
How satellites and orbiting weapons make space the new battlefield
Instead of normal programming, Ukrainian viewers saw parade footage beamed in from Moscow: waves of tanks, soldiers and weaponry. The message was meant to intimidate and was an illustration that 21st-century war is waged not just on land, sea and air but also in cyberspace and the reaches of outer space.
Disabling a satellite could deal a devastating blow without one bullet, and it can be done by targeting the satellite's security software or disrupting its ability to send or receive signals from Earth.
'If you can impede a satellite's ability to communicate, you can cause a significant disruption,' said Tom Pace, CEO of NetRise, a cybersecurity firm focused on protecting supply chains.
'Think about GPS,' said Pace, who served in the Marines before working on cyber issues at the Department of Energy. 'Imagine if a population lost that and the confusion it would cause.'
Satellites are the short-term challenge
More than 12,000 operating satellites now orbit the planet, playing a critical role not just in broadcast communications but also in military operations, navigation systems like GPS, intelligence gathering and economic supply chains. They are also key to early launch-detection efforts, which can warn of approaching missiles.
That makes them a significant national security vulnerability, and a prime target for anyone looking to undermine an adversary's economy or military readiness — or deliver a psychological blow like the hackers supporting Russia did when they hijacked television signals to Ukraine.
Hackers typically look for the weakest link in the software or hardware that supports a satellite or controls its communications with Earth. The actual orbiting device may be secure, but if it's running on outdated software, it can be easily exploited.
As Russian forces invaded Ukraine in 2022, someone targeted Viasat, the U.S.-based satellite company used by Ukraine's government and military. The hack, which Kyiv blamed on Moscow, used malware to infect tens of thousands of modems, creating an outage affecting wide swaths of Europe.
National security officials say Russia is developing a nuclear, space-based weapon designed to take out virtually every satellite in low-Earth orbit at once. The weapon would combine a physical attack that would ripple outward, destroying more satellites, while the nuclear component is used to fry their electronics.
U.S. officials declassified information about the weapon after Rep. Mike Turner, R-Ohio, issued a public warning about the technology. Turner has pushed for the Department of Defense to provide a classified briefing to lawmakers on the weapon, which, if deployed, would violate an international treaty prohibiting weapons of mass destruction in space.
Turner said such a weapon could render low-Earth orbit unusable for satellites for as long as a year. If it were used, the effects would be devastating: potentially leaving the U.S. and its allies vulnerable to economic upheaval and even a nuclear attack.
Russia and China also would lose satellites, though they are believed to be less reliant on the same kinds of satellites as the U.S.
Turner compared the weapon, which is not yet ready for deployment, to Sputnik, the Russian satellite that launched the space age in 1957.
'If this anti-satellite nuclear weapon would be put in space, it would be the end of the space age,' Turner said. 'It should never be permitted to go into outer space. This is the Cuban Missile Crisis in space.'
Mining the moon and beyond
Valuable minerals and other materials found on the moon and in asteroids could lead to future conflicts as nations look to exploit new technologies and energy sources.
Acting NASA Administrator Sean Duffy announced plans this month to send a small nuclear reactor to the moon, saying it's important the U.S. does so before China or Russia.
'We're in a race to the moon, in a race with China to the moon,' Duffy said. 'To have a base on the moon, we need energy and some of the key locations on the moon. … We want to get there first and claim that for America.'
The moon is rich in a material known as helium 3, which scientists believe could be used in nuclear fusion to generate huge amounts of energy. While that technology is decades away, control over the moon in the intervening years could determine which countries emerge as superpowers, according to Joseph Rooke, a London-based cybersecurity expert who has worked in the U.K. defense industry and is now director of risk insights at the firm Recorded Future.
The end of the Cold War temporarily halted a lot of investments in space, but competition is likely to increase as the promise of mining the moon becomes a reality.
'This isn't sci-fi. It's quickly becoming a reality,' Rooke said. 'If you dominate Earth's energy needs, that's game over.'
China and Russia have announced plans for their own nuclear plants on the moon in the coming years, while the U.S. is planning missions to the moon and Mars. Artificial intelligence is likely to speed up the competition, as is the demand for the energy that AI requires.
Messages left with Russia's Embassy in Washington were not returned.
Despite its steps into outer space, China opposes any extraterrestrial arms race, according to Liu Pengyu, a spokesperson for China's Embassy in Washington. He said it is the U.S. that is threatening to militarize the final frontier.
'It has kept expanding military strength in space, created space military alliances, and attempted to turn space into a war zone,' Liu said. 'China urges the U.S. to stop spreading irresponsible rhetoric, stop expanding military build-up in space, and make due contribution to upholding the lasting peace and security in space.'
What the US is doing about security in space
Nations are scrambling to create their own rocket and space programs to exploit commercial prospects and ensure they aren't dependent on foreign satellites. It's an expensive and difficult proposition, as demonstrated last week when the first Australian-made rocket crashed after 14 seconds of flight.
The U.S. Space Force was created in 2019 to protect American interests in space and to defend U.S. satellites from attacks from adversaries.
The space service is far smaller than the more well-established services like the Army, Navy or Air Force, but it's growing, and the White House is expected to announce a location for its headquarters soon. Colorado and Alabama are both candidates.
The U.S. military operates an unmanned space shuttle used to conduct classified military missions and research. The craft, known as the X-37B, recently returned to Earth after more than a year in orbit.
The Space Force called access to space a vital national security interest.
'Space is a warfighting domain, and it is the Space Force's job to contest and control its environment to achieve national security objectives,' it said in the statement.
American dominance in space has been largely unquestioned for decades following the end of the Cold War and the fall of the Soviet Union. But the new threats and competition posed by Russia and China show the need for an aggressive response, U.S. officials say.
The hope, Turner said, is that the U.S. can take steps to ensure Russia and China can't get the upper hand, and the frightening potential of space weapons is not realized.
'You have to pay attention to these things so they don't happen,' Turner said.

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Newsweek
16 minutes ago
- Newsweek
Trump's Russia-Ukraine Talks Raise Two Conditions Key to Ending War
Based on factual reporting, incorporates the expertise of the journalist and may offer interpretations and conclusions. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. The fast-moving developments in President Donald Trump's near-back-to-back summits with the heads of Russia, Ukraine and European powers have raised two items increasingly as critical to ending the war between Moscow and Kyiv: territorial exchanges and security guarantees. While the latest talks held Monday between Trump, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky and the leaders of the Finland, France, Germany, Italy, the United Kingdom, the European Union and NATO did not produce an agreement to end the three-and-a-half-year war, the gathering laid the groundwork for a long-anticipated trilateral meeting between Trump, Zelensky and Russian President Vladimir Putin, with whom Trump met in Alaska on Friday. Perhaps most notably, however, the U.S. leader did not walk back from the position of Ukraine needing to offer territorial concessions as part of an eventual settlement, a stance long opposed by Kyiv and its European backers. "We also need to discuss the possible exchanges of territory, taking into consideration the current line of contact," Trump said during a press engagement alongside Zelensky and European counterparts. Jennifer Kavanagh, senior fellow and director of military analysis at the Defense Priorities think tank, said the comments were indicative of a broader reality that has set in over the conflict. "Ukraine will have to cede some territory to end the war, the question is how much and how," Kavanagh told Newsweek. "At the very least, it will not go back to its pre-2022 borders. Crimea will not be returned to Ukraine." "Ukraine can choose to keep fighting now rather than settle for Putin's terms that require withdrawing from the Donbas, but they are losing territory at a more rapid rate and their frontlines are overstretched," Kavanagh said. "More time may not buy them a better deal but force them to settle for much less." A combination of pictures shows Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky (left), U.S. President Donald Trump (center) and Russian President Vladimir Putin (right). A combination of pictures shows Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky (left), U.S. President Donald Trump (center) and Russian President Vladimir Putin (right). DREW ANGERER/SAUL LOEB/ALEXANDER NEMENOV/AFP/Getty Images Land for Peace The Kremlin has thus far maintained an ambitious set of demands outlined by Putin to put an end to the conflict. These include recognition of Russia's full control over four Ukrainian provinces—Donetsk, Kherson, Luhansk and Zaporizhzhia—annexed without international recognition during a September 2022 wartime referendum, as well as Crimea, seized and annexed during a similar vote held in March 2014 amid the initial Russia-backed uprising in the Donetsk and Luhansk that sparked the conflict. Moscow also demands that Kyiv forego its aspirations to join NATO in addition to undergoing a process of "demilitarization" and "denazification," though Ukraine strongly denies any ties to far-right ideology. Zelensky has long expressed an unwillingness to cede territory to Russia but expressed his openness earlier Monday to discussing territorial control over "where the front line is now." Russian forces currently occupy all of Crimea, nearly the entirety of Luhansk and approximately three-quarters of Donetsk, Kherson and Zaporizhzhia. The nearly 20 percent of Ukrainian territory held by the Russian military was on full display on a map stood in the Oval Office on Monday as Trump and Zelensky spoke in front of the press ahead of their discussions. In the Oval Office, a large map of Ukraine was displayed across from where Trump and Zelensky sat. The eastern part, shaded pink, showed the roughly 20% of the country under Russian control — a stark reminder of the nearly four-year war and a possible tool for Trump to pressure… — KyivPost (@KyivPost) August 18, 2025 The comments marked one of the most notable shifts in the Ukrainian leader's position since the Trump administration has recalibrated the U.S. approach to Europe's deadliest conflict since World War II. Trump reiterated his belief that Ukraine would have to make territorial concessions and abandon its quest to join NATO in a statement issued Sunday via his Truth Social platform. "President Zelenskyy of Ukraine can end the war with Russia almost immediately, if he wants to, or he can continue to fight," Trump wrote. "Remember how it started. No getting back Obama given Crimea (12 years ago, without a shot being fired!), and NO GOING INTO NATO BY UKRAINE. Some things never change!!!" Yet Trump has also shifted gears on his earlier calls for a ceasefire, now emphasizing that a comprehensive peace deal should be prioritized, a position that has been challenged by some European leaders, including German Chancellor Friedrich Merz. Franz-Stefan Gady, adjunct senior fellow at the Center for a New American Security, argued that, without a cessation of hostilities, Moscow would likely continue its press to obtain more territory as talks continued. "The Russians obviously don't think they've run out of military options," Gady told Newsweek. "Just having returned from Ukraine a couple of weeks ago, I can attest that there are no signs that the Russian offensive operations are in any way slowing down." "On the contrary, the Russians have been picking up their advance in southern Donetsk, for example," he added, "and they're very focused on seizing the towns of Pokrovsk, Kostiantynivka, and also possibly encircling Soviansk and Kramatorsk eventually." As such, he argued that Merz "is absolutely right in setting a ceasefire as a precondition, because only once Russia agrees to a ceasefire, I think that would be a test of Russia's sincerity." The 'Guarantee' Debate On the same day as Trump's social media post, Trump's special envoy, Steve Witkoff, who met with Putin in Moscow prior to the Alaska summit, told Fox News Sunday that the Russian leader had committed to taking legislative steps toward foregoing any further territorial expansion in Ukraine or elsewhere in Europe once a peace deal was secured. In addition to reiterating his point about potential land swaps, Trump also on Friday revealed that Putin had agreed that Russia "would accept security guarantees for Ukraine." It was "a very significant step," according to the U.S. leader, that could include Western military presence in post-war Ukraine. But it remains uncertain the degree to which Putin would tolerate the presence of NATO forces following a conflict he argued was partially justified by the U.S.-led alliance's post-Cold War expansion into Eastern Europe. From the European perspective, Gady said questions still linger about the commitment from nations to actually enforce any deterrent measures on the ground beyond merely empowering Ukraine's military. "It's important to see that Europe will need to carry the bulk of the burden here," Gady said. "And I think the major issue with Europe is that hiding behind U.S. military power and a U.S. commitment to support the war Ukraine, Europe never had to ask hard questions." He argued that "the hardest question that remains unanswered for Europe" boils down to "what does Ukraine really mean for Europe's security architecture, and what is Europe prepared to risk to ensure that Ukraine will remain an independent, pro-Western country is it?" "Are European countries prepared to go to war against Russia? If the answer is no, then any sort of European reassurance force in Ukraine, integrated with Ukrainian forces, will not be able to deter future Russian aggression," he added. Kavanagh also pointed out that Trump's fundamental opposition opposed any NATO "Article 5-like" guarantees for Ukraine as suggested by Witkoff. "Planning in that direction is a waste of time because it's a nonstarter as a condition for peace," she said. "Putin may be willing to accept an Istanbul 2022-style arrangement where it has a veto over any sort of military intervention to defend Ukraine, but Ukraine will reject this." "There is just no way that Russia would fight for three years to keep Ukraine out of NATO and stop its western integration to allow Western forces in Ukraine after the war--especially now that they have the battlefield advantage," she added. "Finally, the West has little leverage over Putin. They can discuss their terms all they want, but an end to fighting right now is in Putin's hands and on his timeline." U.S. President Donald Trump sits across the table from Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky (right), and European leaders during a meeting at the White House on August 18, 2025, in Washington, D.C. U.S. President Donald Trump sits across the table from Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky (right), and European leaders during a meeting at the White House on August 18, 2025, in Washington, Dilemma European leaders have long expressed concern regarding the Trump administration's foreign policy outlook as it relates to transatlantic security. Since first coming to office in 2017, Trump has accused European allies of taking advantage of U.S. defense guarantees. Trump's position has prompted both NATO and the EU, who share the majority of their respective member states, to undergo great defense spending initiatives. The EU also agreed to spend what Trump described as "hundreds of billions of dollars' worth of military equipment" from the U.S. as part of a trade deal reached last month and NATO has since begun coordinating large-scale arms transfers from member states to Ukraine, predominantly consisting of U.S. weapons. The moves mark a more conciliatory approach from Europe toward the Trump administration; a tone made all the more apparent by the relatively amicable environment that surrounded the high-stakes talks on Friday despite underlying differences over the course of the war. Mujtaba Rahman, managing director for Europe at the Eurasia Group, described what he saw as "a strong show of European unity" in which each leader—including Germany's Merz, Finnish President Alexander Stubb, French President Emmanuel Marcon, Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni, U.K. Prime Minister Keir Starmer, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen President and NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte—"brings something to the table that works for the Trump playbook." "Merz brings the big fiscal spending that Germany is committed to on defense," Rahman told Newsweek. "Macron and Starmer are obviously committed to a reassurance force with British and French troops on the ground." "Meloni has the ideological affinity and proximity to the Trump administration and key people in the Trump ecosystem like [Vice President] JD Vance and others," he added. "Alex [Stubb], even Commission President von der Leyen, have managed to build something of a good rapport with him." Rahman argued that Europe walked into the talks with three overarching goals, including to "ensure whatever guarantees the administration is talking about are credible and robust," to "push back strongly on this idea of territorial exchanges" and to "really shape and influence and work this potential trilateral meeting," where Macron also "raised the stakes" Friday by suggesting European representation there as well. Trump has expressed confidence on the possibility of a joint meeting with Putin and Zelensky. Zelensky has also expressed openness to the idea, while the Kremlin has said Putin would only meet his Ukrainian counterpart following "preparatory work at the expert level." So far, the results of Trump's direct meetings with Putin and Zelensky, alongside European allies, have yet to achieve a breakthrough, though they may pave the way for further discussions on issues Rahman said would need to be addressed even before a settlement on top-line items like territorial control and security guarantees. Such issues, according to Rahman, include "prisoner exchange, return of abducted Ukrainian children" as well as the "sequencing" of a deal, and whether or not it be preceded by a ceasefire to freeze the current lines of control. "It's way too premature to begin talking about territorial exchanges," Rahman said. "I think the European side is still focused on protecting the principles that emerged in the aftermath of the Second World War, that borders can't be redrawn by force, primarily." If Russia did remain in control of the territory it currently possesses in Ukraine, Rahman said "any recognition will be de facto, certainly not de jure."


Bloomberg
16 minutes ago
- Bloomberg
Ukraine Telecom's US Stock Jumps After Debut Amid Peace Talks
As a gathering in Washington raised hopes for an end to the war between Russia and Ukraine, investors snapped up the new US shares of the largest Ukrainian mobile operator that has former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo on its board. Shares of Kyivstar Group Ltd. surged 17% on Monday, their second day of trading after the Veon Ltd. subsidiary went public by merging with a special-purpose acquisition company. The stock, which trades on the Nasdaq under the ticker KYIV, more than made up losses from its first day of trading.


Bloomberg
16 minutes ago
- Bloomberg
Ukraine Talks at 'Fast Pace-of-Play:' Ret. Adm. Hewitt
Retired Admiral Mike Hewitt, Co-Chair of the Ukraine Reconstruction Summit, discusses what to take away from the meetings President Trump had with President Zelensky & other European leaders in the White House. He also talks about the security guarantees President Trump got President Putin to agree on for Ukraine. Retired Admiral Mike Hewitt speaks with Tyler Kendall and Michael Shepard on the late edition of Bloomberg's 'Balance of Power.' (Source: Bloomberg)