New Bush Space Policy Unveiled, Stresses U.S. Freedom of Action

SPACE.com ^ | 10/7/06 | Leonard David

[anymouse]

Rather dry stuff, but note it is the first time US space policy had been officially defined since 1996.

[anymouse]

space policy ping.

[KevinDavis]

I forsee a formation of space force pretty soon...

[isom35]

how about freedom to blow stuff up.

[kinoxi]

how about freedom to blow stuff up.

The policy calls upon the Secretary of Defense to "develop capabilities, plans, and options to ensure freedom of action in space, and, if directed, deny such freedom of action to adversaries."

It's in there. Good common sense policy statement here.

[FairOpinion]

Excellent!

[FairOpinion]

I urge everyone to go to the pdf document, the link to which is provieded at the end of the article and read it:

http://www.ostp.gov/html/US%20National%20Space%20Policy.pdf


This has major implications.


"The US considers space systems to have rights of passage through and operations in space without interference. Consistent with this principle, the US will view purposseful interference with its space systems an infringement on its right".

Now remember, just recently those articles talking about Chinese lasers deliberately interfering with US satellites?

China Lasers Target U.S. Satellites

http://www.nysun.com/article/40634

[kinoxi]

Good point FO. I don't think ground based lasers would apply here since they can only 'interfere' when the satellite is engaged in spying on their soil. A bit of a gray area.

[FairOpinion]

Read the policy.


"The US rejects any claims of sovereignty by any nation over outser space... and rejects any limitations on the fundamnetal right of the US to operate and acquire data from outer space".

The UN might not agree with this, but in my opinion, this space policy covers the China situation, as far as we are concerned, we don't tolerate interference and will take actions to stop it. (see my earlier excerpt from the Space Policy).

[RightWhale]

While the 1967 Treaty is still in effect in the US, there will be no space development aside from the few tons of inflatable hotels that can be launched.

[RightWhale]

The US rejects any claims of sovereignty by any nation over outser space

That is covered by the 1967 Treaty as it pertains to celestial bodies.

[kinoxi]

I read it. I don't think anti-espionage activities are implied. They will always exist. We will find (or have already found) a way to counter them.

[kinoxi]

The 1967 treaty never states where territorial airspace ends and space begins. It needs to be revised. A link.

[tet68]

I kind of like the idea of a space-going Sanford and Son,
plotting and picking up all kinds of space junk, maybe a few Chinese satellites too. America was foremost in freedom of the seas, so it should be with space. (Always keeping an eye on the choke points though.)

[bill1952]

bump

[RightWhale]

As I have mentioned, the 1967 Treaty is an impediment to private development of the resources of outer space. The report Moon, Mars, and Beyond, mentioned in this article, also says so. My Senator is also aware of this and says something will need to be done eventually. My contention is that the mere presence of the 1967 Treaty has killed private development of outer space for at least 20 years and will continue to do so as long as the US remains in the Treaty.

[kinoxi]

As I have mentioned, the 1967 Treaty is an impediment to private development of the resources of outer space.

I agree completely.

[RightWhale]

Excellent! But, what to do?

[kinoxi]

No one is going to want to limit their 'gray area' of territorial freedom to the US's obvious dominance. It will most likely proceed as it has. If the dems get back in power and the chicoms get their classified info pipeline back up and running they might get cockier. The best thing to do in my opinion is stated in this article.

[Southack]

Outstanding!