Opinion
No reason for hysteria following Chinese missile test
Looking for a print version?
Simply use your browser’s ‘Print’ command and a printer-friendly document will be generated automatically.
Also by Andrew Wagner:
- Gas tax holiday pure pandering (May 2, 2008)
- Rising food prices indicate worldwide crisis (April 25, 2008)
- Corn subsidies distort market (April 18, 2008)
- Sexual abuse not protected by Constitution (April 11, 2008)
- South trying to rewrite history (April 4, 2008)
Sharing tools:
E-mail this article:
A little more than one week ago, on Jan. 17, an article on Aviation Week and Space Technology's website reported that the People's Republic of China successfully conducted a test of an anti-satellite missile system. The article stated that U.S. intelligence agencies had learned of a planned test and were watching as the test occurred Jan. 11. The following day, the White House publicly confirmed the news. In a press briefing on Jan.18, White House spokesperson Tony Snow was asked about a U.S. response to the news. He replied, "We are concerned about it, and we've made it known." Since then, the worldwide reaction to the test has been largely negative, with most of the worry coming from the United States. After all, the United States operates the Global Positioning System satellites that determine locations for a multitude of civilian and military operations. Furthermore, many military surveillance and communications satellites are key to the efficient operation of the U.S. military. Clearly, this test has implications for the future, but much of the mainstream media has overreacted to the incident.
First of all, shut off the panic button. The test does not mean that the Chinese are planning to attack the United States or Taiwan or any of its other neighbors. Instead, this situation can be seen as more of a look into the distant future. The satellite targeted by China's test was an old weather satellite. As a result of its non-sensitive nature, the satellite was relatively visible and had a well-known orbit. In other words, the Chinese had a really good idea exactly where that satellite was going to be, making their job of hitting it with a missile much easier.
Luckily for the United States, or for anyone else concerned about having satellites knocked out of the sky, a number of different countermeasures may be useful to protect sensitive satellites. For example, a satellite launched and surrounded by decoy satellites would make the odds of hitting the real satellite much lower. Another idea that seems plausible would be to make satellites less visible to radar. Perhaps coating the satellites in some sort of radar-absorbent material or something similar would make them harder to track. The simplest countermeasure to take might be to simply start placing satellites farther out in orbit from the Earth. A satellite that is orbiting 1000 miles from the planet is harder to hit than a satellite orbiting only 500 miles away. Clearly, the United States has several ways of mitigating the vulnerability of its satellites.
Beyond protecting its own satellites, the United States has other options when it comes to space warfare. The United States has had an anti-satellite capability since the mid 1980s. While the end of the Cold War may have seen a draw in this capability, any attempt to shoot down an American satellite would have dramatic consequences. Also, unlike China, the United States is much farther along the path toward weaponizing space. If sufficiently provoked, the Pentagon may decide that space weaponry is the only option to confront Chinese aggressiveness. This would be an even greater threat to China than reconnaissance satellites and hopefully this possibility will dampen their desire for future provocations.
Although this single test does not in and of itself indicate a desire to decisively confront the United States, other developments in China point to trouble down the road. The Chinese military establishment has been conducting a large buildup and transformation of their forces for several years. Outside of the military arena, China has aggressively pursued the resources it needs to continue growing. If the present political regime survives in China, there is a distinct possibility for conflict within the coming decades. The conflict might erupt over a resource dispute, over an attempt to reclaim Taiwan, or just as a way to distract a discontented public.
What does this mean? The United States needs to take these intervening years to prepare. There will not be a war tomorrow, regardless of what the anti-satellite test looks like. Even in the future, war is not inevitable. However, two decades from now, there may come a time when diplomacy and compromise can no longer manage the conflicting interests of the United States and China. For now, though, the best course of action for the United States is to watch, wait and carefully plan for a future where China can hurt the United States far more than the loss of a few manufacturing jobs.
Andrew Wagner (awagner@badgerherald.com) is a sophomore majoring in computer science and political science.
13 Comments | Leave a comment
Leave a comment
Herald Blogs
The Beat Goes On
Muckrakers
President’s Visit Marked a Speech to One of the Last Groups Not Critical of Him
Extra Points
Top Classified Ads (view all)
HOUSES FOR Fall 2010. All houses are on W Dayton or N Bassett. 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, or 8 bedrooms. All have parking. madisoncampusrentals.com
Most satellites have known orbits. Distance is not a really problem. What is dangerous is the accuracy of the system implying that the chinese has mastered a very sophisticated sensor technology. The domino effect is that the chinese can kill a few satellites in space causing enormous debris which will then destroy all others, chinese or americans.
You are talking about political regimes. May I remind you that there is no difference living in New York or Shanghai. The Chinese are not against the American way of life. In fact they want to live the American way of life and they are approaching it. Both coutries are pure capitalists countries now. American being aggresive (Vietnam, Iraq) has already lost the battles of hearts and minds in this world, implying that more and more people in this world hates Americans although they are envious of the American way of life. I just hope that American students will have more opportunities to visit foreign countries , if not, the decline of US will be very fast, specially if they follow stupid leaders like Bush, Rumsfield or Cheney who give them a false vision of this world. Hope that someday the US will have great Statesman like John Kennedy or Bill Clinton.
I, for one, am ecstatic about the possibility of the United States getting a bargain on Chinese-made weaponry. Think about how much money we could have saved on the Iraq war if we got all our missiles from Walmart.
1:39, your point about visiting other countries is good advice. It's harder to bomb countries when you realize those people want the same things as you: kids, a home, a good job, freedom, etc. I'm pretty sure not one person feels thrilled about their country being occupied by foreign invaders (read as illegal immigrants or US soldiers).
"I just hope that American students will have more opportunities to visit foreign countries , if not, the decline of US will be very fast..."
Please tell what the connection is between American students visiting foreign countries and the rapid decline of the US.
Frankly, most Americans going to foreign countries are going either for 1) sex, 2) drinking, 3) finding a bride/spouse.
I would guess that most American students really aren't experiencing anything "cultural," by cultural I mean anything besides hanging out in pubs with other American students.
My point is, there are plenty of opportunities to see what's really important in life right in your own backyard.
America can be completely self-sufficient with the resources and materials already available. The US needs, however, to ratchet down the raging consumerism that is driving the sino-Walmart industry.
Seriously, break up your paragraphs or else nobody is going to read them. This is a newspaper column, not an essay.
"1) sex, 2) drinking, 3) finding a bride/spouse"
I think you need to qualify that statement, because you can do all those things "right in your own backyard." I think adding the word "exotic" would help your point.
"...plenty of opportunities to see what's really important in life"
What is really important to you? Keeping your ignorant head stuck in the sand? I bet you're able to have really interesting converstations that start with, "I heard" or "I saw on TV."
"My point is, there are plenty of opportunities to see what's really important in life right in your own backyard."
I think you're missing the point. The goal is not to "see what's really important in life", it's to gain some respect for the other inhabitants of this planet and put away some of our arrogance and ethnocentricity.
Aaaw, can't you handle anything that isn't written in the McNews format?
"for a future where China can hurt the United States far more than the loss of a few manufacturing jobs."
A FEW JOBS!!!
Check out the stores and see if you can find anything manufactured in the USA.
In reference to doing the following non-exotic things in a backyard anywhere in the United States:
1) sex... prostitution is not legal or state-sanctioned...
2) drinking alcohol ... gotta be 21 years of age
3) marriage... can't do it with a minor, without going through a big hassle in most states.
The point of life is (?) "to gain respect for the other inhabitants of this planet and put away some of our arrogance and ethnocentricity."
So, would wandering into some bar in Bangkok or Shanghi to pick up some girl who only knows phrases like "me love you long time"... something you probably taught her in the first place in your overpaid "teaching position" at the English language institute.... qualify as "respecting" other cultures?
As long as you're talking about gaining respect, if you really want to gain somebody's respect and find out what it's like to live in their shoes, host them in YOUR home for a few months... don't exploit theirs...
My original point is that globalism is rapidly mining the humanity out of individuality. If I am to follow your advice, by putting away my "ethnocentricity," I've also got to put away my individuality. And at some point, there isn't going to be any distinct ethnicities remaining, just one big global conglomerate of consumerist, ego-centric, mindless automatons.
My point is that own needs to live locally in order to be truly happy. And I don't mean that sailors and the like can't be truly happy. Everybody is unique, and it starts with you, the individual. Respect yourself first, and you won't shit your diarrhea on other cultures.
And, yes, I lived abroad myself in Europe, China, Korea.... And it seems everybody wants American commercialized crap. Shanghi is the new New York. They even have their own version of Chinese Idol. So, yes, saying "I saw it on TV" has significance indeed.
Isn't it obvious that the American government is sensationalizing China's rather drab weapons development program in order to create more fear, and thus more monetary support for the American military industrial complex? I wouldn't be surprised if this test was encourage by the Bush government; they'd love to see 100s of more billions of dollars go to Haliburton, and the Chinese would love to have the US deficit keep snowballing. How much money does the US owe China now?
I'm unimpressed by how easily manipulated the American media and populous are.
Isn't it obvious that the American government is sensationalizing China's rather drab weapons development program in order to create more fear, and thus more monetary support for the American military industrial complex? I wouldn't be surprised if this test was encourage by the Bush government; they'd love to see 100s of more billions of dollars go to Haliburton, and the Chinese would love to have the US deficit keep snowballing. How much money does the US owe China now?
I'm unimpressed by how easily manipulated the American media and populous are.