Question

What are different responses to weaponisation

Answer 1

scientists and intellectual from across the world campaigned for abolising that USA and USSR come to an agreement to endthe arm race.The weaponisation of space would require both intention and a sophisticated level of technological capabilities and infrastructure. At present, the 2007 Space Security Index indicates that the United States dominates in terms of technology, pushing at the boundaries of several types of weapons developments. Of increasing concern, the United States also appears to have the intention of weaponising space, although there is by no means consensus either politically or militarily that this would be a good thing.

Combined with the drive towards ballistic missile defences, the threat of space weaponisation comes primarily from the neo-conservative wing of the Republican Party, elements within the Pentagon's Strategic Command and sections of the US armaments and aerospace industries. Since then, a variety of different technologies and missions have been canvassed in a range of SpaceCom and StratCom documents. One of the most influential, the Rumsfeld Space Commission, concluded that space interests were a top national security priority and that the US must ensure continuing superiority in space capabilities in order "both to deter and to defend against hostile acts in and from space", including "uses of space hostile to US interests".The Commission argued that US military capabilities would need to be "transformed" and upgraded to provide modernised, efficient and cost-effective ways to maximise US space control capabilities and to deny such capabilities to potential adversaries. Seven missions were specifically identified: assured access to space and on-orbit operations; space situational awareness; earth surveillance from space; global command, control and communications in space; defence in space; homeland defence; power projection in, from and through space.