Experts from the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute have prepared a policy paper on the problem of the risk of nuclear escalation, which may arise as a result of an aggravation of confrontation between nuclear powers in space.
The authors of the paper note that against the background of the deteriorating security situation, the erosion of the global architecture of arms control and disarmament and ongoing armed conflicts, the risks of escalation are increasing, including the risks related to the use of nuclear weapons. The situation is also aggravated by measures taken by leading countries in outer space – specifically the complication of the sphere and its weaponization.
At the same time, according to SIPRI experts, little attention is paid to the problem of the impact of space activities on the risks of escalation, which is inconsiderate, given the strategic potential of outer space and the role of space systems in nuclear deterrence. Space systems are used by nuclear powers, in particular China, Russia and the United States, in early warning systems, in command, control and communication systems, in intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance, but the importance of these systems varies in the three countries depending on the level of their integration into strategic forces.
The experts believe that a potential confrontation involving China, Russia and the United States in outer space is of serious concern, given the likelihood of escalation up to the use of nuclear weapons. As scenarios for such a collision, the authors of the paper consider:
- conflict in which strategically valued space systems are targets of attack or perceived imminent threat;
- conflict in which space systems are used (or perceived to be imminently used) offensively, including in an enabling manner for conventional attack;
- conflict in which activities or confrontation in space carries across other domains, for instance, an antisatellite test triggering a conventional response;
- conflict in which parties to an existing terrestrial conflict expand the battlefield to conduct attacks against space systems.
The authors of the paper also identify some risk drivers. The first of them is the blurring of red lines, the intersection of which can lead to the use of nuclear weapons. The text says that Russia and the United States adhere to similar positions, suggesting that attacks or interference in the operation of elements of the early warning and strategic communication systems located in space represent clear doctrinal grounds for considering the use of nuclear weapons. However, the position of the third actor, China, is not so clearly formulated, possibly due to the lack of transparency of the space doctrine, which blurs the so–called red lines and increases the risk of escalation.
The authors named the risks arising from uncertainty in space operations as the second driver. It is unclear in what form the confrontation in the space sphere could take place within the framework of a potential conflict. To date, there are no precedents for a kinetic strike by one state against the space systems of another, however, the use of cyber-attacks is considered by the authors of the paper as a frequently used practice, which, although of an escalating nature, was not previously considered as a reason for conflict. Nevertheless, the political acceptability of the use of certain counterspace capabilities on their own is as of yet unknown; consequently, how states choose to respond to such attacks is unknown as well. Accordingly, ambiguities specific to space operations could further contribute to escalation risks.
SIPRI experts believe that in order to reduce the likelihood of the risks of using nuclear weapons due to confrontation in space, the three countries should take measures both to prevent incidents and to mitigate the possible consequences of such events. First of all, China, Russia and the United States should agree on a common understanding of threats. SIPRI believes that countries should turn to arms control, limit certain forms of behavior, and clarify and harmonize legal and normative frameworks.
Source – SIPRI
