Prelude

It is important to recognise the fine distinction between the terminologies militarisa­tion and weaponisation of space before beginning any further discussion. Identifying this difference is more important because at times it has been observed that some use the word militarisation interchangeably with weaponisation. It is also viewed by few that ‘militarisation’ of space is an imprecise phrase. This is because space has been militarised for decades. For many years, satellites have been used for intelligence gathering, and ballistic missiles are flying through space. Some bracket these issues and issues like killing satellites by using kinetic weapons together as the militarisation of space. At times, this also involves putting weapons in space which could be used for targets on Earth [1]. There are few nonlethal ways of targeting satellites by using jamming techniques. Also, it is very difficult to really define the space weapons. No universally accepted definition is available in this regard. Generally, it is perceived that space weapons are the devices which could damage or obstruct the functioning of any space system. However, the dynamic nature of technology and rapid developments happening in space realm are making it difficult to define the space weapons. Various technologies used for civilian purposes could be misused as weapons too. For example, a micro – or a nano-satellite could be converted into a space mine. The systems developed for the purposes of missile defence could be reconfigured for attacking satellites. All this clearly indicates that the term militarisation of the space, if made all inclusive, will have limitations in regard to clearly confirming the actual purpose behind any act. This demands a nuanced distinction to recognise the intent.

The term militarisation of space means ‘the use of assets based in space to enhance the military effectiveness of conventional forces or the use of space assets for military purposes. The military purposes of space expected to include communications, electronic intelligence, photoreconnaissance, meteorology, early warning, navigation and weapons guidance. The militarization of space is distinct from the weaponisation of space. It is defined as either weapons based in space or weapons based on ground with their intended targets being located in space’ [2].

Various other chapters in this part of the book have mostly followed the structure which essentially revolves around discussing the country-specific investments in various arenas of space technologies. However, it is important to appreciate while discussing the military utility of space assets that, for the purposes of military use, it is not necessary to own satellite systems in space and/or on ground. A state could acquire the required inputs either by purchasing data from the commercial satellite agencies or under bilateral/multilateral agreement a spacefaring nation could share it with them. Also, it is important to appreciate that the information gathered by using satellite technologies for peaceful purposes or for defensive purposes could also find utility for the military purposes depending upon the nature of data gathered and type of military requirement. It is obvious that the satellites meant for communication, remote sensing and navigation will have certain military usages. These are essentially dual-use systems. No detail discussion of such systems is done in this chapter. The basic intend of this chapter is to identify the space systems which are predominantly designed for the military usages. However, certain overlap with the civilian systems looks obvious because few states in the region are not open about identifying certain satellite systems in their possession as military-specific systems. They are designating them as civilian systems but their military-specific utility is becoming far too obvious.

As mentioned frequently in this book there are three major space powers in Asia having significant investments made in civilian space sector. Few other powers in the region could be termed as promising players with major futuristic plans. For states like Israel which is not a part of big three troika also uses satellite technology for military purposes. Few non-spacefaring states with the region also use satellite technology of strategic purposes. For few states in the region security threats are so overarching that they are not left with any option but to depend of multiple methods for handling these threats and space technologies become one of the sought-after option. Hence, before deliberating the militarisation and weaponisation policies of the states in the region, it is important to contextualise the threat perceptions of the states within the region and the dependence and requirement of space technologies for this purpose.