Criticism Mounts on Space Force's Proposition for Countering China's Space Capabilities
Space Force's Space Strategy Validated, Yet Experts Express Concerns
Greg Hadley
March 01, 2025
A workshop involving experts from AFA's Mitchell Institute for Aerospace Studies has evaluated the U.S. Space Force's "Competitive Endurance" theory, providing insights into its core tenets, unintended consequences, and potential limitations.
The principal objective of this workshop, organised in October 2024, was to explore different hypothetical crises in the space domain over the next 25 years. Participants included professionals from the Space Force, combatant commands, other Pentagon offices, Congress, industry, academia, and more.
The Space Force's "Competitive Endurance" strategy, unveiled in March 2023 by Chief of Space Operations Gen. B. Chance Saltzman, aims to protect U.S. interests in space while dealing with increasing competition from other major powers. However, this concept is perceived by some experts as having potential unintended consequences that could disadvantage the Space Force in the long term.
In a new paper released on February 18, senior resident fellows and retired Cols. Charles Galbreath and Jennifer Reeves highlighted some apprehensions regarding the Space Force's strategic choices. Budget constraints notwithstanding, they expressed doubts about the effectiveness of the "Competitive Endurance" strategy in the face of escalating threats in orbit and persistent skepticism towards military space within the Pentagon and the general public.
Jennifer Reeves, one of the paper's authors, stated that an excessive focus on simply surviving competition might undermine the essential warfighting mindset required for a military service. She emphasized that adversaries, such as Russia and China, are likely to pursue military space ambitions without adhering to the same sanctity principles.
Some of the Space Force's concerns have been validated by the workshop findings, according to leaders. These include the need for better space domain awareness, high-end training, and closer cooperation among the U.S. military services and allies.
However, analysts noted persistent issues with the way participants handled the space domain and the Space Force. They contend that the "Competitive Endurance" strategy is not helping to address these issues.
One such concern is a vague understanding of how the Space Force could "win" a competition or conflict with China. Additionally, the emphasis on preventing conflict, minimizing orbital debris, and surviving competitions might create impediments for the Space Force against opponents without such limitations.
Moreover, participants' approach to space as a mere sanctuary, as opposed to a warfighting domain, could have significant negative consequences. If the public fails to understand the need for a Space Force with this perspective, it may lead to insufficient funding, significant questions about the necessity of the service exclusively dedicated to space, and ultimately, challenge the U.S. ability to establish dominance in space, as asserted by Reeves.
Despite these concerns, Galbreath and Reeves also lauded certain aspects of the "Competitive Endurance" strategy: specifically, the importance of avoiding operational surprise, denying first-move advantage, and conducting responsible counter-space campaigning. They highlighted that these core tenets have been validated in all six workshop scenarios.
Additionally, the need for closer cooperation between allies and partners in terms of sharing space domain awareness information has been established. This need justifies ongoing classification reforms, as it becomes crucial for a more effective Space Force.
The workshop also highlighted the need for proliferating U.S. assets capable of quick replenishment, essentially denying the first-mover advantage in cases where adversaries deploy new weapons in space. In situations involving counter-space campaigning, having both kinetic and nonkinetic offensive and defensive options has been identified as key for resolving crises.
Robert "Otis" Winkler, an executive at Kratos Defense and a participant in the workshop, acknowledged the paradigm shift experienced by some participants when confronted with space warfare scenarios. Winkler emphasized the need to break away from viewing space as a sanctuary and consider it as an active warfighting domain.
Concerns about orbital debris resulting from military action have long been highlighted, but experts such as Arnie Streland from Northrop Grumman argue that self-censorship is not the answer. They maintain that leaders should openly discuss the available options and showcase their limitations, such as the potential creation of debris, for informed decision-making.
In conclusion, while the U.S. Space Force's "Competitive Endurance" strategy has been partially validated by the workshop, there are still concerns regarding potential unintended consequences that could weaken the Space Force in the long run. These include increased tension with adversaries, resource misallocation, and technological risks associated with rapid space technology advancements. To better support informed decision-making and ensure military success in the space domain, a strategy focused on winning, paired with a larger budget and policy changes, might be necessary.
- The Space Force's "Competitive Endurance" strategy, as validated by the workshop, includes the importance of avoiding operational surprise and denying first-move advantage, extending to conducting responsible counter-space campaigning.
- Domestic concerns about the Space Force's strategic choices, as expressed in a new paper by senior resident fellows Galbreath and Reeves, involve doubts about the effectiveness of the "Competitive Endurance" strategy in the face of escalating threats in orbit and persistent skepticism towards military space within the Pentagon and the general public.
- Some experts, like Arnie Streland from Northrop Grumman, argue against self-censorship concerning orbital debris resulting from military action, advocating instead for open discussion and informed decision-making about available options and their limitations.
- Jennifer Reeves, one of the paper's authors, stated that an excessive focus on simply surviving competition might undermine the essential warfighting mindset required for a military service, with adversaries like Russia and China likely to pursue military space ambitions without adhering to the same sanctity principles.
- Closer cooperation among the U.S. military services, allies, and the sharing of space domain awareness information is necessary, according to the workshop findings, justifying ongoing classification reforms for a more effective Space Force.
