August 16, 2018
Toward the Creation of a U.S. “Space Force”
Background
For over two decades, the U.S. Government Accountability
Office (GAO) and others have found that fragmentation and
overlap in national security space acquisition management
and oversight have contributed to program delays and
cancellations, cost increases, and inefficient operations.
Congress has attempted numerous organizational and
acquisition reforms to address these problems. In the view
of many observers, these efforts have generally been
unsuccessful.
In addition to these perceived managerial deficits, Congress
has more recently expressed concern over the slow pace
with which the Department of Defense (DOD) and the Air
Force have addressed the growing threat to U.S. national
security in space from adversaries, particularly Russia and
China, and to a lesser extent North Korea and Iran. Some in
the military and elsewhere now increasingly refer to space
as a “warfighting domain”; once seen as peaceful and
uncontested, space is now viewed as crowded and
adversarial.
Generally, House Members have led the effort to remove
institutional barriers to space acquisition reform by
advocating for the creation of a new entity for national
security space. Until recently, the Senate largely favored
efforts to reform existing organizations rather than
authorize new ones. However, as part of the FY2019
National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) deliberations,
both chambers passed (and the President signed) legislation
that authorized the creation of a subordinate unified
command known as the U.S. Space Command (under the
U.S. Strategic Command). The reorganization was intended
to address long-standing concerns related to space
acquisition management and sharpen DOD’s strategic focus
on space.
DOD recently developed a series of additional proposals
that would authorize the creation of an 11
th
unified
combatant command responsible for space. Separately, the
Trump Administration called for Congress to establish by
2020 a new military service branch—Space Force—with
the goal of asserting “American dominance in space.” The
new service branch would be the first since the creation of
the U.S. Air Force (previously part of the Army) in 1947.
Inconsistencies between these various executive branch
proposals have puzzled some observers and Congress could
play a major role in adjudicating among them.
Given the long-standing nature of the debate over how
space assets should be managed, some observers view
recent proposals as initial positions in a longer-term
negotiation among the part of major stake holders during
next year’s NDAA and beyond.
Organizational Structure of the Military
The U.S. military is composed of three military
departments—the Departments of the Army, Navy, and Air
Force—and four armed forces (the Department of the Navy
is responsible for both the Navy and the Marine Corps).
The Secretaries of the military departments are responsible
for organizing, training, and equipping their respective
forces.
Unified Combatant Commands (COCOMS) are
organizationally responsible for employing these forces
during military operations. There are currently 10 Unified
COCOMs, including 6 that are geographically defined (e.g.,
U.S. Central Command) and 4 that are functionally oriented
(e.g., U.S. Strategic Command.) Unified COCOMs are led
by a single commander and composed of a mix of
servicemen and women from the military departments.
Currently, the Air Force provides space mission capabilities
for DOD, primarily through the Air Force Space Command,
which has its headquarters at Peterson Air Force Base in
Colorado, but has additional installations around the world.
Section 1601 of the FY2018 NDAA (P.L. 115-91)
authorized the establishment of a Space Corps within the
Air Force, and designated the commander of Air Force
Space Command as the “sole authority with respect to …
[o]rganizing, training, and equipping personnel and
operations of the space forces of the Air Force.”
Options for Space Reorganization
Specific organizational options that the President or
Congress could implement to conduct national security
space operations include the following:
Reorganization within the military services. The
President could direct the service secretaries to develop new
units or restructure existing units to provide greater
capability and capacity to conduct space operations. Such
changes might involve procuring new equipment, revising
training strategies, and modifying organizational structures
and relationships. Congress could also mandate such
changes by statute, or influence executive branch action
based on its oversight and appropriations powers.
Establish a new COCOM. Using the authority of 10
U.S.C. 161, the President could direct the establishment of
a space-oriented COCOM, or a subordinate unified
combatant command under an existing COCOM (similar to
the subordination of U.S. Forces Korea to U.S. Indo-Pacific
Command). Alternatively, Congress could require the
establishment of a space-oriented COCOM in law, perhaps
with special authorities, as it did with the establishment of
Special Operations Command and Cyber Command (10
USC 167 and 167b). The FY2019 NDAA provided for the
establishment of a subordinate unified command, to be
