New U.S.

Space Policy a Threat to National Defense

On April 15, 2010, President Obama gave an address at the Kennedy Space Center outlining the new
policies for the U.S. Space Program. At question is why the new policy is being put into effect and how it
will impact the United States.
The U.S. Space Program is not only part of the United State's program for exploration in space, but what
has increasingly become a defense related sector, from satellites that are being used for surveillance and
defense and detection, to monitoring and guidance of missiles and missile defense systems. With the
increased use of "smart weapons¨ and high tech weapons that are guided remotely, such as drones there
has been an increase in space connected defense systems.
What President Obama unveiled as the U.S.'s new space program policy, serves to threaten the United
State's defense capabilities in space, threaten national control of these programs and also to cede control
of existing space programs and operations, such as transport to the new Ìnternational Space Station, to
other countries.
While the Obama administration plan is for six billion dollars to be funded for new rockets, they will be
built and controlled by private companies for private travel to space. At the same time, Obama's program
cuts U.S. national transport funding and funding for U.S. national rockets and transport systems. Senator
David Vitter of Louisiana has called the president's plans irresponsible with the U.S. walking away from
manned space exploration with no timetable or details of any of our goals and how they will be achieved
for deep space exploration.
Ìnstead of the U.S. spending money on the U.S. national space program, the new space program policy is
providing funding for space research and innovation not for the U.S., but for private companies and other
countries. Ìt is cutting U.S. national government control of the U.S.'s own space program. Ìn cutting the
space shuttle program, the Obama administration is also cutting transport to and from the new
Ìnternational Space Station. The new Ìnternational Space Station, to be completed in 1010, has cost
almost a trillion dollars to be built. The U.S. is almost the sole funder of the Ìnternational Space Station
and they were the sole builders. (1)
Ìn reality the Ìnternational Space Station although termed an Ìnternational Space Station, can more
correctly be termed a U.S. Space Station, built by Americans and funded by U.S. taxpayers. (2)
However, the U.S. has been part of a consortium of 15 nations that have access to and are using the
Ìnternational Space Station. Most of these nations don't have transport to the Ìnternational Space Station
and have had to rely on the two nations and one region that do; the U.S., Russia and the European
Space Agency.
The cutting of the U.S. space shuttles, for no valid reason, results in the U.S. having spent almost a trillion
dollars on the Ìnternational Space Station, for programs that were supposed to be for the U.S. Space
Program, with the U.S. being unable to directly access the Ìnternational Space Station or control transport
to and from the Ìnternational Space Station. This means that the U.S. is ceding control of the Ìnternational
Space Station to other countries, though doing almost all the funding for it.
One of the countries that has piggybacked off the U.S. Space Shuttle transports to and from the existing
Ìnternational Space Station is Japan, a nation that notably enough is establishing a transport system to
and from the Ìnternational Space Station at exactly the same time that the U.S. is cutting space shuttle
transport with their H ÌÌ transport vehicle. The U.S. considered using Japan's space shuttle program for
the critical experiments and research they are doing using the Ìnternational Space Station which would be
instead of the U.S. Space Shuttle, and instead of the U.S. Space shuttle flights, but instead there is no
information that the U.S. will access any transportation systems to the Ìnternational Space Station. Japan,
the European Space Agency and Russia will all have transport services to the Ìnternational Space
Station, but not the U.S.
Although it is claimed that this is a U.S space program that is being established and funded by the U.S.
for the U.S.'s future in space the funding appears to be all directed to either private companies and hence
a destruction of U.S. national control of space, including rocket research and development and a
diversion of funds from specifically the U.S. Space Program to instead be diverted to international
consortium programs that are decided internationally and not under the direct sole, control of the United
States. What President Obama is really outlining in the new U.S. Space Program is the destruction of the
U.S. national space program, with funding for the U.S. National Space Program going instead to funding
research and development of space technologies for private companies and other nations.
While President Bush during his time in office, had as his goals for the U.S. Space Program reaching the
moon, and was directing funding for that, instead it appears that the plans for exploration of the moon,
and U.S. funding for the program was not for U.S. exploration of the moon but instead "international
exploration of the moon¨ outlined in the Third Ìnternational Space Exploration Coordination Group
meeting in Japan in 2009. (3)
This is the third meeting of the Ìnternational Space Exploration Coordination Group which was
established in Germany in 2007 and formed to globally unify national space programs. (4)
Although President Obama mentioned that two of the primary new goals for the U.S. Space Program
were to reach the planet Mars and research on asteroids, in fact these are not the goals of the U.S.
Space Program, but as noted in the initial document of the "Global Exploration Framework¨ held in
Germany in 2007, these were primary goals of set by the Ìnternational Space Exploration Coordination
Group. This group appears to be a "co-opting of nation's national space programs¨ for use and appears to
be driven by Germany and Japan.
The Ìnternational Space Station is not the only massively expensive space connected program that the
U.S. funded that is being "internationalized¨ to foreign control, this is also the case for the U.S. missile
defense system or "star wars¨ that has been and was intended to be solely a U.S. defensive and military
applicable missile defense system. Although this was entirely a U.S. system and the U.S. has spent in
excess of a trillion dollars in the research and development of the missile defense system.
Ìn 2005, Japan, through the "U.S.-Japan Alliance: Transformation and Realignment for the Future¨
pushed for co-production and gained a function co-producing parts of the U.S. missile defense system in
Japan. (5) Japan already had access to the U.S. missile defense system for use and deployment, so
there was no valid reason why Japan should have been allowed to be involved in co- production of the
missile defense system that the U.S. developed, and at a tremendous cost.
The shift to co-production of the missile defense system by Japan is occurring at the same time that
Japan and Germany are gaining joint monopoly status dominance in a large number of defense related
sectors, and most other nations, including the U.S. are losing their defense related sector base. What is
occurring with the U.S. space program, is another example of this, and it is a threat to national security.


1. http://www.boeing.com/defense-space/space/spacestation/
2. http://www.gao.gov/archive/1998/ns98212t.pdf

3. http://www.jaxa.jp/press/2009/03/20090313_isecg_e.html

4. http://www.nasa.gov/pdf/178109main_ges_framework.pdf

5. http://www.missilethreat.com/missiledefensesystems/id.30/system_detail.asp



1hls arLlcle ls parL of an overall slLe on Cermanv and !apan worldwlde heaemonv aLť
hLLpť//aermanv[apanheaemonvŦbloaspoLŦcom/2011/12/aermanvŴandŴ[apanŴworldŴheaemonvŦhLml







Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful