posted on Jul, 15 2010 @ 03:43 AM
The U.S. government on July 13 told the United Nations that the new U.S. space policy represents "a departure" from the previous doctrine insofar as
the United States will now at least consider proposals to prevent an arms race in space.
Found this article on the Space.com website, I thought it's quite interesting in so far as the US is now willing to consider
prevent an arms race and the U.S. authorities will now view measures to control arms in space much as it does other arms control agreements.
There is a fair bit of information in this article, for starters the joint draft treaty on arms control in space submitted by the Russia and China
governments in 2008 was blatantly rejected by the U.S. due to:
having too many loopholes to be of value, and lacking the means to verify that all spacefaring nations were respecting the treaty's terms.
but now the U.S. is willing to: no longer oppose making space-related arms control a topic of debate at the Conference on Disarmament, so long as
the discussions do not rise to the level of formal negotiations in view of a treaty.
The article is stating the U.S. is willing to change it's outlook on a debate due to the amount of space junk out there in orbit and to prevent
collisions in space, BUT! on the other hand U.S policy, allows space to be used for national and homeland security activities, and also preserves
the right of a nation to defend its space-based assets from space- or ground-based interference
To my mind the U.S. government want to preserve the right to use space for defence but don't want all the space debris up there interfering with
their precious satellites and lord knows what else they have up there, so now they are willing to consider
a debate (That's nice of them
, one other thing that struck me about this article was the statement:
European government officials say they have noticed a more-open attitude on the part of U.S. government officials in U.S.-European talks about
coordinating work on space surveillance, both for debris mitigation and for other purposes.
I wonder what the other purposes
are?? it doesn't say in the article, all in all an interesting read on the space weapon debate.