Military Review

Who prepares the bomb for the universe

Who prepares the bomb for the universe

The United States voted against the resolution on non-posting first weapons in outer space, proposed by Russia in collaboration with other states with 25.

Nevertheless, the draft document was supported by the overwhelming majority: 122 delegations voted for it, 47 countries, mostly European, abstained, while Georgia, Israel, the United States and Ukraine opposed it.

The committee also approved a resolution on the prevention of an arms race in outer space, which was supported by the 173 delegation. Only three states expressed their "no" - Israel, Palau and the United States.

Voting took place on Tuesday in the relevant first committee of the UN General Assembly, responsible for disarmament and international security issues. The document entitled “On the first non-deployment of weapons in space” confirms the importance of this issue and the need to take practical measures, including “based on the updated draft treaty on the prevention of the placement of weapons in outer space, the use of force or the threat of force that Russia and China have made at the disarmament conference in 2014. "

According to the press release of the first committee of the UN General Assembly, the representative of Ukraine supported the idea of ​​not placing weapons in space as such, but without bothering to work on the document, without hesitation explained the vote against him not by content claims, but by the fact that it was submitted by Russia. According to him, Kiev opposes the foreign policy of the Russian Federation, the draft resolution on the non-deployment of nuclear weapons in space "is designed to divert attention" from events in Ukraine, which means "does not have the right to exist."

The representative of the United States showed a somewhat more thoughtful approach. According to him, “the resolution does not give a clear definition of what is a weapon in outer space,” “it does not allow determining the criteria for placing a weapon in space first.” In addition, the American delegation did not like the "focus of the resolution on weapons deployed in space, but the lack of provisions on ground-based anti-satellite systems." In this regard, the United States intends to vote against the document at the UN General Assembly. The US delegation voted against a similar document last year.

The representative of Russia, Vladimir Yermakov, for his part, called these arguments "unserious" and noted that "a political decision of all states not to be the first to place weapons in space would serve as a joint guarantee that no country will take such steps in the future." According to him, the resolution is mainly opposed by one state, "whose position is well known and understandable," since its national doctrines spell out "a desire to dominate outer space and contain provisions for the use of weapons against other countries." He also drew attention to the fact that the EU countries traditionally took a different view, and for many of them, preventing an arms race was one of the priorities. The representative of the Russian Federation suggested that the European states "were subjected to such external pressure that they are unable to maintain a sovereign position and now refrain from a dialogue on the non-placement of weapons in space."

Space military is not a toy

US desire to place weapons in outer space will lead to a new arms race

Yuri Gavrilov, Ivan Petrov


The question of space systems of armaments began to be studied by the military of the USSR and the USA from the beginning of space exploration. There were even some experimental explosions. The most powerful of these was carried out by the US 9 July 1962, the 1,4 megaton bomb exploded at an altitude of 400 km. In 1300 km from the epicenter, in Hawaii, street lighting went out, phones and radio stations failed. Artificial radiation belts formed by the explosion caused the failure of seven satellites, which was one third of the orbital constellation that existed at that time.

In 1963, the USSR, the United States and the United Kingdom signed a treaty banning the testing of nuclear weapons under water, in the atmosphere and in outer space. In 1967, the outer space treaty came into force, confirming a ban on testing nuclear weapons in space, as well as prohibiting the deployment of weapons of mass destruction in outer space. This treaty has been ratified by more than 100 countries, including the Russian Federation, the United States and China.

However, if the placement of nuclear weapons in space is prohibited, then this prohibition has not extended to conventional weapons.

In recent years, the United States has been actively developing its Space Situational Awareness (SSA) program, whose mission is to protect American satellites and other spacecraft from anti-satellite weapons. Earlier it was reported that the United States intends to send billion dollars to 5 to protect its orbiters.

Allocation of such significant budgets and activation of programs for the protection of spacecraft is explained, in particular, by the success of China in the development of anti-satellite weapons. Beijing over the past 10 years at least three times experienced similar weapons. It was reported that ground-based missiles and laser weapons were used for this purpose. Successful launches took place in 2007, 2013 and 2014. The Chinese managed to shoot down their meteorological satellite in orbit.

Figure: 122 states supported RF resolution in collaboration with 25 countries on non-placement of weapons in space

But concerns about the safety of their satellites, of course, are far from the only reason why the United States stubbornly refuses to support all initiatives on an unarmed space. The fact that the "space" intentions of the Americans are clearly not only defensive in nature, they are known at the Russian Defense Ministry. The Russian military is well aware that the Pentagon has long been actively developing promising strike complexes, the withdrawal of which into orbit can negate many of the rules for using near-Earth space.

At the same time, the Russian position on this issue remains unchanged - space should not become a place for the deployment of a new arms race. It is no secret that the group of US military satellites outnumber the Russian one.

Of the 1200 satellites in orbit, about half belong to the United States, each of which may have a dual purpose, both civilian and military.

But the most important thing is that Russia, unlike the United States, does not seek to flood the near-Earth space with shock weapons like military lasers. The tasks that our military vehicles are currently solving in orbit are mainly reduced to navigation support and the acquisition of intelligence information.

Therefore, in the Russian military, they have little faith in believing that overseas they will agree with such rules that will diminish the US role in space exploration and, all the more, affect the fulfillment of the tasks of the Pentagon’s orbital group.

How do you like this?

Igor Korotchenko, a member of the Public Council under the Ministry of Defense of Russia, editor-in-chief of the magazine “National Defense”:

- Weapons in space are those that are capable of destroying spacecraft, any other types of weapons in space, that is, something that has a shock potential. Russia is not engaged in such projects, but the Americans are conducting similar developments.

If the United States is the first to place weapons in space, then no one can stop them. This will mark a new large-scale arms race, which in the future could lead to war.

Ivan Moiseev, head of the Space Policy Institute:

- In 2008, Europe launched an initiative of the convention on behavior in space, which closely intersects with the issues of space weapons, and the States supported them. An alternative document is the proposal of Russia and China, roughly speaking, about space non-aggression.

Due to the fact that the United States is perfectly aware of its capabilities in the use of space, any restrictions do not need them. All the more initiated by their geopolitical opponents Russia and China.

In general, recently, the degree of hysteria over the use of space weapons has only increased. This summer, American journalists wrote about three mysterious Russian maneuvering spacecraft capable of disabling valuable American satellites located in geosynchronous orbit.

Anatoly Tsyganok, Head of the Center for Military Forecasting:

- The fact that Americans are developing weapons of space attack, it became known 15 years ago. Apparently, soon they are planning to try to put weapons in space, so they are now opposed to this UN resolution, which binds them together. I believe that Russia should definitely raise this issue in the UN Security Council.
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Bort radist
    Bort radist 7 November 2015 06: 57
    The USA has a manic idea of ​​being the first and to rule the world, they understand by logic that this is already impossible, that this is the road to the abyss, but they cannot stop. The former see the edge, but if they stop moving in that direction they will be trampled by those who follow them.
    1. Andrey Yuryevich
      Andrey Yuryevich 7 November 2015 07: 39
      all except the USA, Israel and ... PALAU !!! PALAU BLINK !!! - "ONO" - Consists of 328 islands with a total area of ​​458 km² wassat
      1. Ramzaj99
        Ramzaj99 7 November 2015 13: 38
        and Georgia, Israel, the USA and Ukraine spoke out against.

        You can immediately see who is against the vote, the United States and its little dogs ......)))
      2. The comment was deleted.
    2. Civil
      Civil 7 November 2015 08: 43
      and Georgia, Israel, the USA and Ukraine spoke out against.

      What an interesting company, Israel somehow it is clear to them that the whole region is facing a war, Georgia and Ukraine simply lick Hegemon up to the holes!))))
      1. tomket
        tomket 7 November 2015 09: 25
        Quote: Civil
        What an interesting company,

        If the United States and Israel are still pulling on Sherkhan from Tabaki, Georgia and Ukraine are not even pulling on jackals of hangers-on ...
        1. Temples
          Temples 7 November 2015 10: 01
          Well, everything, tryndets of the universe !!!
          Georgians against the militarization of space.
          There is no longer Georgian urine to restrain its rocket engineers and cosmos warriors.
          Georgians will launch combat satellites into space tomorrow!
          Airfield combat caps in space! Universal horror !!!!!!
          MIMINO himself will lead the Georgian cavalry !!!
          Everyone is afraid and give up !!! wassat
    3. max702
      max702 7 November 2015 12: 25
      Well, we are helping them in this by delivering the inherited real rocket engines for green papers and virtual tokens ..
  2. Name
    Name 7 November 2015 06: 58
    Welcome all! No, well, with the grandfathers of Moses and the "exceptional" everything is clear, but Palau with a population equal to an urban-type settlement for which plant is it all needed, and ... laughing
  3. Monster_Fat
    Monster_Fat 7 November 2015 07: 05
    Well, they didn't sign, so what? And if they "signed", then what, no one would take weapons into space? "Don't tell my slippers." They would begin to deduce under various pretexts. Experience shows that the entire course of world history, all these "agreements" "are not even worth the paper on which they are written" (Otto von Bismarck) ...
  4. Armored optimist
    Armored optimist 7 November 2015 07: 20
    Yes, not really what I wanted! Now they have untied our hands. I think we are much faster able to launch combat platforms for various purposes into space.
    1. NIKNN
      NIKNN 7 November 2015 12: 09
      Armored Optimist (4) RU Today, 07:20 AM

      Yes, not really what I wanted! Now they have untied our hands. I think we are much faster able to launch combat platforms for various purposes into space.

      Yes, it’s not reasonable for us to get involved in the arms race (the sausage has not fallen in price yet), but we would need to prepare an asymmetric answer.
      In fact, it is easier to shoot down a satellite than an airplane (maneuverability is limited, the weight of additional protective equipment is worth its weight in gold multiplied by "n" to the "n" power, the position is known and tracked, etc.), so if there is a "death star", then seriously. Plus not being killed is R&D development.
    2. vladimir_krm
      vladimir_krm 7 November 2015 12: 45
      Yes, everything is simpler. The USA has been obsessed with SOI and other weapons in space since Reagan’s time, at least in theory, in cartoons :) Russia is on the defensive from it. The already developed S-500 is able to defend itself against space weapons, because the Americans want to link the ban on weapons in space with the ban on protection against it.
  5. rotmistr60
    rotmistr60 7 November 2015 07: 25
    122 delegations voted for it, 47 countries abstained, mainly European, and Georgia, Israel, the USA and Ukraine spoke out against.

    The usual situation for serious matters. And the countries supporting the United States have long been known. Two "great powers" - Georgia and Ukraine, are especially "happy". It is also strange that for 122 delegations. Obviously, the United States did not need to push this issue in its favor, since it is enough that they themselves did not go to sign such an agreement.
  6. EvgNik
    EvgNik 7 November 2015 07: 27
    Well, here's the answer to the question: who is in greater isolation, who generally lost a sense of proportion and the last drops of reason. And it was amusing in which company the states ended up after the vote. Very revealing community.
  7. Volzhanin
    Volzhanin 7 November 2015 07: 29
    It is high time for the world to understand - while it uses dollars, it sits on a powder keg.
    If you turn a green-scent into what it really is, then such vast opportunities to crap, the mattress will not.
  8. Rigla
    Rigla 7 November 2015 07: 56
    Well, what for the UN? What for??? It is necessary to do the matter, and not write complaints that one hell will flush the toilet. We must launch our dual-use satellites and drag weapons into space ourselves! Then the Americans will not speak, and they will scratch their turnips before another muck.
    1. NIKNN
      NIKNN 7 November 2015 12: 18
      Rigla (4) RU Today, 07:56
      It is necessary to launch their dual-use satellites

      And you, what do you think, we launch satellites for the circle from the palace of pioneers (and those would be dual-use wink )? Our (I think not only) specialists already collect satellites that will form the basis of the constellation in lunar orbit (and I hope they will receive all possible assistance from the palace of pioneers), so that we do not stand still.
  9. aszzz888
    aszzz888 7 November 2015 08: 06
    It’s simple and clear - the mericatos want war, wherever it takes place. And even in space.
    Campaign, that city, living on the continent and called America, is very superfluous on the planet.
    Sift them through a sieve, and release them in the Gobi, or somewhere else with a good climate! laughing
  10. Bort radist
    Bort radist 7 November 2015 08: 12
    Quote: aszzz888
    It’s simple and clear - the mericatos want war, wherever it takes place. And even in space.

    They want war everywhere, but not on their territory. Drones, cruise missiles, napalm, uranium, ......., but not in their own country.
  11. Barakuda
    Barakuda 7 November 2015 08: 22
    Quote: aszzz888
    release in the Gobi, or else where with a good climate!

    There is nothing to litter Asia, it is better to the Sahara. Local residents in the area will "joyfully" greet them, and remember something am Wishing parties will also be pulled up from the south ..
    1. Mikhail Krapivin
      Mikhail Krapivin 7 November 2015 08: 56
      Quote: rotmistr60
      Georgia, Israel, USA and Ukraine.

      Yeah, a mighty bunch. Haberdashery and cardinal - great power :)
  12. stayer
    stayer 7 November 2015 08: 56
    All these treaties only delay "space armament" for some time. Sooner or later, the strike complexes will appear in space, in orbit, possibly on the Moon. They just don't exist yet. We need to understand this and take action. The development of such systems in the United States has been talked about for a long time, at least 15 years. It is not for nothing that they vote against, presenting ridiculous reasons for refusal. I hope that our scientists and developers will be able to oppose their developments (I am sure that they are also underway).
  13. pilot bin-bom
    pilot bin-bom 7 November 2015 09: 02
    "the resolution does not provide a clear definition of what constitutes a weapon in outer space"
    Indeed, how can one discuss what he himself has not read. Indeed, almost every satellite can be turned into a kind of meteorite and direct it to the desired point. Space weapons for striking the earth's surface may not contain explosives. Type in the search engine "arrows of God."
    1. Lelek
      Lelek 7 November 2015 09: 39
      Quote: Pilot bin-bom
      Indeed, almost every satellite can be turned into a kind of meteorite and direct it to the desired point.

      You are absolutely right, especially when you consider that many satellites have nuclear energy sources.
  14. blizart
    blizart 7 November 2015 09: 13
    Let us rise a thousand kilometers above the Earth - we will see America again, Israel is unlikely. One astronomical unit and already the whole Earth is barely visible. One parsec and the sun is lost among the myriad of stars. We have not yet covered one Universe that is ... the eleventh degree indifferent to us! Therefore, the phrase from the American movie "Head Through": "You are entering the US outer space." - sounds not just funny, but idiotic. But the sin of pride was always punished. Is always!
  15. aba
    aba 7 November 2015 09: 31
    Quote: blizart
    "You are entering US outer space." - sounds not just funny, but idiotic.

    This is megalomania! Perhaps not even treatable ... Therapeutic, only surgery! More precisely, craniotomy. wink
  16. kartalovkolya
    kartalovkolya 7 November 2015 09: 32
    Well, everything fell into place and the main thing was explained to everyone who is the worst enemy of mankind! But ... And this "BUT" does not give rest to all of us, and why and why do officials from Roscosmos supply our open enemies with engines for missiles, on which they "stuffed" Space with their satellites and other "rubbish"? Isn't it treason and outright betrayal behind these actions of our bureaucrats? Well, the United States does not have engines for spacecraft and it will take a long time before they will be able to develop them, so why give them funds for "fouling" outer space on their own hands! ??? And then there are such "benefactors" who are supposedly "saving" our Space Program, threaten our very existence as a sovereign country ?! Once in the United States they openly talked about placing weapons in orbit, then immediately stop supplying engines and, as Rogozin put it: "... let them start on trampolines ..."! (by the way, they have already tried, together with dill, to modernize one former Soviet engine and where did their launch vehicle flew to?)
  17. Samarin
    Samarin 7 November 2015 11: 02
    Quote: stayer
    I hope that our scientists and developers will be able to oppose their developments (I am sure that they are also underway).

    Well, well, hope ... And also believe in good sorceresses.
  18. Samarin
    Samarin 7 November 2015 11: 10
    Quote: kartalovkolya
    and as Rogozin put it: "... let them run on trampolines ..."!

    And where are the trampolines ?! Engines deliver as cute ... And yawns Rogozin said - how it farted into the water.
    1. vladimir_krm
      vladimir_krm 7 November 2015 12: 41
      Do what they deliver correctly. If all sorts of embargoes were stimulated by Russia for import substitution, then in the USA it would be about the same. Why help the United States by encouraging them to develop their own and denying earnings Russian factories?
  19. revnagan
    revnagan 7 November 2015 14: 13
    What is the point of all these treaties? There was a non-aggression pact between the USSR and Germany. And what? As soon as the Fritz had the opportunity, they attacked. And if, God forbid, they won, then who would remember this treaty? And if the USSR had atomic weapons at that time, and Hitler knew that in the event of an attack they would flounder, then there would have been no attack without a pact. The Americans are ready to launch them (weapons) into space. They have invested money and are ready to get advantages from putting weapons into orbit. And no pieces of paper will stop them and voluntarily they will not refuse trump cards.
  20. MAKK75
    MAKK75 7 November 2015 15: 37
    Space must be peaceful, people on Earth can’t figure it out, and especially smart people climbed into space with weapons.
  21. _GSVG_
    _GSVG_ 7 November 2015 17: 29
    Palau is what? or where? It seems that either I missed something from the school curriculum or the Jewish cosmonaut Palau from the GI is going to go into outer space from the Amer Shuttle with M16 to the edge, and run along the skin from nose to tail. Arms race in space you understand. laughing laughing
  22. Old26
    Old26 7 November 2015 20: 49
    Quote: kartalovkolya
    Once in the United States they openly started talking about placing weapons in orbit, then immediately stop supplying engines and, as Rogozin put it: "... let them start on trampolines ..."!

    They did not "talk about placing weapons in orbit." They asked a quite natural question about clarifying the terminology, "what is what." and so far voted against. By the way, if you read the GA document there everything is so vague that it is not clear to which weapon all this applies.
  23. Vlad5307
    Vlad5307 7 November 2015 21: 54
    Quote: MAKK75
    Space must be peaceful, people on Earth can’t figure it out, and especially smart people climbed into space with weapons.

    Well, that means you need to answer asymmetrically and cheaply - create a bunch of space "bugs" that will destroy such spacecraft on command. It will be more profitable than launching weapons into orbit, and such small "bugs" maneuvering "stick" to satellites with weapons and "extinguish" them. bully
  24. igorka357
    igorka357 8 November 2015 09: 18
    Palau .. I have not heard!