Font size: 
Some analysts gave other reasons for the preemptive action, saying the United States was worried that data or instruments from the satellite could fall into the hands of potential space opponents, especially China and Russia.
James Lewis, a satellite expert at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington, D.C., indicated to the media that the official explanation of wanting to prevent the spacecraft's fuel tank from spilling its contents on the ground might not be the whole story. Thus critics from around the world have speculated about ulterior motives, ranging from a desire to test U.S. ballistic missile defenses to a desire to poke China in the eye.
States' activities in outer space are always sensitive and attract attention. Since the 1960s, outer space has been a battlefield for seeking hegemony, characterized from the start by the "space race" between the Soviet Union and the United States, who competed to send human beings into space. The sending of astronauts into space represented a technological revolution and also symbolized the human capability to explore, and master, the universe.
Throughout the Cold War period the United States and the Soviet Union tried every means to develop their space technology for the purpose of gaining a military advantage over each other. The first satellites sent into orbit by the two superpowers were mostly for intelligence purposes. Then the competition was extended to their missile capabilities in terms of weight load and shooting range, which formed the main contents of arms negotiations in the 1980s. Despite these agreements, the two superpowers never trusted each other to comply with them.
The United States has never truly stepped back from developing its space weapons. As early as 1983, the Reagan administration initiated its "Star Wars" defense project, aimed at destroying nuclear ballistic missiles in flight. The idea was temporarily put aside when the Cold War ended with the dissolution of the Soviet Union into 15 independent states.
However, in the mid-1990s the United States resumed its space weapon system, calling it National Missile Defense, for the purpose of shielding the United States and allies such as Japan and Australia from attacking enemy missiles.
This space program was delayed by the 9/11 attacks, when the United States had to find international allies to invade Afghanistan, overthrow the Taliban regime and hopefully arrest al-Qaida leader Osama Bin Laden. However in 2002, the Bush administration extended the NMD project and has since been expanding its ground-based sites from which to launch anti-ballistic missile strikes. It also has the capacity to shoot down satellites from these bases. It is possible that the February satellite shooting was an attempt to test an anti-satellite weapon.
In January last year, when China shot down a disabled meteorological satellite, the United States, Japan and some European countries immediately expressed concern over China's intentions. According to U.S. reports, a Chinese ground-based, medium-range ballistic missile knocked the weather satellite from its orbit about 537 miles above Earth. The missile carried a "kill vehicle" that destroyed the satellite by ramming it.
The United States lodged a formal diplomatic protest over this event. "We are aware of it and we are concerned, and we made it known," White House spokesman Tony Snow said after the incident. Low Earth-orbit satellites have become indispensable for U.S. military communications, guiding GPS navigation for smart bombs and troops, and for surveillance. The Chinese test revealed the vulnerability of such satellites.
The U.S. military has described the difficulty of hitting an object in space with a missile as being similar to striking a bullet with another bullet. With the 25th anniversary of President Ronald Reagan's original speech calling for a Strategic Defense Initiative coming up on March 23, the United States has now fully demonstrated such a capability.
No wonder the U.S. action alerted China and Russia. Both countries complained about it, saying it raised the risk of accelerating an arms race in space and showed the hypocrisy of U.S. criticism of China.
"China is continuously following closely the possible harm caused by the U.S. action to outer-space security and relevant countries," said Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Liu Jianchao at a news conference in Beijing following the shooting.
According to U.S. officials, the shooting down of their satellite took place at a low orbit, meaning the resultant cloud of debris would mostly fall into the atmosphere and burn up. The Chinese anti-satellite missile left a cloud of debris in a higher orbit.
Analysts worry that that the U.S. move might provide other nations an excuse to move forward with their own programs. Many countries other than the United States and Russia now have the ability to send satellites into space. China has already sent men into space, and some other countries -- India and Japan in particular -- are likely to do so in the near future.
All these developments force major nations to pay careful attention to advances in space technology. Any actions taken in space will draw attention, and concern, from other stakeholders.
What measures could be taken to prevent the escalation of a new space race? Could all the countries that possess satellite or missile technology come to an agreement that would cover all actions in space? For example, if it were necessary to shoot down a malfunctioning satellite, could rules and procedures be established? And would states who view one another as competitors be willing to make the relevant information transparent?
Concluding such negotiations over the use of space could be more difficult than the negotiations between the United States and the Soviet Union during the Cold War. Then there were only two players, now there are many more, making consensus more complicated.
What's more, such talks would cover not only quantity and quality but issues of technology, finance and supervision systems. There is the added dimension of space as an arena for commercial competition, too.
The need for caution is clear, in any case. The current space stakeholders should learn a lesson from the Cold War, when the nuclear race between two superpowers almost brought disaster to the Earth. Today's powerful states should be responsible with regard to their actions and also to the messages they are sending to the rest of the world.
--
(Zhang Quanyi is an associate professor at the Zhejiang Wanli University in Ningbo, China, and a Ph.D. candidate at Shanghai International Studies University, studying policy making and collective identity. His research interests focus on conflict management and identity construction. He can be contacted at qyzhangupi@gmail.com. ©Copyright Zhang Quanyi.)
