Theresa Hitchens space and air writer at the Breaking Defence web publication and a professional analysis affiliate at the University of International and Security Studies, University of Maryland. Previous to that, she was head of the UN Institute for Disarmament Research and was based in Geneva for six years. Hitchens also said that the space force had two major issues at stake.
The first thing is if the Department of Defence (DoD) as well as the Air Force have been doing their best–and not just their memorandum–to incorporate the true meaning of the Congressional Mandate well into the 2020 National Defence Authorization Act on the Acquisition of Space.
Initially, the Space Development Agency, founded in March the year before, was charged to accelerate the expansion of new military space capacities to help make sure U.S. massive technological scientific and military advantages in space. Hitchens said it seemed that DOD wanted to try to slow down these changes now, but rather in the hope of persuading Congress that it can break them off
Hitchens ‘ greatest dilemma would be whether Congress should require or compel other members of the armed forces to apply to the space fleet. However, there is a concern as to whether this a plain rewrite of the Space Command of the Air Force, which has nothing but clothing and patches shifts and taxpayer dollars are wasted. Hitchens also stated that a Space Force, at best, distracts from what could be required to guarantee protection in the face of rapid technological and geopolitical change. It would, at the very worst, trigger a space weapons race that would threaten satellites and does not safeguard them. It requires diplomacy, not bureaucracy.
Greg gave a reply that the public could ignore the Space Force as a project of vanity because of its name.
Yet the main thing that remains is a bureaucratic change without a large budget or increased staff.
In this case, the State Department is not making an appropriate attempt and form the space environment to be more stable and peaceful, and this would help the military as well as civilian consumers. The danger is a product of institutional attempts to exaggerate the threat and build weapons to combat the challenge.
With this structure, there is a regulatory motivation for a security risk controversy and then for munitions to be constructed to counter this threat. No corresponding effort by the State Department for the development of a more peaceful and stable space environment is likely to benefit the military as well as civil users alike.