Subscribe to enjoy similar stories. WASHINGTON WAS abuzz on February 14th with news of a mysterious Russian space weapon. Mike Turner, chairman of the House intelligence committee, urged the White House to declassify intelligence on a “serious national-security threat".
American broadcasters and newspapers said that it concerned a Russian space-related nuclear system, not yet deployed, that could endanger American and allied satellites. What could this be? Much of the initial reporting is contradictory, with some outlets describing a nuclear-powered spacecraft and others a nuclear-armed one. There are essentially three options: a “pop-up" nuclear weapon designed to destroy satellites, which would be stationed on the ground and launched only when it was about to be used; a nuclear weapon that would be stationed in orbit; or a nuclear-powered satellite which would not be a bomb itself, but instead used nuclear energy to power some other sort of device.
If Russia plans to deploy a nuclear weapon in full orbit—rather than a “fractional" one in which it does not completely circle the Earth—it would be breaking the Outer Space Treaty of 1967. Nuclear detonations in space are also banned under the 1963 Partial Test Ban Treaty, to which Russia is a signatory. Legality aside, it would be a destructive and indiscriminate weapon.
On Earth the intense radiation from the nuclear explosion not only does damage itself but also creates a huge blast wave, starts fires and creates fallout. In the vacuum of space, radiation is the whole game. The electromagnetic pulse created by an orbital explosion could damage the electronics on satellites across much of the sky.
Read more on livemint.com