Weapons In Space

The Obama administration has announced it is ready to negotiate a treaty banning weapons from Earth orbit. The previous administration approached the subject from the starting position that the U. S. reserved the right to ensure U. S. access to space and to defend U. S. assets in space.

Mr. Obama will surely start there, as well, but his emphasis seems to be on discussing issues. The history of limiting weapons is not terribly good. Most experts agree, for example, that the Soviet Union routinely violated nuclear arms control agreements-- and some experts say the U. S. didn't follow those treaties to the letter, either. The Washington Naval Treaty of 1923 limited the size of battleships, but that didn't stop Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan from developing navies with substantial offensive capabilities. On the other hand, international bans of chemical and biological weapons seem to be holding.

So, would banning space weapons by treaty end the problem? Probably not. Nations pursue what their leaders perceive as the national interest. Would such a treaty, therefore, be a waste of time and effort? Not necessarily. It would focus attention on space, which the media almost totally ignores. A treaty banning offensive weapons while allowing defensive systems might also establish a stable, durable dynamic.