The US Global Politics in Outer Space

By Hendrajit*

The National Space Policy is suspected by the developing countries as the US agenda for becoming herself as the “space cop in outer space.” At the same time giving us a clear picture that US are a nation scared og its own shadow.

The policy makers of national security in Washington seem quite ambitious in its plan of controlling its access to outer space. On 6 October 2006 President George W. Bush released the National Space Policy (NSP). Through this released new space policy, it is clear indication that the US security authorities are seeking to become a new “space cop” in outer space.

And more dangerously, planning on denying access space to countries America deems unacceptable or potentially becoming hostile to the strategic interests of the ruling elites based at the White House around George Bush, Dick Cheney, Karl Rove, and the others.

The document released declares that “The United States will seek to cooperate with other nations in the peaceful use of outer space to extend the benefits of space, enhance space exploration, and to protect and promote freedom around the world.” Seen from the normative point of view, there is nothing special on this policy.

But compared to the 1996 space policy, through the 2006 policy Bush has adopted a more unilateralist approach to the subject of access to space, and the policy’s rejection of new treaties or other limitations on American access to or utilization of space. “The United States will oppose the development of new legal regimes or other restrictions that seek to prohibit or limit U.S. access to or use of space.”

Through this statement, Bush and his security advisers seem quite prepared in confronting with the other countries perceived as unfriendly or even hostile to the US global strategy.

And this new space policy have given the chance for America not only controlling and dominating the military aspect of national security space issues, but the scope has been enlarged to gain its access to science and technology.

As the background stipulates in the preamble of NSP, it was stated that In order to increase knowledge, discovery, economic prosperity, and to enhance the national security, the United States must have robust, effective, and efficient space capabilities.

As a logical consequence of this commitment, America has pointed out its commitment to the exploration and use of outer space by all nations for peaceful purposes, and for the benefit of all humanity. Consistent with this principle, "peaceful purposes" allow U.S. defense and intelligence-related activities in pursuit of national interests.

It is no doubt that this last paragraph has clearly showed its hidden agenda of controlling not only the military matters related to outer space, but also seeking access to controlling the development of science and technology related to the national security space issues.

Worse still, the new space policy  can be used by the US authorities in Washington as the justification for undermining the research plan considered as more strategic and more productive to improve and increase the prosperity and welfare of the society and nation in general.

In connection with the US effort to become the “space cop,” this new policy has pave the way for America to eliminate and destroy the aircrafts or military equipment owned by the countries considered as hostile or potential rival as the new superpower such as People Republic of China(PRC).

And the Bush security advisers have the strong reason to justify its agenda. Several right wing leaning experts wrote in The Weekly Standard, the right wing-influenced news paper, that China recently tested “an anti-satellite laser” and “disabled a U.S. spy satellite in the process.”

It seems quite strange that this event was widely reported on the Internet, although not in the print media other than trade newspapers—neither the New York Times nor the Washington Post.

This incident no doubt deserves to be suspected. As the ultra-nationalist and right wing political administration which is aggressive in character, why Bush and his aides did not call for retaliatory action against China given the fact that If an American satellite had indeed been “disabled” by a Chinese laser, it could easily be interpreted as an act of war.

But in reality, even when Defense News, which broke the story as did Space News, a Department of Defense official did not say that this was an “anti-satellite weapon,” nor that the satellit