Checkpoint: Space Force Is A Mistaken Approach To Expanding Government
SOPA Images
“The heart looks to space to be away from Earth.”
- Richard Jefferies
Our species has been captivated by the infinite expanse beyond our planet since the early days of our evolution. The Space Force is our nation’s latest attempt at solidifying the US position beyond the borders of our planet. Technological innovation and preparation are undoubtedly essential in securing American extra-planetary interests through the coming century; however, the Space Force represents the wrong approach to achieve such ends. The aesthetics of the department are wielded as legitimizing forces more than its proposed functionality. The establishment of the Space Force mirrors that of President Ronald Reagan’s Strategic Defense Initiative- a widely criticized and ultimately unsuccessful attempt at utilizing space to attain military dominance. In an era where the expansion of government itself is plagued with controversy, the establishment of the Space Force represents unnecessary investment hindered by redundancy and wasteful spending. Alternative approaches to space innovation and technological advancement must be implemented if the US will establish a productive role in space and use it to ethical ends.
Space Force Functions
The Space Force declares its mission to be,
“responsible for organizing, training, and equipping Guardians to conduct global space operations that enhance the way our joint and coalition forces fight, while also offering decision makers military options to achieve national objectives.”
The Space Force is first and foremost a military branch. Currently nested within the Air Force, comparable to the Marine Corps within the Navy, Space Force responsibilities primarily involve the operation and defense of US satellites and their ground stations for data collection. In addition, the department has assumed responsibility for operating and maintaining the Global Positioning System’s network of satellites. While these are unquestionably vital functions for the success of US operations, the need for an independent military branch to address such issues is uncertain. The Air Force manages more than seventy-five percent of the Space Force’s support functions, and the department participates in NASA-like partnerships leasing support to commercial space companies. While protecting military assets in space is imperative, the Space Force is an answer looking for a problem.
Redundancy
Senator Mark Kelly (D-AZ), former NASA astronaut having logged more than fifty-four days in space, stated that the Space Force served only “redundant” and “wasteful” ends. Bipartisan concerns quickly arose regarding the size and scope of the department and its potential to evolve into a vast military bureaucracy. Nevertheless, efforts have already begun developing what Kelly describes as “a whole other layer of bureaucracy in an incredibly bureaucratic Defense Department.” President Biden’s 2022 defense budget proposal of $715 billion includes more than $17 billion for the U.S. Space Force; however, the Air Force budget request called for $173.7 billion dollars. The construction of the Space Force was a poor alternative to simple expansion of the Air Force’s role in the protection of satellite, GPS, and other essential technologies. The minimal funding and the Space Force’s limited scope of responsibility further demonstrate aesthetics legitimizing the Space Force more than its function.
In addition, the Space Force exists separately from the already established US Space Command, which “conducts operations in, from, and to space to deter conflict, and if necessary, defeat aggression, deliver space combat power for the Joint/Combined force, and defend U.S. vital interests with allies and partners.” The department claims to “deter aggression,” “deliver space combat power,” etc. It is easy to see where the Space Force roles overlap with pre-established military structures. The further expansion of the space complex is a display of the government’s greater willingness to enlarge military unnecessarily than to address widening domestic shortcomings hindering the United States’ long-term position in space.
Inefficient Expansion
Despite the drastic relative expansion of government that has been shown to occur with time, partisan politics is still often framed through a counterproductive lens of “big government” versus “small government.” The Republican Party ideologically opposes expanding government, while Democrats seek to utilize government resources in solving social and economic problems. A Morning Consult poll found that forty-seven percent of respondents believed it was “essential that the United States continues to be a world leader in space exploration.” However, maintaining dominance in this field requires greater funding to research and development rather than the military capabilities granted by a sparsely funded Space Force. An example of more efficient spending would be to increase the attention on STEM education, a field in which America lags severely and will be necessary to tackle the growing technological innovation of America’s competitors. In our highly polarized era, where the very establishment of expanded government influence is met with contention and controversy, the establishment of the Space Force draws attention and funding away from more pressing government investment.
Star Wars Initiative
Reagan first proposed his Strategic Defense Initiative in 1983 during a nationwide television address. The initiative was steeped in Cold War-era fear and sought to develop a means of intercepting Soviet ballistic missiles mid-flight using advanced weaponry such as lasers based in space. Dependent on technology that had yet to be researched or developed, the initiative drew criticism for its cost and feasibility. Reagan had developed a keen interest in directed energy weapons and his honest belief in their potential was solidified after a 1979 visit to the North American Aerospace Defense Command. Like President Donald Trump’s announcement of the Space Force, which caught Pentagon and security officials off guard, Reagan’s announcement “blindsided” many of his personnel and advisors. Massachusetts Senator Edward Kennedy condemned Reagan’s SDI as “reckless 'Star Wars' schemes” for the futuristic and science-fiction-seeming nature of the proposal. The government invested roughly $30 billion over ten years to the Strategic Defense Initiative, which was ended and repurposed under President Bill Clinton as the Ballistic Missile Defense Organization which evolved to become today’s National Defense Agency.
Without proper strategy and implementation, the Space Force risks facing the same flaws as the Strategic Defense Initiative. General John W. Raymond, Chief of Space Operations, has clarified that the Space Force’s goal is not to engage in military conflicts in space, stating, “We want to deter that from happening. However, if deterrence fails, a war that begins or extends into space will be fought over great distances at tremendous speeds.” This statement runs contrary to Trump’s assertion that “Space is the world's newest war-fighting domain.” The Department of Defense defines deterrence as “the prevention of action by the existence of a credible threat of unacceptable counteraction and/or belief that the cost of action outweighs the perceived benefits.” Raymond indicates plans of employing US strategies for deterrence born during the Cold War to prevent armed conflict in space. Mutual deterrence, however, inherently relies upon overhanging premises of mutually assured destruction to prevent military encroachment. Where the protection of military assets in space is necessary, a rapidly militarized deterrence policy in space will only accompany the further militarization of the new frontier between competing powers.
Conclusion
The Space Force is a prime example of the wrong approach to securing America’s dominance in space. The Space Force is being organized to serve vital functions, but those functions are already addressed by pre-established structures within the military. The Space Force is an example of inefficient government expansion. American dominance in space will be better secured with greater investment in STEM education, research, development, and domestic strategy for the long term rather than military expansion for limited purposes and benefit in the short term. The ease with which the Space Force was implemented and the military-industrial complex expanded starkly contrasts the difficulty in passing domestic policy that benefits space dominance on the local and individual level. Reagan’s Strategic Defense Initiative proved to be a waste of government resources and taxpayer funding; the Space Force risks doing the same unless resources are utilized to prepare for the role of space in the short term and the long term.