Why has U.S. deployed ‘space weapons’? |Explained

The story so far:

On September 14, 2026, U.S. Air Force secretary Troy Meink said the country has “space control” weapons deployed in Earth’s orbit to defend U.S. forces against “hostile adversary action”. The disclosure drew backlash from Russia and China, among other quarters.

What is a ‘space control’ weapon?

As per the U.S. Space Force, ‘space control’ refers to military activities required to control the space domain. In 2025, the then-Space Force chief, Gen. Chance Saltzman, said such a device could possess both “kinetic and non-kinetic” capabilities and could disrupt or degrade an adversary’s capabilities.

‘Kinetic’ generally refers to physically damaging an object through impact, such as by smashing into it. Non-kinetic methods include electromagnetic interference that can jam or spoof a satellite’s communications, and directed energy systems that interfere with its sensors.

In fact, the current Space Force war-fighting framework recognises three kinds of counter-space operations: orbital, electromagnetic, and cyberspace.

What has the U.S. deployed?

We do not know. We also do not know how many units/instances of the system exist, what they are capable of, which orbits they are in, and whether they are kinetic or non-kinetic. Mr. Meink had said that while disclosing the weapon’s (or weapons’) existence would contribute to deterrence, revealing their operational details would subtract from the deterrence. There is also no indication whether these weapons are the same as the space-based interceptors the U.S. government has planned for the ‘Golden Dome’ missile defence programme. These interceptors are still undergoing tests.

What will the weapons defend against?

Mr. Meink has referred to “hostile adversary action”. Incumbent Space Force chief Gen. Douglas Schiess has also referred to “space-enabled attacks”.

In other instances over the years, U.S. officials have repeatedly singled out Russian and Chinese counter-space capabilities as reasons for their government to develop similar capabilities of its own, to protect its own satellites. Russia and China have also demonstrated sophisticated satellite manoeuvres in orbit.

For example, in 2020, two Russian satellites manoeuvred close to a U.S. government satellite, prompting the Space Command to call the behaviour potentially threatening. In 2022, the Chinese Shijian-21 satellite used a robotic arm to tow a defunct Chinese geostationary satellite into a graveyard orbit.

However, we do not know the circumstances in which the U.S. will use its weapons as the government has not published the rules of engagement for orbital weapons.

Is it legal to have weapons in orbit?

The relevant instrument is the Outer Space Treaty, which entered into force in 1967, during the Cold War and the nuclear arms race between the U.S. and the Soviet Union. It prohibits its party states, which include the U.S., Russia, and China today, from placing nuclear weapons or other weapons of mass destruction in orbit or stationing them elsewhere in outer space. It also obviates states from setting up military bases and conducting weapons tests on the moon and other celestial bodies.

However, the treaty does not prohibit states from placing conventional weapons in orbit. The treaty also says all activities in outer space must comply with international law, which means other bodies of international law governing the use of force and armed conflicts can be applied to military operations in orbit. As the U.S. government has not disclosed what its orbital weapons are capable of, it is not possible to say whether it violates specific treaty conditions.

Can other countries prevent unilateral action?

There is no international body to order the U.S. to remove its weapons from orbit. However, there are various diplomatic and legal avenues through which other countries can seek more information and negotiate restraints. For example, Article IX of the treaty requires states to have “due regard” for the interests of other parties, which a (party) state can invoke if it believes U.S. activities in orbit could harm its own peaceful use of space. States can also endeavour to draft new orbital governance rules through the United Nations process on the Prevention of an Arms Race in Outer Space, whose third substantive session is scheduled for November. Countries can also raise the issue before the UN Security Council or the General Assembly as a threat to international peace and security, under Article 35 of the UN Charter.