National Security
Space Defense
and Protection
_______________
Public Report
Committee on National Security Space Defense and Protection
Division on Engineering and Physical Sciences
A Report of
THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS
Washington, DC
THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS 500 Fifth Street, NW Washington, DC 20001
This activity was supported by Contract 2014-14041100003-0004 between the Office of the Director of National Intelligence and the National Academy of Sciences. Any opinions, findings, or conclusions expressed in this publication do not necessarily reflect the view of any organization or agency that provided support for the project.
International Standard Book Number-13: 978-0-309-44748-5
International Standard Book Number-10: 0-309-44748-8
Digital Object Identifier: 10.17226/23594
Limited copies of this report are available from: |
Additional copies are available from: |
Air Force Studies Board |
The National Academies Press |
National Research Council | 500 Fifth Street, NW |
500 Fifth Street, NW | Keck 360 |
Washington, DC 20001 | Washington, DC 20001 |
(202) 334-3111 | (800) 624-6242 or (202) 334-3313 |
http://www.nap.edu |
Copyright 2016 by the National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Printed in the United States of America
Suggested citation: National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. National Security Space Defense and Protection: Public Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/23594.
The National Academy of Sciences was established in 1863 by an Act of Congress, signed by President Lincoln, as a private, nongovernmental institution to advise the nation on issues related to science and technology. Members are elected by their peers for outstanding contributions to research. Dr. Marcia McNutt is president.
The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964 under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences to bring the practices of engineering to advising the nation. Members are elected by their peers for extraordinary contributions to engineering. Dr. C. D. Mote, Jr., is president.
The National Academy of Medicine (formerly the Institute of Medicine) was established in 1970 under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences to advise the nation on medical and health issues. Members are elected by their peers for distinguished contributions to medicine and health. Dr. Victor J. Dzau is president.
The three Academies work together as the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine to provide independent, objective analysis and advice to the nation and conduct other activities to solve complex problems and inform public policy decisions. The Academies also encourage education and research, recognize outstanding contributions to knowledge, and increase public understanding in matters of science, engineering, and medicine.
Learn more about the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine at www.national-academies.org.
Reports document the evidence-based consensus of an authoring committee of experts. Reports typically include findings, conclusions, and recommendations based on information gathered by the committee and committee deliberations. Reports are peer reviewed and are approved by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine.
Proceedings chronicle the presentations and discussions at a workshop, symposium, or other convening event. The statements and opinions contained in proceedings are those of the participants and have not been endorsed by other participants, the planning committee, or the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine.
For information about other products and activities of the Academies, please visit nationalacademies.org/whatwedo.
COMMITTEE ON NATIONAL SECURITY SPACE DEFENSE AND PROTECTION
JAMES O. ELLIS, JR., U.S. Navy (retired), Stanford University, Co-Chair
MARTIN C. FAGA, MITRE Corporation (retired), Co-Chair
ALLISON ASTORINO-COURTOIS, National Security Innovations, Inc.
OWEN C. BROWN, SAIC
VINCENT W.S. CHAN, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
MICHAEL D. GRIFFIN, Schafer Corporation
RAYMOND JEANLOZ, University of California at Berkeley
DAVID A. KOPLOW, Georgetown University
L. ROGER MASON, JR., Noblis
JOHN A. MONTGOMERY, Naval Research Laboratory
SCOTT PACE, George Washington University
THOMAS E. ROMESSER, Independent Consultant
WILLIAM L. SHELTON, U.S. Air Force (retired)
BOB THOMSON, Independent Consultant
DAVID M. VAN WIE, Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory
DEBORAH L. WESTPHAL, Toffler Associates
Staff
JOAN FULLER, Board Director
ALAN H. SHAW, Deputy Board Director
CARTER W. FORD, Study Director
DIXIE GORDON, Information Officer
MARGUERITE E. SCHNEIDER, Administrative Coordinator
This page intentionally left blank.
Preface
As part of the Fiscal Year 2014 National Defense Authorization Act, Congress directed the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) and the Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD) to contract with the National Research Council (NRC) to undertake a study on U.S. national security space defense and protection.1 Somewhat at the same time, ODNI and OSD undertook a series of related initiatives, including the Space Strategic Portfolio Review (SPR), the congressionally directed Space Protection Strategy (SPS), and the Space Security and Defense Program (SSDP). In January 2015, the NRC approved the study terms of reference (TOR) and appointed a committee of experts to do the following:2
- Review the range of options available to address threats to space systems, in terms of deterring hostile actions, defeating hostile actions, and surviving hostile actions.3
___________________
1 For more information, see P.L. 113-66, December 26, 2013. Available at https://www.congress.gov/113/plaws/pub166/PLAW-113pub166.pdf. Accessed June 8, 2015.
2Appendix A provides biographies of the committee members. The committee includes experts with experience in academia, government, and industry, combined with many years in U.S. combatant commands and major commands, intelligence community, space law, spacecraft survivability, systems engineering, system architecting, space operations, space acquisition, cyberdefense, strategic deterrence, and high-altitude electromagnetic pulse.
3 “System” is defined for purposes of this report as “a functionality, physically, and/or behaviorally related group of regularly interacting or interdependent elements; that group of elements forming a unified whole.” “Space systems,” in turn, are defined as “all of the devices and organizations forming the space network.”
- Assess potential strategies and plans to counter such threats, including resilience, reconstitution, disaggregation, and other appropriate concepts.
- Assess existing and planned architectures, warfighter requirements, technology development, systems, workforce, or other factors related to addressing such threats.
- Recommend architectures, capabilities, and courses of action to address such threats and actions to address affordability, technology risk, and other potential barriers or limiting factors in implementing such courses of action.
STUDY METHODOLOGY AND CAVEATS
The committee held eight meetings, beginning in February 2015 and ending in October 2015, to collect information and draft findings and recommendations.4 With the understanding of Congress, OSD, and ODNI, the authoring committee produced two stand-alone classified reports to address the TOR and delivered them to the sponsors in August 2015 and December 2015, respectively. Collectively, the committee provided 30 findings and 18 recommendations to the sponsors. The requirement to report initial findings and recommendations to key stakeholders no later than August 15, 2015, essentially divided this study into two overlapping phases: phase one, February-August 2015, which addressed TOR items 1 and 2; and phase two, July-December 2015, which addresses TOR items 3 and 4. Report 2 contained analysis, findings, and recommendations that complemented those found in Report 1. The committee was granted rich access to documents and officials involved with intelligence collection, policy and planning, strategy, budgetary processes, and organizational realignments and assignments. In addition, the committee invited industry and federally funded research and development centers to participate at a 1-day session in April 2015, in conjunction with its third full committee meeting.
Importantly, no independent modeling or analysis was completed by the committee; rather, the information gathered from interviews, documents, and briefings, together with the expertise and experience of committee members, served as the bases for the committee’s work. This unclassified summary, while admittedly brief due to government classification requirements, reflects the unclassified content of both classified reports. This unclassified summary is primarily a policy discussion. The reasons behind this focus are twofold. First, the system technologies themselves, the overall system architectures, and the operational aspects to their employment are predominantly classified at very high levels. Second, the committee observes that, as the summary states, there are major national policy issues that need to be addressed in order for the nation to formulate a wise and coherent approach to space defense and protection. On a macro level, two primary themes emerged from
___________________
4Appendix B provides a listing of invited speakers for both phases of the study.
this study regarding potential solutions to the threats facing U.S. space assets. First, the state of organization and coordination among various government activities is evolving and necessarily so. Second, there is an urgent need to create relevant national policies to guide the creation of responses to these threats; this includes educating the public so that it can understand and participate in potential solutions in whatever capacity makes sense.
ORGANIZATION OF THE REPORT
Chapter 1 provides an overall context for the report and explains how space is no longer a domain exclusively for national security. It discusses commercial trends at a high level that will help shape the future in space. Chapter 2 then describes measures for preserving national security space-enabled capabilities, including system protection measures, deterrence, and potential international avenues, such as regimes.
This page intentionally left blank.
Acknowledgment of Reviewers
This report has been reviewed in draft form by individuals chosen for their diverse perspectives and technical expertise. The purpose of this independent review is to provide candid and critical comments that will assist the institution in making its published report as sound as possible and to ensure that the report meets institutional standards for objectivity, evidence, and responsiveness to the study charge. The review comments and draft manuscript remain confidential to protect the integrity of the deliberative process. We wish to thank the following individuals for their review of this report:
Rita R. Colwell, Johns Hopkins University and University of Maryland,
Gurudas Ganguli, Naval Research Laboratory,
Anita K. Jones, University of Virginia,
Paul G. Kaminski, Technovation, Inc.,
Donald A. Lewis, The Aerospace Corporation,
Lester L. Lyles, U.S. Air Force (retired),
Grant Stokes, MIT Lincoln Laboratory, and
Peter J. Weinberger, Google, Inc.
Although the reviewers listed above have provided many constructive comments and suggestions, they were not asked to endorse the conclusions or recommendations, nor did they see the final draft of the report before its release. The review of this report was overseen by John Stenbit, U.S. Department of Defense
(retired), who was responsible for making certain that an independent examination of this report was carried out in accordance with institutional procedures and that all review comments were carefully considered. Responsibility for the final content of this report rests entirely with the authoring committee and the institution.
Contents
Space-Enabled Capabilities Are Increasingly Shared
Domestic and International Consumer Markets
Government and Commercial Sectors
Consumer Demands Help Drive Innovation in Space
National Security Uses of Space
Low Earth Orbits and Functions
Medium Earth Orbits and Functions
Geosynchronous Earth Orbits and Functions
Highly Elliptical Orbits and Functions
2 SELECTED ISSUES RELATED TO NATIONAL SECURITY SPACE DEFENSE AND PROTECTION
The Role of Space in National Security
Space Services: Classifying What Is at Stake
Threats to Space Systems and Services
Defending and Protecting National Security Space Assets: Space Defense Triad
Credibility of a Deterrent Threat
Communicating Deterrence Messages
Coalition Formation and International Regimes
Acronyms
A2AD |
antiaccess area denial |
AJ |
antijam |
AoA |
analysis of alternatives |
ASAT |
antisatellite |
CAGR |
compound annual growth rate |
COMSAT |
communications satellite |
DoD |
Department of Defense |
EHF |
extremely high frequency |
EMP |
electromagnetic pulse |
GEO |
geostationary/geosychronous (orbit) |
GPS |
Global Positioning System |
IC |
Intelligence Community |
ISR |
intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance |
LEO |
low Earth orbit |
MILSATCOM |
military satellite communications |
NRC |
National Research Council |
NSS |
national security space |
ODNI |
Office of the Director for National Intelligence |
OPLAN |
operational plan |
OSD |
Office of the Secretary of Defense |
PNT |
position, navigation, and timing |
RF |
radio frequency |
SATCOM |
satellite communications |
SBIR |
space-based infrared |
SIGINT |
signals intelligence |
SPR |
Space Strategic Portfolio Review |
SPS |
Space Protection Strategy |
SSD |
Space Security and Defense Program |
TOR |
terms of reference |
TTP |
tactic, technique, and procedure |