DISTRIBUTION A:
Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited.

Published: 1 March 2009
Air & Space Power Journal - Spring 2009

Lt Col Paul D. Berg, USAF, Chief, Professional Journals

Flying, Fighting, and Space

The mission of the United States Air Force is to fly, fight, and win . . . in air, space, and cyberspace. Properly integrating military activities conducted in those three diverse operating domains presents a challenge on a par with successfully harmonizing joint air, land, and sea operations. Excessive compartmentalization of operations could become as undesirable as their imprudent blending. When we contemplate performing a new activity, we usually begin not by using an entirely fresh perspective but by drawing analogies from familiar procedures. As reflected in its mission statement, the Air Force’s legacy operating domain is the air, so Airmen naturally think of “flying and fighting” in other domains. The idea of doing so in space seems plausible at first glance, yet familiar aerial-warfare analogies require adjustment when applied to space activities.

Adapting concepts from one operational domain for use in another is nothing new. Because sea-power theory had become well established by the time airpower emerged, sea-power analogies influenced early airpower thought. Both domains employ similar, basic notions of controlling a fluid medium (the sea or the air), but airpower theory is much more than an evolved form of sea-power theory. Likewise, both theories have influenced space-power theory, yet discontinuities exist among these fields of thought. Doctrine, partly derived from theory, follows an analogous pattern of cross-domain influence. Although the doctrines of sea, air, and space power are logically interrelated, space-power doctrine must differ in fundamental ways from the other two. Rapidly evolving space capabilities require constant reappraisal of doctrine. Indeed, technological breakthroughs or geopolitical shifts may demand drastic overhauls.

Doctrines evolve, but the idea of “fighting” seems more enduring. However, fighting in space may differ considerably from the “flying and fighting” image evoked by the Air Force’s mission statement. Spectacular events such as China’s notorious antisatellite test of 2007 generate much excitement, but when viewed in effects-based terms, fighting in space can encompass any action taken to produce desired outcomes, despite an opponent’s opposition. Hardly any physical combat occurs in space, and some strategists want to keep it that way. Perhaps space—the scene of considerable international cooperation—can remain a sanctuary free from open warfare, but opposing sides will still find ways to struggle against each other there. Space-based communications; intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance; navigation; and other activities present tempting targets that potential adversaries will be unable to ignore. Though we would prefer to deter hostile action, our mission statement predisposes Airmen to view actions taken against space assets as fighting, and it encourages them to seek innovative ways to prevail by integrating air, space, and cyber techniques to fly and fight in space—either literally or virtually.

Space power is vital to national security, but we have much to learn about how best to harness it in pursuit of national goals. Air and Space Power Journal, the professional journal of the Air Force, dedicates this issue to promoting dialogue about flying and fighting in space.

Disclaimer

The conclusions and opinions expressed in this document are those of the author cultivated in the freedom of expression, academic environment of Air University. They do not reflect the official position of the U.S. Government, Department of Defense, the United States Air Force or the Air University

[Home Page | Feedback? Email the Editor ]