Policy Alert #186 | April 10, 2019

On March 27, India successfully conducted its Mission Shakti anti-satellite (ASAT) missile test, in which it destroyed one of its Low Earth Orbit satellites. Prior to India’s test, only the United States, Russia, and China had demonstrated this capability. The US and the Soviet Union developed the technology during the Cold War, while China’s entry to this select club came in January 2007. Despite the importance of this milestone for space security and the salience of space in international security, India’s test received little attention abroad. Although the US’s National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) initially criticized the test for creating debris near the International Space Station and suspended its cooperation with the Indian Space Research Organization (ISRO), the decision to resume activities in less than a week was made “based on guidance received from the White House.” In this Policy Alert, we dig into the Rising Powers’ views on India’s new capability.

INDIA

Prime Minister Narendra Modi hailed the test as a “moment of pride” for India, given that the “Mission was accomplished using an indigenously developed ASAT missile,” and tried to assure the international community that the test was not meant to be demonstrative of ill-will: “I also want to assure the international community that the new capability we have developed is not directed against anyone. India has no intention to threaten anyone. This is an effort to secure a fast growing India. India has always been opposed to the weaponisation of space and an arms race in outer space, and this test does not in any way change this position.” The Ministry of External Affairs published a frequently asked questions guide to the test which outlines the context of the test within India’s broader space program and the country’s policies regarding the peaceful development of space.

• The left-leaning The Hindu took issue with the context of the upcoming elections: “[W]ithin India, the timing of the test, when the country is already in election mode, does raise concerns whether this was aimed at the domestic constituency. […] Ideally, the test should not have been a matter for a partisan political debate, but given the hypernationalist political plank of the Bharatiya Janata Party, Mission Shakti might have more reverberations on the ground than it has had in space.”
• The liberal Hindustan Times explained why India was spared the criticism China faced for its test in 2007. One explanation the Times offered: “[U]nlike China, India is seen as a more responsible country that respects international laws and institutions. New Delhi has done well to exploit this image to enlist itself into this elite space powers club.”
• The liberal Indian Express meanwhile recommended that the country not get ahead of itself: “Delhi’s explicit demonstration of space weapon capabilities is welcome, but it must be part of a clearly articulated military space doctrine that identifies India’s political objectives and technological goals in outer space and the strategy to realise them.”
• The pro-government Daily Pioneer offered some support for Prime Minister Modi’s decision to issue a national address following the test, despite the risk that it would violate election campaign laws (the Election Commission ultimately found that the statement did not): “Prime Minister Narendra Modi resorted to a national address to assuage fears that this was not just an aggressive design to weaponise outer space but a confident move to enhance the bouquet of our national security. That India, as a signatory to all major international treaties relating to outer space, would be responsible for honouring them and was committed to no-first use. […] Perhaps, this assurance needed heft, one that was provided by the Prime Minister as the elected head of a democracy.”
• The center-right Times of India juxtaposed the technological feat of the test against India’s failure “to create a vibrant military-industrial complex” on the ground: “India may have achieved A-Sat capability, but it will continue to be vulnerable to cross-border terrorism from Pakistan unless it focuses on the basics, unfetters innovation, and boosts the economy.”

 

CHINA

China’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs did not address the test in its weekly press conference or in a press release, however, it offered a written response to an inquiry by the Press Trust of India: “We have noticed reports and hope that each country will uphold peace and tranquility in outer space.”

• Citing the flak China endured for its test in 2007 and the silence on India’s test, the nationalist Global Times mused that “The Chinese people are getting used to the US and Western countries’ obvious double standards on China.” The Times assured its readers that India’s new skill is little threat to China: “China is not concerned about India’s rising military strength, because it hasn’t shown a trend of surpassing China. India understands that if it attacks China, Beijing’s retaliation will be unbearable. […] We hope Indian society clearly understands this.”
• Guo Yanying, an expert at the Second Research Institute of China Aerospace Science and Industry Cooperation, meanwhile examined to NASA’s initial criticism of the test in an op-ed for the Global Times: “There is no other country as reliant on satellites as the US. Hence, Washington must be capable of protecting its space assets from enemy attacks. […] Therefore, the US is strongly opposed to other countries carrying out ASAT tests, in spite of itself sparing no effort in testing and developing such weapons. Only when US satellites are left in space will Washington feel very safe. This is also in line with what the US army and politicians seek.”
• The independent, Hong-Kong based South China Morning Post featured an op-ed by Ankit Panda, senior editor of The Diplomat, which criticized the US and India for their role in pushing technology before international regulations on space have caught up: “What India’s test does suggest is that it is now too late for a full-scale ban on the testing of anti-satellite weapons. There were multilateral efforts in that direction in the aftermath of China’s 2007 test, aimed at averting a repeat, but while neither the US nor India have caused that scale of orbital debris with their respective tests, they both have contributed to the abandoning of any norm against these weapons.”

 

RUSSIA

The Russian government was so tight-lipped about its thoughts on India’s ASAT test that even state-owned TASS seemed perplexed. The outlet reported that the Russian Presidential Spokesman Dmitry Peskov deflected inquiries about the Indian test by saying, “This question should be addressed to military specialists and not to the presidential administration.” When asked about US reports earlier this year that Russia might be pursuing new ASAT technology, he responded, “You should address this question to US intelligence, the Americans should explain what they mean.” The Indian media outlets reported that the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs issued a statement that acknowledged India’s efforts to avoid sparking conflict: “We highlight the non-directedness of this test against any specific country declared by the Indian leadership, as well as the reassurance of the continuity of New Delhi foreign policy to prevent the deployment of weapons in outer space and thereby the development of an arms race in it.” State-owned Sputnik News reported that in a similar commentary by the Foreign Ministry in which Russia criticized the US for its role in the current lack of arms control in the international arena: “We have to note that this step is in many respects the result of the deteriorating situation in the field of arms control. Russia has repeatedly warned that the destructive actions of the United States to undermine the entire architecture of international security and strategic stability, including the one-sided and unlimited expansion of the global US missile defence systems, as well as Washington’s reluctance to abandon plans for deploying weapons in space, make other states think about improving their own similar potentials in the interests of strengthening their national security.”

RPI acknowledges support from the MacArthur Foundation and the Carnegie Corporation of New York for its activities.