America sets out to dominate space

By Maj Gen V K Madhok (retired)

Speculation is rife in the US that President Bush is likely to announce a grand Space programme on Dec 17, 2003, which is around the 31st anniversary of the last manned American mission to the Moon. That the Americans are once again considering a return to the Lunar surface. Now that China too has announced a manned lunar mission in the coming years with India following in the next 5 years, some interesting questions arise ?

What could be the overall purpose of US'programme? Can there be a battle or a conflict in Space and are the Americans preparing to meet it ? Will the winner in Space be in a position to dictate terms on Earth? In what manner are the armed forces supported by satellites ?

It is being said, that the country which dominates Space will also dominate Earth! Although this can be contested, because Space gadgets cannot remain indefinitely or independently in Space entirely free of ground support. They need fuel, engineers, airfields or space ports to land and take off. Not self sufficient, they have to be replenished periodically. They will remain dependent on support from Earth till a base can be established on the Moon or Mars. Currently, only the US is in a position to establish a base on the Moon in the next 6-7 years. For others, it will remain in the realm of science fiction. Nevertheless, the support systems from Space offer an endless plethora of options for the armed forces. Further, Space has no boundaries. Therefore, whosoever dominates it will excercise considerable influence on Earth. Accordingly, the reinvigorated race by the US and efforts by China and even Russia to dominate Space. The successful country will be in a position to ensure unchallenged access to orbits. It will be in a position to challenge hostile space satellites like ELINT (electronic intelligence), early warning, communications, weather and ocean surveillance satellites. Therefore, it is really in the freedom to use space facilities, that there is scope and power to dominate Earth. Inspite of this there should be no doubt that in the future, space power will be as important as airpower has been so far. 5-6 years ago, the Indian Air Force had thought of formulating a Space Doctrine, but it seems to have fizzled out. Let there be no doubt, that countries which are not a space power would remain as helpless spectators and the winner in Space will dominate them. Today, Space- the new frontier, is already overcrowded with more than 7000 satellites, 12000 pieces of scientific debris of varying shapes and sizes and 50,000 odd composite materials like screws, wire and nails orbiting at varying heights. This number of satellites and debris could possibly double in the fresh programmes by US, China, Russia and India. As this poses threats to space missions, space brooms have been designed to remove the debris and which will be launched from rockets or space stations.

Emerging space achievements concerning satellites, space stations, space laboratories and anti satellite weapons in the making give a fairly reliable indication, that the capability to fight a space battle is likely to be there by the end of this decade. Strictly from a military point of view it will be a historic event,possibly an unpleasant one. The new space capabilities will bring many changes in military thinking of a nature one may not be in a position to speculate clearly. But considering that three fourths of the satellites launched so far are meant for military purposes, that 80 percent of the signals being generated by these are for intelligence, command and control and other military tasks like reconnaisance, military establishments have legitimate reasons for grave embarrassment in case their locations, barracks, logistic installations, headquarters, training excercises, firing ranges, weapon trials, troop movements, roads and railways and so on can be indicated with pin point accuracy. A capability which is already there. No country as such can afford to be bared in this transparency revolution from the new high ground in Space.

Further as most of the Earth has already been explored, quite logically, countries have turned to space exploration as their next objective. Space philosophies are accordingly been discussed and planned with two cardinal objectives: To ensure military security and to establish commercial and industrial enterprises. Therefore before the end of this decade it would be hard to imagine a world without atleast two dozen different types of satellites, space monitors and traffic controllers remote sensors to spot mineral deposits, droughts and incipient floods. It is in this context that the American goals centre on a desire to regain prestige after the set backs in the 60s and last year. They consider that ultimately a base on the Moon would establish them as leaders in Space. Therefore, a space shuttle (for transportation), a space station (really a depot in orbit for assembling long and short term projects) which is already in progress, and finally a base on the Moon have been well thought of. They have been encouraging future generations to study cosmos, space law, earth observation, remote sensing, and many other subjects connected with Space and produce a large number of Space graduates and engineers.

No one will disagree that a weapon free Space can help serve a large number of activities for the welfare of mankind such as : manufacture of medicines, drugs and vaccines, electronic materials, electricity generation, mining of Moon and even establishing our first contact with other civilisations. But this is a pipe dream. Mankind has never been free of war. The seeds of a space conflict have already been sown. The support to the armed forces on earth is a threat by itself. And therefore it will be necessary to deny and if necessary to destroy this support from Space. And that, in the first instance, appears to be the priority mission on the American space agenda.

Hurriyat’s recipe for Jammu Statehood

By O P Modi

Maulvi Abbas Ansari led faction of All Parties Hurriyat Conference (APHC) willing to hold talks with Home Minister L K Advani, is reported to have come out with a bizarre plan to resolve the Kashmir issue.

The plan envisages splitting Jammu & Kashmir state as it stood before October 1947, into three parts. According to it Jammu and Ladakh regions will go to India, the Northern Areas (at present merged with Pakistan) will be retained by that country and parts of Pak occupied Kashmir (PoK) and the Valley will be reunited. Though the reunited Kashmir will be "under Indo-Pak dual control" the Hurriyat Conference would like its defence in the hands of Pakistan. In other words according to the Hurriyat plan the Indian armed forces are supposed to vacate the valley handing it over to Pakistani army. What sort of "control" will India have over the "reunited Kashmir" after it comes under the grip of Pakistani forces? There is no mention of it in the Hurriyat’s roadmap. Obviously the dual control rider is just a crude ruse to placate India. The idea of "dual control" carries the seeds of greater bloody conflict between the two countries. The proposal, to say the least, is simply naive.

Whatever may be at the back of Hurriyat’s mind its recipe shows that its leaders support a separate Jammu State. This may gladden the hearts of some of those who are struggling for separation of Jammu region from the Valley. Jammu region has a large number of Muslim population that includes the migratory Gujjars and Bakerwals. The Hurriyat Conference would not mind separation from them if its plan for merging the Valley with PoK (read Pakistan) is accepted.

The Hurriyat’s roadmap for Kashmir settlement does not mention anything about the five lakh Kashmiri Hindus; the ethnic minority that fled from the Valley in 1989 in the wake of terrorist attacks. It has no room for the Kashmiri Pandits’ return to their land of origin. The Hurriyat does not have even a word to show solidarity with the Pandits who form an indispensable part of Kashmiriyat. Hopefully Mr. Advani, when he holds talk with the Ansari faction, will ask its representatives as to why the Kashmiri Pandits do not figure in their plan? Panun Kashmir’s demand for a Home Land in the Valley for Pandits gets boosted on account of Hurriyat’s plan.

The plan is an implied but correct admission by the Hurriyat that it does not have any representation in Jammu and Ladakh regions. These two regions have more than half of the state’s population and more than nine times the land area of the Valley. And yet most of the print and electronic media in India treats the fractured Hurriyat Conference, which by its own confession is confined only to the Valley, as if it represents the whole of the state. It is also known that the Hurriyat Conference does not have any base even in PoK.

There are now two main factions of the APHC. One is led by Maulvi Abbas Ansari and the other is headed by Syed Ali Shah Geelani. Interestingly both the factions are dreaming of handing over the Valley to Pakistan. Geelani is a known protagonist of merging the state with Pakistan. He is against holding any dialogue with New Delhi in which Pakistan is not a participant. On the other hand though the faction led by Ansari is willing to talk to the Union government’s interlocutor L K Advani, it has already made it known that it is for handing over the Valley’s defence to Pakistan. In other words, as in the case of PoK, for all practical purposes the Valley will come under the control of Pakistani Army. Clearly the goal of both factions of the APHC is to give away the Valley, if not the whole of Jammu and Kashmir, to Pakistan. The only difference between what Geelani says and what Ansari proposes is that former wants the entire state for Pakistan while the latter makes the concession of allowing Jammu and Ladakh to be retained by India!

Another aspect of the Hurriyat Plan that smacks of insincerity is that before talking to India and Pakistan, the party would discuss the plan with the international community (read America and Pakistan) This shows two things. First the party is not sure of its own plan. Second: the aim of the whole exercise is to gain international recognition rather than to sincerely find out a plausible way to restore peace in the state and resolve the vexed problem.

A second look at the Hurriyat plan would make it absolutely clear that it is based on the principle of religious divide. It is the same principle on the basis of which the Indian sub-continent was partitioned in 1947. According to it the Muslim majority valley and PoK would go to Pakistan and Hindu majority Jammu and Buddhist Ladakh will remain with India. The roadmap is designed to strike at the very roots of Indian Republic’s core principle namely secularism.

However, there is no harm in talking to a group that harbours doubts about India’s lofty principles of unity in diversity, equal fundamental rights for all its citizens irrespective of their colour creed or religion. In any case the dialogue will be instrumental in refreshing separatists’ memory and educating them about what India stands for. The APHC needs to be reminded that India has not sacrificed thousands of its men in uniform merely for its territorial integrity; it has done so also to uphold the philosophy of universal brotherhood of mankind regardless of the religion one professes. At this point I am reminded of Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee’s clear message regarding Jammu & Kashmir’s future wherein he has said "We cannot allow a second partition of India".