Keep Space for Peace Week
https://jamesrichardbennett.blogspot.com/2026/10/omni-stop-us-militarization-of-space_0633385365.html
Compiled by Dick Bennett
What’s at Stake: “Ask yourself – Should we carry the bad seed of war, greed and environmental degradation into space?” Bruce Gagnon
CONTENTS
NOVA, “SPACE WARS”. 10-7-26 and 10-13 (6 & 11). Dick Bennett. Film Notes.
Bruce Gagnon. “Space Militarization or Sustainable Peace on Mother Earth?”
Bruce Gagnon. “Urging you to Sign on Space Issues Letter.”
TEXTS
NOVA, “SPACE WARS”. 10-7-26 and 10-13 (6 & 11).
PBS https://www.pbs.org › wgbh › nova › video › space-wars
Space Wars. Inside the escalating military struggle to control space and the satellites we rely on. Premiered: 10/7/26 Runtime: 53:54Topic: Space + Flight …Read more
From Dick’s notes on the film:
Nations are “preparing the battle to dominate space.”
After the US exploded an H-Bomb in space, the world banned nuclear weapons in space. But the presence of 12,000 satellites and 100,000 predicted makes nuclear weapons difficult to track and control. Especially when 1) Elon Musk owns 2/3 of them, 2) debris is double that number, and 3) very little international regulation exists and additions are opposed by national powers, and 4) Trump’s Golden Dome anti-missile plans exacerbate all of these problems. So, NOVA concludes, it’s “up to humankind” to create a sustainable peace.
“Space militarization or Sustainable Peace on Mother Earth?”
by Bruce K. Gagnon. Coordinator, Global Network Against Weapons & Nuclear Power in Space. www.space4peace.org
I am very happy to be here with all of you at this important and timely conference.
First, I would like to thank Reva University and the Center for International Law &
Policy for inviting me to join you today. I thank Professor Dr. Aruna Kammila and
Asst. Professor Heramb Asvin for your dedicated work on this event.
This year the Global Network marked its 34 th year of existence. Created in 1992 the
GN was organized to build a global consciousness and political movement to
protect space from the frightening global war system.
I was one of the co-founders of the GN.
I grew up in a military family. I lived all over the US, Germany and England. I
joined the Air Force in 1971 during the US war on Vietnam. At that time, I
supported the war. My first station (after my training) was an airlift base for the
war in the state of California. It was there that I became exposed to the resistance
movement organized by soldiers on the base. Daily, I saw body bags lined up on
the airfield unloaded from huge cargo planes that returned from Vietnam. These
2
planes carried troops to the war, and the wounded and dead back home. There were
weekly protests from local citizens outside the base, and inside there were
meetings in the barracks at night of what we called the GI peace movement. My
heart was changed at this base.
This is where I learned that I wished to be a citizen of the whole world. I did not
want to be involved in endless war. I came to understand that people around the
world all want the same thing – they want to be safe, they want clean water and
clean air to breathe. They want to protect their families and to be treated with
respect, real fairness, equality and true justice.
On June 12, 1982 I was living in Orlando, Florida and was watching a cable TV
channel that reports on Congress. When Congress is not in session they air other
important events. In this case almost one million people were marching past the
United Nations in New York City against nuclear weapons. The occasion was a
meeting of the UN special session on disarmament. The TV covered the march and
then the speakers at the huge rally that followed.
After it was over the TV station switched to a right-wing conference being held at
the same time. The speaker at that event was retired US Gen. Daniel Graham who
helped originate the “Star Wars” program under the presidency of Ronald Reagan
during the early 1980’s.
3
Following Graham’s speech, during the question period, one person asked,
“General Graham, they say there are almost one million people protesting in New
York today. Are you worried about that?”
Graham responded, “No, I think it is great. They are protesting against nuclear
weapons, but we are moving into space. They don’t have a clue about what is
going on. Let them keep doing what they are doing.”
It was in that moment in 1982 that I began working on space issues.
I then lived less than a one-hour drive from what is now called the Cape Canaveral
Space Force Base in Florida. I began to study everything I could find out about
what the US was planning in space. I frequently organized protests against military
launches from the space center. My very first protest only drew eight people. Four
years later we had more than 5,000 in attendance at another protest there.
I went to work for the Florida Coalition for Peace & Justice in 1983 and we
organized a space conference which was the first conference ever to have a US
astronaut and a Russian cosmonaut speak together in favor of peace in space.
That could never happen today the way things are unfolding now.
4
Master of Space
In the 1997 US Space Command document entitled ‘Vision for 2020’ they wrote,
“Historically, military forces have evolved to protect national interests and
investments – both military and economic. During the rise of sea commerce,
nations built navies to protect and enhance their commercial interests…..Likewise,
space forces will emerge to protect military and commercial national interests and
investment in the space medium due to their increasing importance.”
We are now very worried about aggressive US moves to create more conflict with
Russia and China – in particular – the Pentagon claim that the US Space Command
should “control and dominate space and deny other nations the use of space”. The
Space Command logo reads ‘Master of Space’.
We know that during the 15 th century and beyond the European powers created the
global war system in order to control resources and markets in what they called
‘the New World’. This was essentially the seed of the oppressive colonial, dog-
eat-dog system that the world suffers from today. India has a very close
understanding of that history.
The dangerous notion of US ‘exceptionalism’ has now been extended to outer
space. In order to successfully operate the current US global space war fighting
system ‘downlink ground stations’ have been based around the world to relay
5
military communications from one place to another via space satellites. Activists
around the planet are opposing the presence of these Star Wars bases in their
communities and are the active membership of the Global Network.
Golden Dome
In recent years the US has been feverishly deploying so-called “Missile Defense”
(MD) systems around the globe – essentially encircling Russia, China and Iran.
Missile Defense systems used to be illegal under the Anti-Ballistic Missile (ABM)
Treaty between Russia and the US. Both sides knew that Missile Defense is a
destabilizing program that would give one side an advantage over the other. Its
key job is to be the shield that is used to destroy a nation’s missiles fired in
retaliation after the Pentagon’s first-strike ‘sword’ lunges into the heart of the
opponent’s nuclear forces.
One of the very first things President George W. Bush did after taking office in
2001 was to give Russia notice that the US was pulling out of the Anti-Ballistic
Missile Treaty. Since that time US research, development, testing, and deployment
of ‘Missile Defense’ (MD) systems has accelerated without interruption.
At the time of the collapse of the former Soviet Union the US promised that NATO
would not expand one centimeter toward Russia. Since then, that promise has been
6
repeatedly broken. Today NATO has established new bases along Russia’s border
in Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia, Sweden, Finland and Romania.
A Pentagon missile launch base has been built in Romania, and another in Poland.
These bases will be able to fire first-strike attack nuclear-capable cruise missiles
that can reach Moscow in just a few minutes time. They will also be capable of
launching so-called ‘missile defense’ interceptor systems that would theoretically
destroy any missiles that would be fired in response.
US Navy Aegis destroyers (built in my home state of Maine) also carry interceptor
missiles on-board, and are being deployed in the waters off the coasts of Iran,
Russia and China.
Every year, the US Space Command holds a computer war game where they
practice such a first-strike attack. They call it the ‘Blue’ team against the ‘Red’
team. In the war game, a US first-strike is launched against Russia and China.
When they respond by firing their own nuclear missiles that have survived the
initial Pentagon attack, the Space Command’s MD systems attempt to destroy the
remaining missiles in flight.
Of course, in the real world, things don’t always work out according to plan. But
the main point is that the Pentagon is actively preparing for such a first-strike
attack. The Pentagon deployments of MD interceptor missiles and radars give
7
Space Command the confidence (and arrogance) that they can actually use this
system. Thus, Missile Defense becomes highly destabilizing and very dangerous
to world peace.
Russia and China have long ago pledged they would never be the first to launch a
nuclear weapon. The US refuses to make that same promise.
US Space Force
Please recall that I earlier mentioned the 1997 Space Command planning document
called Vision for 2020. In December of 2019, during Donald Trump’s first
administration, he affirmed that vision by ordering the creation of the US Space
Force. In early 2020 the work to put the Space Force in motion began. One might
say ‘right on schedule’ as was predicted in the ‘Vision for 2020’.
Since that time the funding for US space military operations has expanded
dramatically with Space Force units working with allies like Australia, Canada,
France, Germany, Italy, Japan, South Korea, New Zealand, Norway, and the
United Kingdom to build the capability to “control space”.
At a meeting with these allies in late 2025 U.S. Gen. Chance Saltzman, Chief of
Space Operations of the Space Force stated, “We are building a coalition capable
of addressing the challenges of a contested space environment. To be effective, we
8
must collaborate on our architectures, integrate our training, exercises, and
operations, and build a common understanding of the threats we face."
War with Iran
During the past year we have witnessed many of these space technologies being
used in the war against Iran initiated by the US and Israel. So-called ‘missile
defense’ systems (Israel’s Iron Dome and the US Patriot and THAAD systems)
have been put to the test. Costing hundreds of billions of dollars, these highly
touted systems have repeatedly been defeated by cheaper but very effective Iranian
drones and missiles. US bases in Bahrain, UAE, Saudia Arabia, Qatar and Jordan
have repeatedly been hit and are now mostly unusable.
Golden Dome
As a result of these recent developments Donald Trump has announced a new
‘missile defense’ program he calls Golden Dome. With an initial down payment of
about $25 billion, he intends to put a yet unknown number of orbiting battle
stations just above Earth that would attempt to provide defensive coverage for the
entire US against attacks. The US Congressional Budget office has estimated this
program would cost many trillions of dollars if fully implemented. Trump has
suggested that the system could also cover Canada and Europe as well – adding
9
many trillions more to the eventual cost. Only the aerospace industry and the Space
Force are cheering for this.
The American Physical Society has done a study that rejects this program. They
have reported that to protect against just 10 Incoming Ballistic Missiles, (or
ICBMs), might require 30,000 space-based interceptors. For comparison, there are
currently just over 18,000 active satellites in orbit around Earth, most in SpaceX’s
Starlink network.
Keep in mind that today the US has $40 trillion in national debt. How could
Washington ever afford to pay for Golden Dome? The only way would be to
cancel every human needs, education and environmental program across our
country – making the US a feudal society.
Space Force announces weapons in space deployment
About three weeks ago, US Secretary of the Air Force, Troy Meink, announced
that the US has deployed space weapons in Low Earth Orbit (LEO). This is
obviously a consequence of the competition between the USA and Russia-China
over access to LEO. Whoever controls the increasingly limited parking spaces in
LEO will have a considerable advantage and will be able to see and direct weapons
not only to targets in space but also on the Earth. Elon Musk is being paid to fill up
LEO with military satellites as fast as possible for the US.
10
The US Deep Space Advanced Radar Capability (DARC) with huge radars in
Texas, Australia and possibly Wales (where grassroots opposition is
massive) would be part of a system to guide anti-satellite weapons (ASATS) to hit
targeted satellites in space.
Other space weapons options for the US appear to be space-based lasers and
electro-magnetic guns to blind or fry spacecraft electronics.
Space law
The aerospace industry has established space law departments at various
universities around the world. They are busy trying to rewrite United Nations space
law that was established by the Outer Space Treaty and the Moon Treaty.
Both of those treaties state that celestial bodies and their resources are “the
common heritage of mankind, and that an international regime should be
established to govern” any resource extraction.
During the Barack Obama administration, a bill passed the Congress and was
signed into law giving US corporations and individuals the ‘authority’ to make
land claims on the moon and asteroids. This violates existing UN space law and
will surely cause conflict in the future.
Tom Goffus, NATO’s assistant secretary general for operations, once said “like all
the other domains, you need rules of engagement for space.” This is not a settled
11
question, he said. “We’re going to have space lawyers. We have to figure out those
rules of engagement, figure out where to go on that and then on to operationalizing
our military programs.”
What is sorely needed at this time is a body of legal experts who will explore the
questions of weapons in space and the celestial privatization issue from the point of
view and interests of all humankind. Presently most of the space lawyers work for
the aerospace and weapons industries.
This is one key reason why this conference here at Reva is so timely and
important.
Today there are thousands of satellites in orbit, and the number of nations directly
involved in launching or operating satellites has grown substantially in recent
years. The “parking spaces” in orbits above the Earth are getting full. Conflict will
be increasing around the issue of who has the right to fill these remaining orbital
parking spots. Currently the US military occupies most of these orbital parking
spaces.
The private launch company called SpaceX has been given permission by the US
government to launch tens of thousands more mini-satellites to form the expansive
Starlink broadband network. Designed to provide worldwide high speed internet
12
access, 5G, will ensure that at least one satellite is always above the horizon for
everyone on Earth.
Starlink was presented as a commercial satellite system, but it has fundamental
military applications. In fact, satellites in low Earth orbit transmit signals at a much
higher speed than those in geosynchronous orbit around the equator. The US Army
and Air Force use Starlink for its military operations.
SpaceX’s Starlink satellites haven been used by the Ukrainian military to guide
drones, artillery shells, and missiles into Russian positions and at civilian targets
well inside Russia like hospitals, schools, hotels, markets, residential homes,
military bases and fuel storage facilities.
This is confirmed by former General James Dickinson, head of the US Space
Command, who declared that “Elon Musk’s Starlink demonstrates in Ukraine what
the mega-constellations of satellites can do.”
Trashing the cosmos
Amateur sky watchers have started sharing images of those growing numbers of
satellites in night skies, igniting an uproar among astronomers who fear that the
planned orbiting clusters will wreak havoc on scientific research and obstruct our
view of the cosmos.
13
Even nations that have no direct involvement in launching or operating satellites
rely heavily on space infrastructure: for television, cell phone, radio, banking,
weather prediction, communications, transport, agriculture, and for modern
military operations.
Yet, those satellites are under increasing threat from hundreds of thousands of
pieces of space debris -– fragments from past space launches that orbit the Earth at
high speeds. Imagine cascading collisions of space debris wiping out satellites and
making the Earth go virtually dark.
Thus, we need serious international legal regulations on how many satellites can go
into Lower Earth Orbit and who can put them there, and who is responsible for
damage from the debris.
ASATS
Four countries (US, Russia, India and China) have developed anti-satellite
weapons (ASATS) that could destroy or disrupt satellites during times of conflict.
In 2019 India tested an anti-satellite weapon (ASAT) during an operation
codenamed Mission Shakti. Immediately after the test, DRDO indicated that they
were working on programs involving directed energy weapons, electromagnetic
pulse (EMP), and co-orbital weapons for ASAT roles. DRDO has a Centre for
High Energy Systems and Sciences (CHESS), which is working on futuristic
14
weapon systems, mainly high-energy laser systems. India has created the Defence
Space Agency (DSA) in 2019 and has also conducted its first simulated space
warfare exercise. The Indian Defense Space Symposium in April 2026 — the most
recent high-level forum for India’s defense space community — saw Chief of
Defense Staff General Anil Chauhan deliver a direct statement of strategic intent:
India must build space architecture that is resilient, AI-enabled, quantum secure,
cyber-hardened, rapidly replenishable, and unquestionably sovereign.
There is a grave danger that outer space will become the next war zone. A conflict
in space could have devastating implications for the space systems of all nations
and for modern society on Earth. Therefore, in order to avoid potentially
devastating conflicts, there is a dire need for a global debate about the enforcement
of existing space treaties like the Moon and Outer Space Treaty. We also need
new treaties that would allow for the banning of new emerging space weapons
technologies not covered in current UN treaties.
PAROS
For more than 30 years Russia and China have annually introduced a new treaty to
ban all weapons in space at the United Nations. It is called PAROS – Prevention
of an Arms Race in Outer Space. Each year a resolution calling for the new treaty
overwhelmingly passes the General Assembly in New York City – with the US and
15
Israel voting against. Then the treaty resolution is sent to the UN’s Conference on
Disarmament in Geneva, where the US and Israel block its development. All
through both Republican and Democrat administrations in Washington the US
says, “There is no problem in space, thus there is no need for a new treaty.” It is
obvious that the aerospace industry and the Pentagon view space as a new market
for maximum profits and global domination and thus are the forces behind
blocking the treaty.
Nuclear power in space
At the same time the nuclear industry also views space as a profitable new market.
The nuclear industry dreams of nuclear-powered mining colonies on the moon,
Mars, asteroids and the like. The little NASA rovers driving around Mars today
are powered with a plutonium generator. Nuclear reactors on rockets are
envisioned for travel to Mars. Those same nuclear reactors could be used to power
orbiting battle stations just above Earth. There is currently no true legal regulation
on any of this and the aerospace and nuclear industries wish to keep it that way.
The US space program at NASA has announced it will soon begin testing nuclear
reactor engines in Lower Earth Orbit (LEO) for planned missions to Mars. What if
something goes wrong and these deadly reactors fall back to Earth? There have
been past space nuclear accidents by the US and Russia since the early days of
16
space travel. Plutonium and Uranium have fallen into Earth atmosphere due to
accidents.
NAZI role in US space program
After WW2 the US military smuggled former German Nazi operatives into the US
– unknown to the public or even then President Harry Truman. More than 1,500 of
these Nazis were planted throughout the American military industrial complex.
Among them were 100 of Hitler’s best rocket scientists and engineers who
eventually created the US military space program. With them, when they came to
the US, were 100 of the V-2 rockets that Hitler used to terrorize European cities
near the end of the war.
One of these Germans was Werner Von Braun – Hitler’s lead rocket scientist. He
became the head of the US military and civilian rocket programs.
Another was German Maj. General Walter Dornberger who had been Hitler’s
military liaison to Von Braun and his rocket team during the war. Dornberger
became Vice-President of Bell Aerospace in New York. In 1958 while speaking
before a congressional hearing in Washington, Dornberger insisted that America’s
top space priority ought to be to “conquer, occupy, keep, and utilize space between
the Earth and the moon.” In an address to a National Missile Industry Conference,
he dismissed the so-called civilian space program under NASA as “space stunts”
17
and urged that more attention be given to space weaponry. “Gentlemen,” he told
the missile men, “I didn’t come to this country to lose the Third World War, I lost
two” already.
Former general Dornberger also proposed an antiballistic-missile system in space
in the form of hundreds of satellites, each armed with many small missiles. The
missiles would be equipped with infrared homing devices and could be launched
automatically from orbit. This concept was taken under study by the Air Force in
the 1950s. Labeled BAMBI (Ballistic Missile Boost Intercept), it was an idea that
would reappear in the Star Wars plans of the Ronald Reagan presidential
administration in 1983 and in Donald Trump’s current Golden Dome proposal.
India’s role
Washington has long hoped to bring India under its ‘Space Force’ so your
country’s military forces would be run through the Pentagon space warfighting
program. A term ‘interoperability’ has been coined to describe the process where
all allies must have warfighting systems that can be technically connected to the
US Space Force system. In the end this means the US is controlling the deadly ‘tip
of the spear’ because no other nation has all the satellites and ground stations
around the globe that gives Washington the ability to see everything on Earth, hear
everything, and ultimately target every place on the planet.
18
It is crucial that India maintains its national sovereignty and an independent
foreign policy. The US-UK-NATO wish that India shows ‘proper behavior’ by
becoming a lapdog of the west. The US demands that India end trade and
economic cooperation with Russia and China. New Delhi has refused to join
sanctions on Russia that have only succeeded in the economic crippling of Europe,
and increasingly the US.
India is fast becoming a great global power. We hope that the unique ‘Indian
perspective’ on international relations will remain your nation’s approach.
All the NATO members (and NATO ‘partners’ like Japan, South Korea, Australia,
New Zealand) are being brought into the global military alliance to control and
dominate the planet on behalf of western corporate capitalism. That means
London-Washington-Brussels-Paris-Berlin would be still running the world. Five
hundred years of western colonial control is still on the agenda.
Multi-polar world
Russia, China, Iran, North Korea, Brazil, Mexico, Nicaragua, Cuba and other
nations are on Washington’s wish list for ‘regime change’. They still stand outside
full control by the western bankers and militarists. Recently we’ve seen the US and
NATO do ‘regime change’ in Syria and Venezuela. Who will be next?
19
There is the recent formation of the BRICS alternative economic institution.
BRICS includes Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa. It would loan
money to developing countries and not exploit them the way western bankers do
using the IMF and World Bank as their tools of control. Other nations have
recently been added as BRICS members including Egypt, Ethiopia, Indonesia,
Iran, Saudi Arabia, and UAE. Ten new ‘partner’ nations are now waiting in line for
full membership.
The recent 2026 BRICS+ meeting was held in New Delhi, marking the first time
you nation hosted this meeting.
The western colonial powers are not happy about BRICS as they feel insecure with
the rising of the Global South. I for one hold out hope that BRICS+ will help usher
in a new era of true peace and cooperation that is desperately needed. Without that
we are on our way to more war and more disastrous climate change events like we
recently sadly witnessed in Nepal.
A similar organization, the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) also
includes India as a member. The SCO is a Eurasian political, economic and
security organization. In terms of geographic scope and population, it is the world's
largest regional organization, covering approximately 60% of the area of Eurasia,
20
40% of the world population, and more than 30% of global GDP. Again, this
cooperation is perceived as a threat to western hegemony.
Inside the US
In the US today more than 55% of every federal tax dollar under the discretion of
Congress goes to the Pentagon. America has become a war culture. Our economy
is addicted to military production. Americans are increasingly being indoctrinated
by the corporate-owned media that the ‘Russians, Chinese and Iranians’ are trying
to take over the world so we must spend more on weapons for war and we must
have the very best space technology system in place to protect ourselves. The US
is a paranoid nation – massive guilt and fear come from our long legacy of
genocide and endless war.
We have a wedding in America of the government and corporate power – they are
one in the same. Democracy has essentially been drowned in the United States.
Ukraine
I began following the situation in Ukraine since late 2013 – virtually every day
watching videos from the so-called ‘revolution’ in the capital city Kiev.
I watched as Washington orchestrated a coup d’etat in 2014, replacing the elected
government with a right-wing Nazi backed regime. One of the first things the new
government did was declare the speaking of Russian illegal in Ukraine.
21
In the Donbass region of eastern Ukraine (right along the Russian border) most
people living there are ethnic Russians. They began having peaceful marches and
petition signature campaigns saying they wanted local autonomy and to speak their
own language. The new Kiev government sent in Nazi armed squads to attack
them. Over time the US-NATO set up military training bases in western Ukraine,
near the Poland border, where the Nazis predominate. I watched online as the US
sent Army Special Forces troops to train the Nazis who were then sent to eastern
Ukraine to attack their own Russian ethnic citizens.
Since 2014 well over 14,000 Russian ethnics in eastern Ukraine have been killed
and more than 35,000 wounded. No one in the western media showed any concern
about this. Russian President Putin tried repeatedly to negotiate with the US and
the EU to stop the killing of Russian ethnics but the west was not interested in
serious peace proposals.
At the same time NATO continued to expand toward the Russian border from
many different directions.
In 2019 I organized a Global Network study tour to Moscow, Crimea and St.
Petersburg to see for ourselves what is going on there. Our delegation members
came from several nations.
22
While in Moscow we heard from a leading Russian expert on space technology
who told us that the US withdrawal from arms control treaties was terribly
destabilizing to global peace and began the new arms race in space.
The Chinese and Russian governments have repeatedly said that they would like to
reduce their nuclear forces but cannot do it as long as the US is encircling their
countries with military bases and “missile defense’ systems. Both Russia and
China have been forced to expand their military operations and to even build more
nuclear weapons as they face the US MD program and an expanding NATO.
NATO has been preparing for a conflict with Russia since 2014. Former NATO
Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg said some years ago. “We actually prepared for
this possibility for a long time. It’s not as if NATO suddenly woke up in 2022 and
realized that Russia was dangerous. The reality is that we also have been preparing
for this since 2014.”
The US-NATO hoped to destabilize Ukraine in order to ultimately force regime
change in Moscow. One reason for this is that because of climate change, the
Arctic Sea ice is melting and the oil corporations are eager to drill in the once
frozen Arctic region. But Russia has the largest land border with the Arctic thus
the supposed need to break the large Russian Federation into pieces (like happened
to Yugoslavia during the presidency of Bill Clinton). By doing this the big western
23
corporations believed they would have an easier time grabbing the vast resources
near the Russian Arctic coastline.
The New York Times newspaper reported a couple years ago that current the US-
UK-NATO war against Russia is being directed by the CIA and allied intelligence
agencies. So it is quite clear to me that this war in Ukraine is actually a war on
Russia. Ukraine is just being used by the west as a hammer. The US-UK-EU don’t
care about the Ukrainian people. Russia is now obviously winning this war but it
has come at a terrible cost for all those involved.
Who is the real aggressor?
Despite Pentagon claims that they are out to create peace, democracy and stability
around the world with their more than 800 military bases, quite the opposite is the
truth. Over many years I came away from my trips to Russia, Japan, Okinawa, and
South Korea seeing that the expansion of US bases is largely about creating the
military infrastructure to take down China and Russia.
In the US and across Europe the peace movements are divided. Some groups agree
with the story from the White House and Congress as well as the corporate run
media about the Ukraine war. Many in my country have accepted the demonization
of Russia that has long been a key strategy of Washington.
24
At the very moment when we could be poised to see a nuclear war triggered –
many peace groups are immobilized. This is a huge tragedy.
In Closing
US foreign military occupation must end if there will ever be true world peace. The
Global Network is determined to do what we can to help build such a peace with
true justice. We are grateful to those in India who are also working to put an end
to this madness.
We hope concerned citizens inside India will continue to educate your fellow
citizens about Washington’s hopes to bring your nation into the Pentagon’s Space
Force program aimed at Russia and China. We hope you can help prevent this
growing danger of WW3 that could consume the entire planet in a hell fire of
nuclear war.
Our governments need to be dealing with the reality of climate change and
growing global poverty. We must demand they convert the expensive military
industrial complex to sustainable development to help us protect the future
generations.
Ask yourself – Should we carry the bad seed of war, greed and environmental
degradation into space?
25
We need the people of this orbiting satellite we live on called Earth to tell all
nations that we don’t want war in the heavens.
We all need each other. Holding hands let us work together.
I thank you for the invitation to address this very timely conference and we look
forward to further collaboration with each of you.
Bruce K. Gagnon
Global Network Coordinator
VFP-all] “Urging you to Sign on space issues letter.”
 Urging you to sign on space issues letter  Dear GN friends, I have signed the GN onto to this excellent and timely statement below. I urge you to sign on as well with your national or local group or your relevant personal title. MB and I are now in India attending a space law event organized by GN board member Dr. Aruna Kammila. See here from yesterday’s events https://space4peace.blogspot.com/2026/10/space-week-events-at-reva-university.html Best your way. Bruce——– Forwarded Message ——– Dear Bruce, Project Ploughshares is circulating a joint civil society statement on outer space for the 2026 UN First Committee on Disarmament and International Security, and we would be very pleased to invite Global Network Against Weapons & Nuclear Power in Space to join as a signatory. The statement responds to growing arms-racing dynamics involving both ground- and space-based capabilities that can threaten space systems. It calls for reciprocal and observable restraint, immediate risk-reduction measures, stronger use of existing legal and diplomatic tools, and progress toward meaningful arms control. The draft statement is attached for your review. If your organization would like to sign on, please reply by Tuesday 13 October 2026 confirming the exact organization name you would like listed. We would also welcome suggestions of other civil society organizations that may wish to endorse the statement. Many thanks for considering the invitation. Miguel Ilustre milustre@ploughshares.ca Research Assistant, Project Ploughshares MA Global Governance Student, Balsillie School of International Affairs Joint Civil Society Statement on Outer Space, 2026 United Nations First Committee on Disarmament and International Security For decades, preventing an arms race in outer space has meant acting before weapons and other capabilities to disrupt, disable or destroy space systems become normalized features of military competition. Recent developments suggest that this danger is no longer hypothetical. This year, the debate over military capabilities that threaten space systems entered a new phase. On 14 September, the United States publicly acknowledged that it has “on-orbit space control weapons.” The exact nature of these weapons remains undisclosed, but the significance of the declaration should not be minimized: a major space power is now openly describing weapons as deployed in orbit. At the same time, other states are developing, or are alleged to be developing, a growing range of ground- and space-based capabilities that could threaten space systems. States continue to affirm the peaceful use of outer space and warn against its weaponization. Yet new military capabilities are increasingly justified as necessary responses to the capabilities and intentions of others. This is the logic of an arms race unfolding in real time. Left unchecked, it risks making weapons and other counterspace capabilities expected rather than exceptional. Declarations of peaceful intent are not enough. Preventing an arms race now requires concrete action to constrain arms racing dynamics already underway. That requires reciprocal and observable restraint, together with transparency, communication and other forms of reassurance that can interrupt the action-reaction cycle, reduce uncertainty, and diminish incentives for further escalation. These risks cannot be reduced to weapons deployed in orbit. Space systems already face jamming, spoofing, dazzling, cyber operations, destructive anti-satellite capabilities, close approaches and other forms of interference. These activities differ significantly in their characteristics, effects and legal implications, but together they complicate assessments of capabilities, intentions and potential targets. The introduction of weapons into orbit adds another layer of uncertainty and creates additional incentives to develop counter-capabilities or to act before an opponent can. Because military space systems are deeply intertwined with civilian infrastructure and, in some cases, nuclear command, control, communications and early warning, attacks on—or even perceived threats to—critical space systems can create pathways to escalation across domains. The use of space systems in contemporary armed conflict further increases these risks, including the possibility that actions directed at military functions will have broader civilian consequences here on Earth. Those consequences could be profoundly destabilizing for global security and human well-being. Satellites support communications, navigation, financial systems, weather forecasting, emergency response and other services on which people around the world depend. Conflict involving space systems could disrupt these services, create long-lived debris, damage the orbital environment and impose costs on states and communities that had no role in creating the confrontation. Preventing an arms race in outer space is thus not only about preserving satellites; it is also about protecting the people and societies that depend on them. Multilateral diplomacy must accelerate. The Open-ended Working Group (OEWG) on the Prevention of an Arms Race in Outer Space (PAROS) in all its aspects provides a central multilateral forum in which states can address these risks comprehensively. Its mandate allows states to consider measures addressing both behaviour and capabilities, including legally binding and non-legally binding measures, rather than treating these approaches as competing alternatives. Its work should now move from diagnosing threats toward developing and negotiating measures that reduce risks associated with existing capabilities and activities, constrain further escalation, and build the legal, political and technical foundations for effective arms control and strategic stability in space. To preserve outer space for peaceful use and constrain further arms racing dynamics, First Committee delegations should: Build political support for strategic restraint in both capabilities and behaviour. Through First Committee statements and resolutions, delegations should reinforce the expectation that states avoid actions that would expand or normalize destabilizing counterspace capabilities, including the further deployment of weapons in orbit. States should pursue reciprocal restraint on capabilities and activities that create acute risks of escalation, miscalculation or widespread harm, whether based on Earth or in space. Strengthen and advance the OEWG on PAROS in all its aspects. States should give the OEWG clear political support, resist procedural fragmentation, and use its comprehensive mandate to advance both legally binding and non-legally binding measures addressing behaviours, capabilities and effects. Advance immediate risk-reduction measures. Building on existing transparency and confidence-building measures, states should develop practical measures to reduce the risk of misperception, miscalculation and escalation, including standards for safe and predictable proximity operations; notification, consultation and emergency communication mechanisms; protections for space systems that provide critical civilian services; and measures to reduce risks involving space systems that support nuclear command, control, communications and early warning. Discussion should move toward negotiation and adoption of agreed measures. Reaffirm and build upon existing legal obligations and restraint commitments. States should reaffirm the prohibition on placing nuclear weapons or other weapons of mass destruction in orbit; adopt or maintain national commitments not to conduct destructive direct-ascent anti-satellite missile tests; and reaffirm applicable international legal obligations governing harmful interference with space systems. Use existing legal and diplomatic tools more effectively. States should make greater use of mechanisms already available under international space law, including consultation under Article IX of the Outer Space Treaty and information requests and exchanges under Article IV of the Registration Convention. These tools should be used more actively to reduce uncertainty, clarify intentions and address potentially harmful activities before they escalate. Build the foundations for meaningful arms control in outer space. States should advance shared understandings of relevant capabilities, activities, effects and threat perceptions; develop and test verification and monitoring approaches; identify measures capable of limiting the deployment or harmful use of destabilizing capabilities, wherever they are based; and work toward effective and verifiable legal constraints. Disagreement over definitions should not prevent progress on activities and consequences that states already recognize as dangerous. Put human, environmental and collective security consequences at the centre of PAROS deliberations. States should develop a common understanding of the potential civilian, environmental and systemic impacts of threats to space systems, including effects on civilian populations, essential services, the orbital environment and states that are not participants in a confrontation. These assessments should draw on meaningful participation by states from all regions, civil society, commercial actors and technical experts. Action is also needed beyond First Committee. Nationally and through cooperative partnerships, states should: Translate strategic restraint into national policy and practice. States should adopt concrete measures of both behavioural and capability restraint and embed them in national space and defence policies, doctrine, procurement decisions and operational planning. Make military activities and restraint commitments more transparent and observable. States should publish and explain relevant policies and doctrine; provide non-sensitive information about the purpose and limits of military capabilities and activities affecting outer space; notify relevant tests, deployments and potentially hazardous operations; and support independent monitoring, space situational awareness and data-sharing. Transparency is not a substitute for restraint, but restraint that cannot be observed is difficult for others to trust. Apply strategic restraint across national space activities. States should incorporate relevant international obligations and political commitments into national legislation, regulation, licensing and procurement so that governmental and commercial activities do not undermine agreed measures of restraint or risk reduction. Signatories: This statement was drafted in collaboration with civil society experts on space security. Their contributions are gratefully acknowledged. It is signed by the following organizations: Project Ploughshares Rideau Institute Women’s International League for Peace and Freedom (WILPF) Global Network Against Weapons & Nuclear Power in Space ‘Thank God men cannot fly, and lay waste the sky as well as the earth.’ ~ Henry David Thoreau ‘It’s sad that so many people are blinded by the green frog skin….’ ~ Lame Deer, Seeker of Visions Global Network Against Weapons & Nuclear Power in Space P.O. Box 652, Brunswick, ME 04011 globalnet@mindspring.com     |
END OMNI MILITARIZATION OF SPACE ANTHOLOGY #10