Very little is known about Russia’s alleged satellite-killing and nuclear ambitions in space which sent some members of Congress into full-blown panic mode this week.
While Moscow isn’t thought to have a deployed capability yet, the US believes the Kremlin is dabbling with weaponry that experts say could fundamentally cripple the military and the American way of life.
“We’re talking trillions of dollars worth of economic damage in the worst case,” Dr. Rebecca Grant, president of IRIS Independent Research, which studies defense and aerospace, told The Post.
“Our economy is completely dependent on space for the navigation and precision timing signals that guide everything from your iPhone when you drive to your banking transaction,” she explained.
White House national security spokesperson John Kirby confirmed Thursday that the uproar on Capitol Hill this week was indeed over an “anti-satellite capability that Russia is developing.”
But Kirby was tight-lipped about some key details of the weapon such as whether it was nuclear and underscored that it’s not a device that can be “used to attack human beings or cause physical destruction here on Earth.”
Still, the potential ramifications are considerable.
“Space and its capabilities enable our daily lives,” Kari Bingen, director of the Aerospace Security Project at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, told The Post.
“Everything from navigation and position information —whether in our cars or our cell phones using GPS— weather forecasting, even TV broadcasts, … the agricultural sector leverages GPS, shipping and transportation,” she added.
“It is integral to our daily lives, and much of that could be put at risk.”
A kamikaze space weapon?
Such a weapon could have the potential to damage Russian space assets as well.
Moscow got a glimpse of this in 2021 when it shot a missile against a satellite, triggering debris that forced two Russian cosmonauts along with their peers on the International Space Station to take cover.
“They know that the United States is much more dependent on space than they are,” Bingen said.
“Russia is no longer the space power that it once was. Its space program is in decline. So it has less to lose in space.”
Crippling Western sanctions have seemed to further hamper Russia’s ability to bolster its space capabilities.
In 2022, Moscow announced its intent to withdraw from the ISS altogether.
Nuclear bomb or nuclear-powered weapon?
Many reports, including from the New York Times, described the system as a potential “space-based nuclear weapon,” but it’s not fully clear if that means a nuclear-powered device or a nuclear bomb.
In theory, a nuclear reactor device could be used to power a weapon in space such as a communication jammer or a radiation device to fry the circuits and disable rival satellites.
“Unlike detonating a nuke in space [where] it affects everything within a range of detonation, a high power microwave weapon could target just individual satellites,” Todd Harrison, a senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute who focuses on defense, warned.
“That would actually be more credible and more concerning if that’s what we’re seeing in the intelligence.”
Traditionally, satellites are powered by solar panels or chemical propellants such as hydrazine.
But with nuclear energy, a satellite could hypothetically attain more power and at a more consistent rate.
If Russia is actually moving in the direction of a space-based nuclear bomb, that would run afoul of the Outer Space Treaty of 1967.
But there are also logistical challenges to maintaining a fleet of space nukes as well.
“This is a very, very, very bad idea,” Grant mused.
Space is full of debris that threatens assets orbiting above the Earth and it would be expensive to perform any type of maintenance on systems hovering hundreds of miles about the planet.
Harrison argued that earth-based intercontinental ballistic missile systems are far more practical for harnessing nukes than space.
“ICBMs over the long run, end up being cheaper, easier to operate and maintain. And they’re actually more flexible,” Harrison said.
“You don’t have to keep it in space. You could just launch it on a missile and detonate it once it reaches the altitude.”
While detonating a nuke in outer space could unleash havoc on US satellite systems, it would almost certainly take out Russian satellites as well.
Damage could stem from the explosion of a nuke, electromagnetic pulses unleashed by the bomb, and debris from its detonation.
Russia’s history with satellite killers
Interest in satellite-killing technology is nothing new for Moscow. Throughout the Cold War, the Soviet Union researched methods to disable satellites from adversarial nations.
“They started testing anti-satellite weapons back in the early 1960s. And quite frankly, Russia has been one of the most advanced nations in terms of anti-satellite technology,” Harrison said.
Pentagon officials have long studied and assessed the potential threats of satellite killers and have already begun laying the groundwork for a more secure system.
“Russia already has a number of ways to hurt our satellites, mainly because our satellites are very delicate and vulnerable,” Grant said.
During his first term, former President Donald Trump established a sixth branch of the military — the Space Force — to pay close attention to these types of threats.
In particular, the military is working “fast and furious right now” to move away from big bulky satellites to constellations of smaller ones — similar to the ones from space guru Elon Musk’s StarLink system, according to Grant.
“What makes the satellite constellation as a whole, much less vulnerable [is that] instead of taking out one satellite, there’s a whole bunch. And they can then be more easily replaced if something is lost,” she said.
Unfortunately, the military isn’t quite there yet, Grant cautioned, suggesting that they’re really “just starting” that transition.
On the other hand, the transition to a constellation of satellites could be incentivizing Russia to explore nuclear capabilities in space as a means of establishing deterrence against the US.
“If you’re trying to hold at risk hundreds to thousands of satellites — that’s really hard,” Bingen said.
“In many respects, it doesn’t surprise me that they’re researching — again if reports are true — nuclear detonations in space.”
Kremlin’s response
The Kremlin was evasive when pressed on the accusation and suggested the release of the information was a ruse to whip up support in Congress to take action.
“It is obvious that the White House is trying, by hook or by crook, to encourage Congress to vote on a bill to allocate money, this is obvious,” Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said.
Of course, Russia has a long history of not being fully forthcoming about its intentions.
Back in January 2022, the top Russian diplomat angrily denied allegations that Moscow was concocting a false flag operation to invade Ukraine. Weeks later, Russia invaded.
Other troubling implications
Also concerning is the mindset that led Russia to allegedly pursue such a weapon. Tensions between Washington and Moscow have plunged to all-time lows due to the war raging in Ukraine.
“I think a bigger concern is if there’s some new development — what is Russia doing … does this mean that they’re feeling more emboldened? Do they feel that they could threaten to use or actually use capabilities like this?” Harrison pondered.
As Kirby noted, Russia’s actions would violate the Outer Space Treaty, but Russia has seemingly soured on such agreements lately.
“Putin has been walking away from arms control,” Grant noted, fretting that “the US and Russia aren’t gonna have any arms control left here before long.”
With relations already ice-cold between Washington and Moscow as the US mulls whether to ship additional weaponry to Ukraine, the space development is just another example of how things could spiral out of control.
Either way, Russia’s alleged development of an advanced satellite killer is a major development, especially if Moscow follows through on it.
“Hopefully there’s an opportunity for the administration to work with allies and partners to put some pressure on Russia to to stop whatever they’re doing,” Bingen said.
