Among the many races in which the U.S. is involved with China is AI.

The increasing militarization of space is hardly news by now (or at least it should not be). Nevertheless this story from Fast Company’s Jesus Diaz is a reminder of the speed at which it is progressing and makes grim reading despite a fairly lighthearted beginning:

China is developing robotic guards for its Tiangong space station. Equipped with small thrusters, these AI-powered robotic beasts are being developed to intercept and physically shove suspicious objects away from its orbital outpost. It’s a deceptively simple but ingenious step towards active space defense in an increasingly militarized domain. Rather than firing directed energy weapons like lasers or projectiles, which will turn the potential invader into a cloud of deadly shrapnel flying at 21 times the speed of sound, the Chinese have thought of a very zen “reed that bends in the wind” kind of approach. The bots will grapple a threatening object and lightly push it out of harm’s way. Elegant space jiu-jitsu rather than brute kickboxing.

If Beijing is to be believed, these “robotic beasts” are “AI-powered” (which I presume means AI-guided), which is just another reminder that among the many races in which the U.S. is involved with China is AI. This was not, therefore, the moment for the Senate to reject the proposed moratorium on state-level AI regulation. But that, naturally, was what the Senate did, and by a majority of 99-1 no less, proving yet again that “bipartisan” is all too often a synonym for dumb, or at least poorly thought through. It surely would have been easy enough to speed some necessary legislation, such as that to protect children, through Congress without subjecting America’s AI innovation process to a patchwork of state regulation that will inevitably slow its advance.

The vote is being hailed by some as a triumph for federalism. In reality it was a win for Xi.

But back to Fast Company. In his report on the robotic beasts, Diaz notes that they are (officially) aimed at stopping accidental collisions, such as with Starlink satellites, which are apparently engaged in continuous (and unpredictable) maneuvering but adds, “it would be naive not to see it as part of the ongoing effort to dominate space by force, which is now ongoing in Russia, the United States, and China.”

Indeed.

Diaz:

One of the most concerning developments for the U.S. is China’s demonstrated prowess in rendezvous and proximity operations (RPO), precise spacecraft maneuvers to approach and closely operate near another object satellite. These involve controlled relative motion for activities like inspection, maintenance, docking, or capture. They can be peaceful—like filling the fuel tank of a satellite—or military, like taking down another spaceship.

It was not particularly reassuring to read this:

The U.S. Space Force is playing catch up with Chinese capabilities [in the area of maneuvering—or more—near another satellite]. The U.S. Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) and the U.S. Space Force’s Space Systems Command (SSC) are spearheading initiatives like the Victus Haze mission, which has already been delayed from mid-2025 to a late 2025 launch. Using only two spaceships, it aims to partially match the capabilities demonstrated by the Chinese.

Victus Haze does not, from what I can read, involve SpaceX, but, encouragingly (given what this says about the evolution of American private sector space capabilities) two other rocket companies, Rocket Lab and Firefly. Nevertheless, given intensifying military competition in space, and the threat it could pose to this country, this does not seem like a good time for the president to be musing aloud about the possibility of deporting Elon Musk.

This passage from Diaz’s article only reinforces that view:

China has clearly stated that they consider orbital space domination crucial to have military superiority on Earth. They have declared they want technological hegemony in hypersonic space weapons and so far they have achieved it, according to the Pentagon itself, which referred to its tests as “close to Sputnik moment” back in 2021.