Some general points, based on the very (very) long view of history:
1. No state (or, for those of a historical bent, pre-state - empire, city-state, etc.) achieves permenant supremacy. They all (ALL) fall at some point (when they fall, is - of course - up for debate).
There really isn't anything else to say. If there is one law of history, it is that political structures rise and fall. Not all of them rise, but those that do all (eventually) fall. Thus, the annoucement that the Chinese have successfully tested a land-based anti-satellite technology (New York Times, and Defense Tech), can only be seen as a challenge to the US (NOTE: to be precise, this is a challenge by one faction in China (clearly the militaristic/expansionist/anti-American one), and may not represent the actual will of either entirety of the Chinese government or the Chinese people. All of this depends on how autonomous the military is in China, which is a complicated debate itself.).
The "shock and awe" of the US military is based fairly heavily on the space-based capability we have. We (the US) can drop bombs literally through windows because of our GPS (Global Positioning System) equipped bombs. Those munitions query satellites to determine their exact location, relative to the window, which allows them to be precise. While the GPS satellites are much further out in orbit than the Chinese test reached (about 12,000 miles out; the Chinese missiles only reached 500 miles out), the difference is presumably capable of being overcome at some point (i.e., the Chinese will eventually be able to reach the GPS satellites, or even the geosychronous communications satellites at 24,000 miles out).
Just about everything the US military does of any significance (communication,targeting, and intelligence) happens though satellites. Thus, the Chinese today demonstrated an eventual capability to make us blind (no intelligence through images or intercepted cell-phone signals), deaf (no communications between far-apart entities), and impotent (can't target a specific window). It's no wonder this was the lead story on the NYT.
This doesn't mean the end of America. We have a long way to go for that (and the Chinese have some significant R&D ahead of them, though I imagine they will succeed). But this was clearly a challenge by (some part of) the Chinese. I'll be curious to see how we respond (anti-anti-satellite weapons? decoys? de-emphasizing satellite-based technology? stealth technology for satellites?), though, as noted, I am not particularly hopeful that we can hold off all challengers forever.
In any event, Bush's foreign policy just got significantly more complicated (for those keeping track at home, Chinese anti-satellite weapons seem more significant/important than Al Qaeda and Iranian nukes, about on par with North Korean nukes, and less important than Pakistani nukes.).
Posted by baltar at January 19, 2007 09:29 PM | TrackBack | Posted to International Affairs | Military Affairs | War