National Space Policy : International Comparison of Policy and the ‘ Gray Zone ’
The U . S . and U . S . Intelligence Community is faced with a difficult and complex problem . Although currently policy and doctrine exists to help examine the space domain , it is vital to examine how particular threats are within the gray area of the space domain . Space systems encompass an array of capabilities from non-kinetic to kinetic effects . However , the complexity of space and its connection to critical national security infrastructure pose significant vulnerabilities to the international community . The rapid growth of space-faring nations and indigenous capabilities leave nations and their allies susceptible to space-centric targeted attacks . National level policy and strategic direction by senior military and political leaders is continually developed to ensure the protection of national infrastructure . Nevertheless , adversarial nations continue to blend hard and soft power tactics to achieve strategic objectives .
The blending of these tactics , or Gray Zone activities , allows nations to remain below the threshold of conflict and absolute war . Dalton et al . ( 2019 ) explain Gray Zone threats are “ sharp power , political warfare , malign influence , irregular warfare , and modern deterrence ” ( n . p ). The competition for space dominance is an elusive domain where space activity is ambiguous and susceptible to non-kinetic threats ( Wright , 2018 ). Nations are employing these Gray Zone activities to destabilize and influence adversaries in an effort to shift the balance of power regionally and internationally .
As the capacity of space-faring nations has increased , the corresponding threats in the space-domain have expanded exponentially . Historically , the U . S . was faced the threat of communism and primarily focused on the Soviet Union . The launch of Sputnik shocked the U . S ., triggering the Space Race . In contrast , the political unrest in China caused a cultural upheaval , impeding Chinese space program expansion ( Drozhashchikh , 2018 ). The lag of China ’ s space program fueled China ’ s ambition to catch-up to the U . S . and Russia ’ s space capabilities . Similarly , India was able to enter the space enterprise but through the development of rockets and nuclear capabilities . Nevertheless , India ’ s nuclear program testing in the late 1970s caused China to place sanctions on India affecting their ability to construct a space launch pad ( LeLe , 2017 ). This delay showcases China ’ s strategy to achieve regional dominance by preventing nations , within the region , from expanding space capabilities . Although , each nation holds a different strategic purpose these nations are affected by a new common enemy , the Gray Zone . In turn , it may influence their respective decision-making abilities .
As the space domain becomes more advanced , it is crucial to examine the factors associated with Gray Zone activities . Space policy is not prepared to handle the challenges associated with Gray Zone activities . Space policy must reflect on Gray Zone challenges to implement an effective space strategy . The ambiguity of the space domain creates the ideal breeding ground for Gray Zone activities . However , for nations
97