Space as a warfighting domain is increasingly congested, contested, and competitive. Space as a warfighting domain is also difficult: the question of how to organize, train, equip, and exercise command and control in a domain wherein nearly all warfighters will never set foot grows ever more urgent. The United States, as well as other global powers, continue to emphasize the significance of space as a military domain. Despite these advances, interservice disputes about future space capabilities, the joint application of space power, and the confusion between the United States Space Force and United States Space Command continues to confound most national security practitioners. In this context, DoD should consider creating a theater space operations command (TSpOC) to integrate space units and capabilities across the joint force within geographic combatant commands. Space requirements transcend service-specific command and control and require joint integration at the theater level. Joint TSpOCs could potentially address this challenge by alleviating the burden for US Space Force to man additional headquarters, creating a centralized command-and-control structure, and facilitating joint and combined cooperation.
A Crowded Space
The US Space Force and US Space Command (USSPACECOM), both established in 2019, represent an essential step in addressing the challenges in the space domain. However, the existence of both a service to organize, train, and equip space forces and a combatant command responsible for space operations one hundred kilometers above the earth further complicates the space domain. The Untied States needs a more nuanced and validated approach to organizing and commanding joint space forces. Traditionally, the military services align with their respective domain functions to provide command of forces in that domain. For example, the US Army maintains a service component headquarters for command and control of land forces in each geographic combatant command, with the ability to surge as the joint force land component command if designated as such by the combatant commander until a time in which the combatant command can establish the appropriate joint force command headquarters. However, it is also well accepted that the services have cross-domain functions, as codified in the 1948 Key West Agreement, and that the services share certain aspects of each domain. That is why the Navy continues to have maintain a premier fleet of fighter aircraft.
Currently, the Space Force is undergoing a transformation that creates two new service component field commands like those of the other services. In light of this, ostensibly a Space Force component field command would serve as the joint force space component command, as component commands of other services do for their respective domains. However, this does not account for the similar function of the Space Force component to USSPACECOM, Space Forces–Space. As a result, both USSPACECOM and a terrestrial geographic combatant command could establish joint force space component commands, thus blurring the lines of command and control of space capabilities considering that USSPACECOM is responsible for space operations above one hundred kilometers from the earth’s surface. A TSpOC could alleviate this confusion, providing terrestrial geographic combatant command with a joint force headquarters to synchronize space effects within the combatant command’s area of responsibility while permitting USSPACECOM to focus on operations on orbit. Further, the Space Force is currently unable to meet its requirements to fulfill critical functions in support of other DoD agencies. TSpOCs would provide streamlined force structure that would be filled by space professionals from all services, thereby reducing the burden on the Space Force to man service components within each geographic combatant command.
Joint Command and Control in the Space Domain
Unity of command is critical to ensuring mission success and can reduce the confusion created by multiple Space Force component headquarters. The theater special operations command (TSOC) model, with a TSOC operating as both a component of US Special Operations Command and a subordinate unified command to a geographic command, offers several advantages that can be leveraged in the space domain. Born in the late 1980s, TSOCs provide a command structure that integrates joint special operations forces (SOF) from across the Army, Air Force, Navy, and Marine Corps within a geographic theater under the geographic combatant commanders. The TSOC ensures unity of command and enhances the responsiveness of special operations forces across the traditional domains. It also facilitates close coordination and interoperability with conventional military forces and allied nations, access to partner nations through security cooperation, and joint command and control through its ability to serve as a joint task force headquarters.
The transformation of space from a relatively peaceful domain into a contested and competitive warfighting domain signals the need for a joint warfighting vision and broad coordination of capabilities in, from, and to space. In other words, space operations can originate, influence, or terminate on earth, in space, or in between. Therefore, the Space Force does not have a monopoly on space operations and all space operations should be approached with a joint mindset. TSpOCs would serve as the joint force command for all services’ space capabilities. This differs significantly from the traditional model of service component commands assigned to support both geographic and functional combatant commands and would preclude the requirement for the Space Force to establish independent component commands. A single command for delivering space capabilities would provide enhanced situational awareness in complex and dynamic environments and ensure synchronization and deconfliction of joint space power in support of joint force commanders.
Advancing the SOF-Space-Cyber Triad
A single TSpOC aligned to each geographic combatant command could provide the single coordinating point between SOF and space enablers. In a bid to establish and reinforce a triad of capabilities, the US Army and joint force are advancing SOF-space-cyber doctrine and warfighting concepts, and broader adoption by joint commands will quickly follow. Alternatively, some authors already contend that SOF could influence, deceive, or degrade adversary space-enabling infrastructure. With joint SOF providing terrestrial effects for space-based capabilities, coordinating these operations with a single joint space command in the geographic combatant command is essential to ensuring success and reducing redundancy.
Finally, TSpOCs could promote joint and combined security cooperation for all space capabilities within their geographic areas of responsibility. In the terrestrial domains, TSpOCs would work closely with conventional military forces and partner nations to achieve mission objectives and meet joint force readiness goals. This same level of cooperation would be crucial in space, one hundred kilometers above the earth, where operations often involve multiple branches of the military as well as civilian and commercial entities. Space is a shared domain, and conflicts in space could affect global communications, navigation, and commerce. Therefore, the ability to coordinate efforts across different organizations and with allied nations is essential for mission success.
Joint space capabilities must keep one foot in geographic combatant commands’ areas of responsibility and one foot in that of USSPACECOM. To eliminate delays and blurred lines of communication, a single theater space operations command provides a geographic combatant commander the ability to manage joint space effects to and from space while USSPACECOM focuses on its area of responsibility one hundred kilometers above. As space continues to evolve as a critical warfighting domain, establishing TSpOCs offers a way to enhance the US military’s agility, interoperability, and mission effectiveness in space. The TSpOC would provide a centralized command structure that enhances situational awareness and promotes joint and allied cooperation. In an era where space assets are essential to national security and global stability, the ability to rapidly and effectively respond to threats in space is critical. TSpOCs would position the United States to maintain its strategic advantage in this increasingly contested domain.
Ted Hanger is a US Army colonel and currently the director for strategic engagements within the Strategy, Plans, and Policy Directorate (J5) for United States Space Command.
Ryan Kertis is a US Army lieutenant colonel and foreign area officer. He currently serves in United States Space Command in the Strategy, Plans, and Policy Directorate (J5). Ryan’s previous articles have been published by Military Review, the Irregular Warfare Initiative, and the US Army War College War Room.
The views expressed are those of the authors and do not reflect the official position of the United States Military Academy, Department of the Army, United States Space Command, or Department of Defense.
Image credit: John Ayre, US Space Command