategic-level needs, the use of space assets has evolved over the years, extending to operational and even tactical levels.

331-Deterrence 

Deterrence remains the fundamental element of strategy, serving as a safeguard against any threat to vital interests in a world where constant vigilance is still required. Space contributes to deterrence by enhancing its credibility and effectiveness. Space-based intelligence systems provide early warning and help identify and locate adversary systems. They also aid in mission planning for airborne components and in creating objective dossiers. In the field of oceanography, satellites like Topex-Poseidon and Jason hint at the possibility of predicting oceanic and thermal fronts, and perhaps even acoustic propagation, which is of vital interest to nuclear-armed submarines.

332-Prevention 

Space also contributes to prevention, aimed at protecting a state from strategic surprises, preventing conflicts, and avoiding crises that could threaten international security. Satellites providing imagery and electromagnetic surveillance play a critical role in identifying potential crisis zones. During periods of tension, space systems help detect early warning signs (troop movements, construction activities) and allow timely decision-making. Moreover, forces' repositioning requires communications facilitated by satellite systems.

333-Projection 

If prevention does not resolve the crisis, military action may be necessary, and the projection function provides the capacity for military engagement, relying on space-based capabilities. Telecommunications, reconnaissance, and signal intelligence systems are indispensable for operations. Satellite-guided munitions usage has significantly increased, from 15% in the first Gulf War to over 80% in the latest Iraq intervention.

334-Protection 

The protection of forces during operations depends on early warning capabilities, such as the ability to detect ballistic missile launches. Surveillance of space assets will become essential to protect these capabilities in the future.

34-Space as an Irreplaceable Asset for Security and Defense Systems 

Since the Gulf War, space assets have become increasingly critical for political authorities, military staff, and deployed forces. There are three main reasons for the irreplaceable nature of space systems in current conflicts:

1. Asymmetric Threats: Satellites provide precise and objective intelligence globally, without intrusion.
2. Operations Conduct: Communications, weather forecasting, intelligence, and navigation capabilities offered by satellites are essential for force projection.
3. Discretion: Satellites enable discreet operations, as their altitude and coverage area prevent adversaries from identifying targets.

341-Satellites in the OODA Loop 

To clarify the role of satellites in operations, the OODA (Observe, Orient, Decide, Act) cycle can be referenced:

• Observe: Satellites excel in optical, infrared, and radar observations, detecting and characterizing adversary assets, and providing missile early warning.
• Orient and Decide: Decision-making relies on communication satellites, which facilitate connections between distant theaters and mobile units.

 342-Anti-Missile Defense

Missile defense is the largest research and development category in the U.S. Department of Defense's budget. The Pentagon is developing infrared satellites better than the current Defense Support Program (DSP) to intercept missiles and distinguish real warheads from decoys. The U.S. is researching kinetic energy weapons, such as "killer vehicles," and directed-energy weapons, like space-based lasers. Critics warn that placing weapons in space could lead to an arms race.

Conclusion

Legally, the militarization of space is prohibited (Treaty of 1967), yet the possibility of space warfare remains a looming threat. Space weapons, such as satellites carrying nuclear or conventional warheads, could one day orbit the Earth, posing a constant danger with virtually no defense against them, except for preemptive strikes.

The role of space in defense strategies is undeniable, as space access, utilization, and control are now attributes of any global power. Just as control of the seas once provided political and economic autonomy, so does control of space today. Space allows nations to assess threats independently and stay ahead of events through information mastery, contributing to political self-sufficiency.