On June 18, 2018, President Donald Trump addressed the National Space Council in the East Room of the White House, where he announced a major initiative: the formation of a new branch of the military that he believed was vital for buttressing both American identity and national security.
Strictly adhering to script rather than veering into off-the-cuff remarks, Mr. Trump made references to the historic space race between the United States and Russia, which began in 1957, when the Soviet Union launched the first artificial satellite Sputnik I into orbit. “My administration,” he declared somberly, “is reclaiming America’s heritage as the greatest space-faring nation. The essence of the American character is to explore new horizons and to tame new frontiers.
“Our destiny, beyond the Earth, is not only a matter of national identity but a matter of national security. So important for our military. …And people don’t talk about it. When it comes to defending America, it is not enough to merely have an American presence in space. We must have American dominance in space.
“Very importantly, I am hereby directing the Department of Defense and the Pentagon to immediately begin the process necessary to establish a space force as the sixth branch of the armed forces. That’s a big statement. We are going to have the Air Force and we are going to have the Space Force, separate but equal. It is going to be something. So important.”
I must confess that I was prepared for almost anything, but certainly not the unveiling of a “space force,” especially in 2018. Had Donald Trump been watching too many sci-fi films?
My reaction was not an isolated one. The liberal media had a field day, instantly renaming the newly launched branch of the military “Trump’s Space Farce.” The new initiative was labeled unnecessary, unjustified, frivolous, bizarre and hilarious. The press conference was widely mocked, and other than providing great fodder for the liberal media’s war against Trump—the late-night talk show hosts, comedians and pundits lampooned the announcement—it quickly passed into the next news cycle.
As David Montgomery of The Washington Post Magazine noted on August 10, 2018: “Space Force jokes practically wrote themselves. Talk show host Grace Parra, however, didn’t consider Trump’s announcement any kind of laughing matter. She perceived it as another stunt for public attention and a violation of far more earthly matters that weren’t being addressed. Parra was practically livid when she angrily denounced Trump for creating his plan to take on outer space: ‘He’s creating a Space Force while Flint, Michigan, still doesn’t have clean water; children are being ripped from their families at the border; DACA is still under fire and climate change continues to erode our globe. But yeah, sure, launching missiles at Mars seems great.’”
Stephen Colbert, a late-night talk show host known for his sharp political satire, then added weight to Parra’s remarks by acerbically noting, “We already have NASA. We don’t need Space Force. Please wait for NASA to find life before you try to kill it.”
Colbert’s dig was actually a little bit closer to the truth than the rest of the myriad jokes made by his colleagues. Since 1947, there have been five branches of the United States military: the Army, Navy, Air Force, Marines and Coast Guard. On December 20, 2019, undeterred by the liberal media’s ridicule and the public outrage on social media, President Trump made good on his word and resolutely signed into legislation the creation of the sixth branch of the military. The only grist for the media’s mockery mill this time around was when Trump proudly announced that a flag and logo had already been created for the new branch. (Still believing that the entire enterprise was an unnecessary waste of taxpayers’ billions, I murmured to myself, “What, no theme song?”) A heartbeat later he added: “And we’re still working on the theme song.”
I am humbled and mortified to admit that I now realize that this legislation was actually a bona fide attempt to thwart auguries of war rather than exaggerate them. My apparent illiteracy and naivete (as well as that of many in the media) about Russia’s true intentions came to a grinding halt when Reuters reported on November 5, 2024, that Russia had just launched a “Soyuz rocket” carrying 55 satellites: two large ones “designed to monitor space weather,” and the other 53 far more ambiguous as to their intent. What was known, however, was that of this number, two satellites belonged to Iran.
Alarm bells rang in both the corridors of NASA and the Pentagon, as this had followed on the heels of a far more frightening scenario that had unfolded the previous May with the launch of the Russian Cosmos satellite. The official statement released by the Pentagon characterized this particular launch as “likely a counterspace weapon,” confirming for the first time what had been the source of much speculation but kept under wraps in the inner sanctums where high-level security reigned.
What particularly alarmed US space officials was the unprecedented high orbit the Russian Cosmos satellite reached, higher than all the other 16,000 satellites (50% are American) currently circling the Earth. (Editor’s note: Other news sources cite numbers ranging from 6,000 to 20,000.)
According to an NPR report published on May 30, 2024, “Observers say the Cosmos satellite has reached an orbit that essentially lets it stalk a US spy satellite.” This accusation also raised questions about how a satellite positioned in a higher orbit than any of its rivals might be used as a weapon to attack lower satellites.
Dr. Marco Langbroek, a lecturer in space situational awareness at Delft Technical University in the Netherlands, also commented, “Certainly, this must make the US military nervous. If a country can put a satellite on the same orbital plane as a rival’s spacecraft (only higher), then it’s also probably able to damage that craft.”
Although American officials have stressed that space weapons cannot be used to directly attack people or assets on the Earth’s surface, the overriding concern among experts is the indirect havoc intra-space battles could exert on our planet and its inhabitants.
According to Jessica West, a senior researcher at a Canadian peace and security institution, “Outer space is fundamental to life on earth. Cyberattacks, for example, generated from satellites in space can take down an entire country, from commanding control of nuclear weapons all the way down to being able to communicate with and navigate an individual soldier on the field. In the Ukraine war, Starlink satellites are being used in communications, flying drones and artillery. Shooting down satellites with projectiles or directed energy weapons can create great vulnerability to those of us on Earth, destroying our communications and intelligence systems, including GPS systems, cell phone networks, satellite TV, timekeeping devices, weather forecasting, provision of interconnectivity to remote places, maintaining the power grid and more. When US forces are in conflict, satellites can provide them with communications, navigation, reconnaissance and tactical missile detection. We have to remain aware and vigilant about how all of these can be interfered with.”
To read more, subscribe to Ami
