Warfare in orbit is only news when China does it

Via NY Transfer News Collective  *  All the News that Doesn't Fit

sent by Global Network - May 5, 2007

Warfare in orbit is only news when China does it

The Real 'Masters of Space'

By Karl Grossman

(Appearing in April 2007 issue of Extra! The Magazine of FAIR--The
Media Watch Group)

As a graphic proclaiming "Red Storm" flashed on the screen, CNN
anchor Lou Dobbs intoned: "Communist China tonight refusing to
explain its motives for conducting its first-ever anti-satellite
missile test. That test, the latest in a series of dangerous new
challenges by the Chinese military to this country's interest."

He threw it to correspondent Christine Romans, who declared, "Defense
experts see a pattern of behavior that highlights China's strategy
to exploit American weakness." Romans went to John Tkacik of the
Heritage Foundation, who, she reported, "says that American
policymakers refuse to recognize China's hostile intentions toward
this country."

The segment on Lou Dobbs Tonight (1/24/07) didn't mention anything
about the U.S. military's space strategy of recent years (Extra!,
5-6/99). There's not a word about a key 1998 U.S. strategy document,
the U.S. Space Command's Vision for 2020, which envisions space-based
laser weapons zapping targets on Earth, and speaks of the U.S.
military "dominating the space dimension of military operations to
protect U.S. interests and investment" and "integrating Space Forces
into war-fighting capabilities across the full spectrum of conflict."

Nor was mention made of the 2001 Rumsfeld Commission report, which
declared, "In the coming period, the U.S. will conduct operations
to, from, in and through space to support its national interests
both on the earth and in space." The Commission to Assess United
States National Security Space Management and Organization, chaired
by Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, also urged that the U.S.
president "have the option to deploy weapons in space."

Also left out was a new U.S. National Space Policy adopted by the
White House last year that took a still more aggressive U.S. position
on space warfare, announcing that the U.S. will "develop and deploy
space capabilities that sustain U.S. advantage."

Just as the continuing U.S. development of space military capabilities
wasn't reported, nor were the repeated efforts led by China, Russia
and U.S. ally Canada to have the 1967 Outer Space Treaty, the basic
international agreement setting aside space for peaceful uses,
broadened to include a ban on the deployment, testing or use of
weapons in space--or the U.S. opposing this initiative, all but
alone at the U.N., in vote after vote.

Instead of placing the story in context, explaining the precipitating
factors, China's successful destruction of one of its old satellites
was simply labeled--in a banner across the screen--as "Communist
China's Rising Threat to the United States."

The New York Times (1/19/07) was only somewhat better. After the
jump, its lead story ("Flexing Muscle, China Destroys Satellite in
Test") did inform readers that China has "been trying to push a
treaty to ban space weapons." No reference, however, was made to
the U.S.'s lonely and sustained opposition to this.

And the quote on which the story is hung, in the fourth paragraph
on Page 1, is Jonathan McDowell, a Harvard astronomer, declaring:
"This is the first real escalation in the weaponization of space
that we've seen in 20 years." Where exactly has McDowell been as
the U.S. has ratcheted up its space warfare program over the past
two decades?

The space industry trade newspaper, Space News (1/22/07), emphasized
the folly of banning weapons in space in its front-page story about
the test ("China's ASAT Test Widely Criticized, U.S. Says No New
Treaties Needed"). It filled six of the first eight paragraphs of
the piece with long, virtually unbroken quotes from an anonymous
"U.S. State Department official."

A key quote from the unnamed official: "Arms control is not a viable
solution for space. For example, there is no agreement on how to
define space weapons."

How about "weapons in space"?

Aviation Week & Space Technology (1/17/07) revealed the January 12
Chinese test on its website in an article that omitted any mention
of the U.S. space military program. But it did state, "China's
growing military space capability is one major reason the Bush
administration last year formed the nation's first new National
Space Policy in 10 years."

In a subsequent full-page editorial, headlined "China's ASAT Test:

Irresponsible and Against International Norms," Aviation Week
(1/29/07) declared that news of the test "that we broke on our
website.should not come as a surprise. While the precise timing of
the test may have startled most of the world.the People's Liberation
Army has been signaling its intent to master the space realm for
more than a decade."

Aviation Week might have acknowledged that "Master of Space" is not
a motto coined by the Chinese, but by the U.S. Air Force Space
Command's 50th Space Wing in 1992-the words emblazoned to this day
above the entrance of its headquarters in Colorado.

The publication made no explicit mention of China's efforts to ban
weapons in space and U.S. opposition to that, but it did remark
that

the general hand-wringing about "militarizing space" or an "arms
race in space" that we have noticed in some quarters strikes us as
downright silly.

First of all, space has been militarized practically from day one..
And even if the genie could be put back in the bottle, why should
it be?... Today, the U.S. is understandably reluctant to invite the
nations of the world to discuss restrictions on a technology in
which it is preeminent.

No armed forces enjoy the advantages of the orbital high ground
more than those of the U.S.

"When I say last week's coverage was bad, I mean textbook bad,
without even token context," Brian Dominick wrote for the New
Standard website (1/25/07).

"The only background we're offered--in some articles--took the form
of acknowledgement that the U.S. has the capability to nix Chinese
satellites.

But even that came in a paraphrase attributed to an expert who
appears to be some kind of U.S.-space-domination cheerleader."

Among the pieces he singled out was an Associated Press story
(1/23/07) that spoke about the test by China "carried out under the
auspices of its highly secretive, military-dominated space program."
Dominick observed: "It's hard to think of better terms to describe
the U.S. space program other than by adding 'profit-aware.' But
you'll never see 'secretive' or 'militarized' as adjectives describing
NASA--at least not in the AP."

Great detail need not be offered to provide context. For instance,
the British journal New Scientist (1/27/07) simply noted:

Despite protests from the Bush administration over China's action,
analysts point out that the U.S. has consistently refused to discuss
a new UN treaty on the peaceful uses of outer space. Instead, it
will this year spend at least $1 billion on anti-satellite weapons
research.

The mainstream U.S. media coverage of the Chinese test--riddled
with omissions and jingoism--is no surprise to Bruce Gagnon, who
for 15 years has been coordinator of the Global Network Against
Weapons and Nuclear Power in Space ( www.space4peace.org). He tells
Extra!:

While China's ASAT test is troubling, it is also hypocritical of
the U.S. to criticize them for doing something that our country has
been doing since the 1980s. The Pentagon today is developing a host
of ASAT weapons technologies that would give them the ability to
knock out other countries' satellites.  Sadly, the American people
don't know anything about this because the corporate-dominated media
refuse to cover the story.

Every year, he notes, the Global Network presses the space
militarization issue by holding a Keep Space for Peace Week. "We
send information out to the mainstream media locally and nationally
but they completely ignore our efforts," he says. "You'd think that
the fact people are holding positive actions to educate the public
about preventing a news arms race would be newsworthy." Last year,
during the week of demonstrations and talks, the bellicose new
National Space Policy was announced (DATE), and thus "all the more
reason for a story about a global movement working to prevent the
weaponization of space. But nothing was reported on it."

"Why do the mainstream media not report on a growing international
movement to keep space for peace?" Gagnon asks.

Could it be that much of the media today is under the control of
the very corporations who will benefit, directly or indirectly,
from a new arms race in space? The Pentagon has long bragged that
Star Wars will be the largest industrial project in the history of
the planet. In order to create the fear and acceptance of such a
plan, the media must manage the news around this issue so that the
American people remain compliant.

The move by the U.S. to turn the heavens into a war zone "has all
the elements of a big story--money, power, domination, corruption,"
says Gagnon. "But the corporate-dominated media rarely go near it.
The big money is keeping a lid on this story for a reason."

[Karl Grossman, professor of journalism at SUNY College at Old
Westbury, is author of Weapons in Space (Seven Stories Press) and
The Wrong Stuff (Common Courage Press) and host of the TV documentaries
Star Wars Returns and Nukes in Space: The Nuclearization and
Weaponization of the Heavens ( www.envirovideo.com).]

- ------

Global Network Against Weapons & Nuclear Power in Space PO Box 652
Brunswick, ME 04011 (207) 443-9502 http://www.space4peace.org
global...@mindspring.com http://space4peace.blogspot.com (our blog)

                                *
================================================================
 NY Transfer News Collective    *    A Service of Blythe Systems
           Since 1985 - Information for the Rest of Us          
 Search Archives: http://olm.blythe-systems.com/htdig/search.html
 List Archives:   http://olm.blythe-systems.com/pipermail/nytr/
 Subscribe: http://olm.blythe-systems.com/mailman/listinfo/nytr
================================================================

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (FreeBSD)

iD8DBQFGQCIliz2i76ou9wQRAo4FAKCm9D6QZrZTtyiegX9tOgr/P801hgCbBGcH
NB429mqu5mmXeqjFZ67xA9Q=
=0m8x
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----