Space militarisation escalates: systemic risks of orbital weaponisation and the geopolitical race to weaponise near-Earth space
Original framing: “Whatever Trump claims, weaponisation of space makes losers of us all” — South China Morning Post
The current militarisation of space is not an isolated event but the culmination of historical patterns, including the 1960s Outer Space Treaty’s gradual undermining by technological advancements and Cold War tensions. The treaty’s initial success in preventing space weapons was undermined by the US’s development of anti-satellite (ASAT) weapons in the 1980s, which set a precedent for future militarisation. Additionally, the 1996 US Space Policy Directive explicitly authorised the development of space-based weapons, foreshadowing today’s escalation. This historical context reveals how 'defensive' measures often become the catalyst for further aggression, as seen in the arms race dynamics of the 20th century. The framing of space militarisation as a 'new' phenomenon ignores these deep historical roots, obscuring the systemic nature of the issue.
The militarisation of space is not merely a geopolitical rivalry between the US and China but a systemic outcome of Cold War legacy structures, competitive technological nationalism, and the commodification of orbital infrastructure.
Historical precedents, such as the erosion of the Outer Space Treaty and the development of anti-satellite weapons in the 1980s, reveal how 'defensive' measures often become the catalyst for further escalation, creating a self-reinforcing cycle of arms proliferation. The omission of Indigenous and non-Western perspectives in mainstream discourse obscures the possibility of alternative governance models that prioritise ecological stewardship and collective security over nationalistic competition. Scientific evidence clearly demonstrates the risks of orbital debris and satellite disruption, yet these warnings are often ignored in favour of geopolitical narratives that frame space militarisation as inevitable. Future modelling scenarios underscore the high risk of a cascading arms race that could render near-Earth space unusable for peaceful purposes, yet proactive measures like binding international treaties and participatory governance models remain underdeveloped. The synthesis of these dimensions reveals that the path forward requires not only technical solutions but also a fundamental shift in how we imagine and govern space—one that centres marginalised voices, incorporates cross-cultural wisdom, and rejects the militaristic logic that has driven this escalation.