Yves here. This is a workman-like overview US, Russian and Chinese space initiatives. I suspect this topic is of keen interest to some readers who will hopefully add more. Recall that Haig provided a long-form debunking of the Trump Golden Dome boondoggle.
One question for those in the know: this post discusses threats to US space vehicles of the kinetic sort. Am I hallucinating, or is there evidence (or at least concern) that Russia’s best-in-breed signal-jamming capabilities could mess with these orbiting assets?
By John P. Ruehl, an Australian-American journalist living in Washington, D.C., and a world affairs correspondent for the Independent Media Institute. He is a contributor to several foreign affairs publications, and his book, Budget Superpower: How Russia Challenges the West With an Economy Smaller Than Texas’, was published in December 2022. Produced by Economy for All, a project of the Independent Media Institute
President Donald Trump’s plans to build a space-based Golden Dome missile defense shield have drawn immediate criticism from China, which has framed it as a renewed American push to “weaponize space.” This program, announced in an executive order signed in January 2025, echoes former President Ronald Reagan’s 1980s Strategic Defense Initiative, or “Star Wars,” which was never completed but is believed to have pressured the Soviet Union into a costly arms race. Whether the Golden Dome will meet the same fate or move beyond rhetoric remains to be seen.
Regardless of its future feasibility, the president’s announcement marks another departure from the vision of space as a peaceful domain. Aside from the U.S. Air Force’s anti-satellite (ASAT) missile test in 1985 and the abandoned Star Wars program, treaties like the Limited Test Ban Treaty (1963), the Outer Space Treaty (1967), and the Moon Agreement (1979) helped restrain space militarization during the Cold War. In the 1990s, multinational projects like the International Space Station further reinforced a vision of international cooperation under U.S. leadership.
As a result, public discussion of space weapons remained largely restricted, even as governments quietly advanced their capabilities. That began to change in 2007, when China shocked observers by using a missile to destroy its own satellites, followed by a similar U.S. Navy test a year later. These events signaled a clear break from past restraint and kick-started a new space race. In place of the Cold War’s bipolar competition, the 2020s have seen a more multipolar and militarized space race taking shape.
U.S.
The 2019 reorganization of U.S. space branches marked a turning point in Washington’s military approach to space. It created the U.S. Space Force for training and equipping personnel, and reestablished the U.S. Space Command, responsible for operational missions. NASA, though a civilian agency, continues to support military objectives through dual-use technologies and interagency coordination, while the White House’s National Space Council also helps shape policy.
Trump’s second term has seen the Space Force intensify its rhetoric on space conflict, casting doubt on the Artemis Accords’ stated peaceful intentions declared in 2020. In April 2025, General Stephen Newman Whiting, head of Space Command, publicly called for deploying weapons in space, according to Defense One. Meanwhile, General B. Chance Saltzman, the Space Force’s chief of space operations, outlined six types of counterspace capabilities during the Air & Space Forces Association Warfare Symposium in March 2025; three ground based (kinetic missiles, directed energy, and jamming), and the same three methods adapted for use from satellites in orbit.
In April, the Space Force released a new document titled Space Warfighting, which provides a framework to guide military planning in the largely untested environment. The focus remains on Earth’s orbit, broken down into low, medium, and geostationary orbit, where most satellites operate. The unmanned Boeing X-37B spacecraft, launched in 2010 by the Pentagon, is just one secretive military project in space. It stayed in orbit for more than 900 days from 2020 to 2022, raising concerns over U.S. ambitions in co-orbital warfare and its ability to tamper physically with other satellites.
Private industry has long been integral to American space capabilities, and a new wave of companies is expanding that role. Elon Musk’s Starlink, designed as a civilian internet service, has become a critical asset for Ukraine’s military during its war with Russia. Meanwhile, firms like L3Harris have repurposed commercial satellite sensors for military surveillance and tracking. The Commercial Augmentation Space Reserve (CASR), initiated by the Department of Defense in 2024, aims to integrate with the private sector for space-based operations.
Beyond Earth’s orbit, the cislunar space between the Earth and the moon is emerging as a major zone of competition. The Air Force Research Laboratory’s (AFRL) “Primer on Cislunar Space” in 2021 identified the region as a growing military priority, and the Pentagon established the 19th Space Defense Squadron to monitor activity in cislunar space and regions beyond traditional satellite orbits. AFRL is also developing the Oracle-M spacecraft to track objects in cislunar orbit, and completed thruster and ground systems tests in March and April 2025, respectively, and is now moving toward launch readiness reviews.
While some experts argue that the strategic value of cislunar space is overblown, the moon itself is increasingly seen through a militaristic lens. NASA plans to return U.S. astronauts to the moon by 2027, and the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency’s (DARPA) NOM4D program aims to study how lunar materials could be utilized for future military use. The Space Force and the AFRL are also testing a lunar reconnaissance satellite called the Defense Deep Space Sentinel to “demonstrate operations in lunar orbit, including surveilling the lunar surface,” according to the news organization Breaking Defense.
But not everyone is convinced about the reasoning for these developments. According to the co-director of the Outer Space Institute Aaron Boley, “there is no current need for debris removal in cislunar space, and there is unlikely to be any such need for decades to come,” stated a 2022 article in the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists.
Paul Szymanski of the Space Strategies Center stated in a 2023 article in Space.com that companies are planning to provide “cell phone service on the moon and the Air Force Research Lab is developing several programs, such as space surveillance for the far side of the moon. None of this makes sense, unless there is some other not publicly known factor that has changed everyone’s attitudes.”
Other Countries
With help from private companies, the U.S. is at the forefront of space militarization, though it faces growing competition from other countries. Its former Cold War competitor, Russia, brought its “air force and the… Aerospace Defense Forces under one unified command,” of Aerospace Forces (VKS) in 2015, according to the Moscow Times. Russia displayed its ASAT capabilities in November 2021, when it destroyed one of its defunct satellites.
Just before it invaded Ukraine in February 2022, Russia launched the Cosmos 2553 satellite into a high, radiation-heavy orbit around 2,000 km above Earth, a zone rarely used by communications or observation satellites. U.S. officials believe it may be connected to a Russian project for a space-based nuclear weapon. In 2024, reports emerged that Russia was developing a weapon that could disable hundreds of satellites using “radiation effects or the resulting electromagnetic pulse.”
Also in 2024, the U.S. accused Russia at the UN Security Council of launching a satellite capable of attacking other satellites. Experts suggested this satellite was part of a series of similar Russian satellites launched over several years that may carry kinetic projectile weapons. Then, in March 2025, U.S. officials observed multiple Russian satellites “work together to surround and isolate another satellite that was positioned in low earth orbit, demonstrating how they could potentially target enemy spacecraft in a future conflict,” stated an official in a CNN article.
China, however, has overtaken Russia since the end of the Cold War to become the U.S.’ primary competitor in space. In December 2024, several Chinese satellites conducted what U.S. officials described as “advanced patrols and advanced attack” approaches, showing their ability to physically disable nearby satellites. A senior U.S. general later confirmed that China is testing satellites capable of “dogfighting maneuvers,” also using multiple spacecraft.
China’s missile capabilities have also advanced rapidly. In 2021, the country tested several hypersonic weapons faster than Mach 5—or five times the speed of sound—using a Fractional Orbital Bombardment System (FOBS), in trials that surpassed anything the U.S. has publicly demonstrated. In each case, China launched a payload into low earth orbit that circled part of the globe before releasing a hypersonic glider, which struck a target in China. In one test, the glider released a second missileduring its descent.
These tests laid the groundwork for later claims of more sophisticated, space-based strike systems. In April 2025, Chinese military officials claimed they can launch missiles from space using various platforms, including reentry glide vehicles capable of reaching up to 13,000 miles per hour. This all comes as China plans to land its own astronauts on the moon by 2030.
China, Russia, and the U.S. have all developed Earth-based lasers capable of blinding satellites. As these powers advance their arsenals, other nations are building up their own. Among the newcomers, India has demonstrated its own ASAT capabilities in 2019 when it shot down one of its satellites.
New power blocs are also taking shape. Traditional coordination between the U.S. and allies in Europe and Japan now faces growing competition from China and its partners. The China and Russia-led International Lunar Research Station project aims to build a lunar base by 2035. Nearly a dozen other countries have already pledged support.
Managing Space Militarization Risks Is the Way Forward
While Washington seeks to preserve its lead in space, that very dominance can make it vulnerable. Russia, less dependent on space infrastructure, is investing in systems designed to trigger cascading effects. Chinese strategists, meanwhile, believe the U.S. would win a prolonged war in space but may be vulnerable to a sudden first strike, influencing their planning.
Debris from previous ASAT tests by the U.S., China, and Russia already threatens spacecraft and satellites. As more countries acquire offensive space capabilities, the vision of a peaceful and cooperative exploration of space becomes harder to realize. A more realistic approach may be to acknowledge space militarization and focus on managing risks. In preparing for conflict, humanity may still develop technologies and infrastructure that ultimately serve the public good.
I’m not sure the USA is the leader in space. Pretty sure both China and Russia are way ahead of us. This is what happens when the neo-cons running our government choose confrontation rather than cooperation as their foreign policy.
Meanwhile our bridges are falling down, the trains are becoming de-railed, and the roads are crumbling, and best of all our young are entering college who can’t read, write, or do basic math.
Our politicians are so corrupt it’s beyond belief and they serve the interest of foreign nations and not the American people.
And the beat goes on!
Ironically not dissimilar to Alex Karp’s Palantir pitch.
[No offence intended!]
Here are some specifics on Russian capabilities in this 2021 article from Harper’s, which the post above mentions – https://harpers.org/archive/2021/11/ad-astra-the-coming-battle-over-space/ I take this with a grain of salt since I’d imagine there is posturing going on by both sides, and the article is more literary than technical –
“In late January 2020, in an orbital belt around 640 kilometers above Earth, two unmanned Russian spacecrafts coasted through the sky toward USA-245, an American reconnaissance satellite.
From this elevation a traveler would have seen the earth as a rounded slope of green and brown. One could have made out the rugged edges of mountains and the contours of lakes, our white atmosphere, bowed around the planet, darkening to blue and then black. Seen from a backyard telescope, the satellites would have looked like small glimmers in the night, with light from the sun glinting off their alloyed coating as if off a distant windshield.
The Russian crafts had positioned themselves unusually close to the American, in a near-identical orbit, and they had synced their paths with USA-245—a classified, multibillion-dollar KH-11 satellite, equipped with imaging systems on par with the Hubble telescope—such that one of them came within twenty kilometers of it several times in a single day. Satellites in the same plane may on occasion pass within one hundred kilometers of one another but far less frequently. The Russians, it seemed, were stalking an American spy satellite.
The larger of the two Russian crafts, Kosmos-2542, had first entered the same orbital plane as USA-245 in late November, launched from a Soyuz rocket. This in itself was not a notable occurrence, and the two passed each other only once in eleven days. But on December 6, the Russian vessel seemed to split in two. In fact, it had spat out another, smaller craft. Speaking later, in February, General John W. “Jay” Raymond, chief of the newly established Space Force, would describe it by saying, “The way I picture it, in my mind, is like Russian nesting dolls.”
According to Russia, Kosmos-2542 was an inspector satellite, a type of craft also used by the United States and China. Inspectors are smaller, more agile machines with precise navigation and controls, most often employed to closely approach or dock with friendly crafts to assess for maintenance. The Russian Ministry of Defense claimed that the satellite born from Kosmos-2542, called Kosmos-2543, was also an inspector, and described its begetting as an “experiment,” intended to further maintenance of its fleet. Russia also noted that 2542 was equipped with cameras powerful enough to photograph the earth’s surface. USA-245 slowly lifted into a higher orbit, away from the Russian satellites, while Kosmos-2543, the baby, zipped around the sky and, in the words of a later published space-threat assessment from the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), changed its orbit “constantly”—an exceptional performance in space, where fuel is precious.
Then, on January 22, both Russian crafts approached radically closer to the American. For two months, they shadowed USA-245, one of the two never traveling more than a thousand kilometers from it. One observer noted that their orbital paths were synced such that they were closest to the American when it was in bright sunlight: the ideal choreography for taking photographs.
When Raymond first spoke publicly on the events, in an interview with Time, he called the activity “unusual and disturbing,” and noted that “inspection” of a satellite by an enemy craft is not discernibly different from an approach preceding an attack. An offensive strike could take the form of an old-fashioned kinetic assault—objects hurled through space—or chemical sprays, lasers, signal jammers, and more. The antagonism of Russia’s approach was clear. Kaitlyn Johnson, deputy director of the Aerospace Security Project at CSIS, told me that the behavior was “really unusual, very intentional, and pushing the limits.” But, she added, whether it was espionage or one-upmanship, it was not illegal.
In mid-April, Russia tested a direct-ascent anti-satellite weapon (DA-ASAT)—a missile launched from Earth rather than from a vessel already in orbit. The country had tested this weapon system—named Nudol, after a river near Moscow—multiple times before, and the UnitedStates, China, and India had all performed DA-ASAT tests in years prior, each demolishing defunct satellites of their own. The Russian weapon seemed intended for a target in open space: it sailed through the sky and then fell back to Earth, where it likely landed in the Laptev Sea. U.S. Space Command issued a statement the same day, declaring the test evidence of the growing threats to U.S. space systems and deeming it “hypocritical”: Russia had publicly called for “full demilitarization” in space. Space Command also took the opportunity to comment on the nesting dolls. Russia, the statement said, had “conducted maneuvers near a U.S. Government satellite that would be interpreted as irresponsible and potentially threatening in any other domain.” In a line attributed to Raymond directly, it warned that the United States was “ready and committed to deterring aggression and defending the Nation, our allies and U.S. interests from hostile acts in space.”
But the Russians were not done. On July 15, Kosmos-2543, the smaller of the stalking pair, itself released a smaller object. It did not approach a U.S. craft, but both the American and British militaries called it a weapon: Russia, they claimed, had fired a projectile in orbit. U.S. Space Command has remained mum on the precise details of what happened. Jonathan McDowell, a Harvard astrophysicist and satellite watcher, told me that it was clear that an object had been discharged at high speed but that it was hard to say whether the intent was to test a weapon or a defense system—an especially vexing distinction in space. The action was “similar,” a statement from U.S. Space Command said, to one by Russia in 2017, and “inconsistent” with the claim that the crafts were inspectors. In response, the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs said that the release of the new object was merely part of a “close inspection” and that “most importantly, it did not breach any norms or principles of international law,” calling the American assessment of the events “propaganda,” and volleying back the accusation of hypocrisy: the United States and Britain, it said, “naturally keep silent about their own efforts” and “programs on the possible use of . . . counter-satellite weapons.” ”
And if you opened up the x post from yesterday’s links from America-China Watcher , there is this on China’s capabilities –
“Back in 2007, China stunned the world by obliterating one of its own weather satellites—Fengyun-1C—using a direct kinetic anti-satellite strike. It wasn’t a blast. It was a high-speed body collision, turning a multi-million dollar satellite into a cloud of orbital debris. That was a warning. Today, it’s a guarantee.
By 2027, China’s third-generation kinetic anti-satellite system—capable of reaching geostationary orbit at 36,000 kilometers—was fully operational. This range includes America’s most precious military satellites: the GPS constellation. A single hit would shatter decades of infrastructure and leave no trace. No explosion. No shrapnel. Just silence. The satellite fails, seemingly on its own. The U.S. military now refers to this system as a “space assassin”—a kill system that leaves no fingerprint.
And it gets worse. Unlike early designs, China’s latest models use zero-debris “covert kill” technology. It doesn’t blow you up—it just turns off your light. A malfunction, they’ll say. But there’s no coming back. It’s warfare by silent unobtrusive deletion, typically civilized warfare with Chinese characteristics.”
So it’s possible China and Russia are more advanced than the US, but it’s also quite possible that the US is keeping some cards close to its chest as the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs noted in the Harper’s piece.
‘When Raymond first spoke publicly on the events, in an interview with Time, he called the activity “unusual and disturbing,” and noted that “inspection” of a satellite by an enemy craft is not discernibly different from an approach preceding an attack.’
So wait a minute. How is this any different to US aircraft stalking Russian and Chinese ships and flying up to their borders with either their transponder turned off or else using the codes of civilian passenger jets. The Chinese are getting jack with it so yesterday they flashed a German spy plane with a laser to get them to buzz off.
As much as I support space exploration and development, I sometimes think that it would be better if we had a Kessler Syndrome get going to cut us off from space for a very long time. It is either that or else some maniac bureaucrat or politician will cause to have nukes orbiting the Earth to establish “dominance.” Such a country would claim that there were no nukes there but only Tungsten rods to be used for kinetic strikes but since you would have to wait for it to hit to determine if it was a nuke or not, it may trigger a first strike scenario instead rather than wait find out.
Not any different really, is it? The Harper’s piece mentions that the 1967 Outer Space Treaty was put together because in 1962, the US had detonated a nuke in space. The treaty only bans nukes in space though – everything else is fair game. And we’ve learned how agreement capable the US is in recent years…
Why the need to exaggerate??
America’s most precious military satellites: the GPS constellation. A single hit would shatter decades of infrastructure and leave no trace.
The GPS constellation has 24 vehicles, and there are normally at least one spare in each plane. “A single hit” would be just an inconvenience, although an expensive one.
There seem to be two main streams of development, the Ekipazh using thermionic reactors in the hundreds of Kw power range and the TEM 1 Mw gas turbine reactor both by KBArsenal, now merging with Zuvs. Both are probably EW warfare suites.These have been in development from Soviet times.
Also Cosmos 2588 shadows USA 338 as does Cosmos 2542/3 shadow USA 245, Cosmos 2558 shadows USA 320 and Cosmos 2576 shadows USA 314. The Russians don’t like the optical spy satellites at all.Russian satellites are transitioning from Zenon gas to Krypton.
There is an idea that an unknown system is in development in Kaluga under the the mentorship of Shoigu for some time. Perhaps a Oreshnik like surprise.
Systems like these that take more than 20. years to finalise are no longer feasible for the US hence the panic.
I have not done a final pass to see what remains of NASA, but the last version I saw had a budget (no plan, just more than 80 M) to move a shuttle from the Smithsonian to a museum space in Texas and funding for Artemis projects. Everything else, including projects that are on time, on budget, and in business for years, was crippled or cut.
Makes sense for military goals.
t: I have not done a final pass to see what remains of NASA
Don’t bother. This just in –
Former reality TV star appointed NASA Interim Administrator
Can Sean Duffy embrace the challenge?
https://www.theregister.com/2025/07/10/nasa_interim_administrator/
‘NASA has a new interim Administrator. US President Donald Trump has announced that former reality TV star and current Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy will be taking on the role.
‘”Sean is doing a TREMENDOUS job in handling our Country’s Transportation Affairs,” wrote Trump….
‘The Trump administration aims to slash NASA’s budget, with many science missions at risk of being terminated or scaled back. Of Duffy, Trump said: “He will be a fantastic leader of the ever more important Space Agency, even if only for a short period of time.”
‘Duffy responded: “Honored to accept this mission. Time to take over space. Let’s launch.”
…Duffy has little experience in the space arena. Before entering politics, he starred in The Real World: Boston in 1997, the sixth season of the MTV reality television show, and Road Rules: All Stars in 1998, an MTV Winnebago driving event where he met his future wife, Rachel Campos. He resigned from Congress in 2019, later becoming a Fox Business host in 2022 before being appointed Secretary of Transportation in 2025….’
Robotic systems are far better suited to work in space than astronauts, but the U.S. prioritized manned programs to amuse the public and secure political support for NASA. The pernicious dogma that appearance is reality has undermined the U.S. space program, and even some commercial ventures are still focused on tourist joyriding.
Meanwhile, Chinese and Russian developments are proceeding on a more rational basis. Since the U.S. has declared its intention to militarize space, these nations must take appropriate defensive precautions. The Chinese have just made a major advance in demonstrating the capability to refuel a satellite in orbit. By contrast, NASA intends to abandon the $10 billion James Webb space telescope in 20 years because it was designed without a refueling capability.
In a sane world, there would be an international standard for robotic refueling or modular replacement of propulsion modules for spacecraft. This would greatly extend the service life of satellites and space observatories. Institutional inertia and geopolitical divisiveness prevent rational development of space technology. Instead, we get a space weapons race that has unpredictable and potentially disastrous consequences.
HH: the U.S. prioritized manned programs to amuse the public
I seem to remember a fellow called Yuri Gagarin, who was the first man in space in 1961.
Other manned space firsts by the Russians include:
The record for the longest stay in space, which belongs to cosmonaut Valery Polyakov, who spent 437 days in orbit aboard the Mir space station from January 1994 to March 1995, with the aim of studying the effects of long-duration spaceflight on the human body, in preparation for potential missions to Mars;
The first woman in space, Valentina Tereshkova, cosmonaut, June 16, 1963.
I mention these Russian manned space milestones to make a couple of points.
[1] NASA back in the day did not prioritize putting humans into space any more than the Russians did. The groupthink that most people defaulted to back then because it was received opinion in both Russia and America, as well as elsewhere, was that space was a new frontier and human beings were going to go out there and, thus, there was a space race on to put people up there, without any real consideration of how difficult it is to sustain human beings from solar and cosmic radiation beyond Earth’s magnetosphere.
[2] Today, the groupthink that most people default because it’s now the received opinion is the one you defaulted to: Robotic systems are far better suited to work in space than astronauts. and what’s gone wrong with NASA is that it’s spent too much time putting astronauts up there unlike the Chinese and Russian developments (who) are proceeding on a more rational basis.
No. In the real world the Chinese have Tiangong, their own manned space station in orbit, and a plan to put astronauts on the Moon by 2030. Likewise, there are still three Russian astronauts aboard ISS. So your claim or assumption that China and Russia see no purpose in manned space missions and have become success stories in space by focusing exclusively on robotic missions clearly is not true. Is it?
For that matter, in terms of robot programs NASA had the likes of the Rover missions to the Martian surface and the Voyager and Cassini missions (the latter in combination with ESA) to its credit
So what’s gone wrong with NASA — and it has gone wrong — is not the result of a failure to pursue robotics. Rather, I’d suggest, what’s gone wrong with NASA is what’s gone wrong with America. It’s the same reason, forex, that American nuclear power has been a failure.
And that’s that in the US if something doesn’t serve the short-term interests of either US capitalism or the US military then the country’s rulers aren’t interested in it and it doesn’t get done properly.