| Original language | English (US) |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 755-775 |
| Number of pages | 21 |
| Journal | Review of International Studies |
| Volume | 34 |
| Issue number | 4 |
| DOIs | |
| State | Published - Oct 2008 |
Bibliographical note
Funding Information:* We thank Tarak Barkawi, Michael Barnett, Daniel Deudney, Penny Griffin, Ayten Gündog˘du, Brian Job, Ronald Krebs, Richard Price, Aaron Rapport, Karthika Sasikumar, James Tully and the two anonymous referees for helpful comments on earlier drafts of this article. We presented this article at the annual meetings of the International Studies Association, San Diego, March, 2006, at the Centre of International Relations at the University of British Columbia, Vancouver, November 2006, and at the Minnesota International Relations Colloquium at the University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, March 2007. We also thank the University of Minnesota’s Graduate Research Partnership Program and the Canadian Department of National Defence’s Security Defence Forum for providing financial support for the completion of this project. Research for this article was completed in 2007; as a result more recent events, such as the US spy satellite destruction, are not discussed. 1 President George W. Bush, ‘US National Space Policy’ (Office of Science and Technology Policy, 31 August 2006), p. 4. 2 Ibid., p. 2. 3 The 2006 Pentagon budget request to Congress publicly earmarks more than half a billion dollars for experimental space-weapons testing programmes, and, according to a 14 March 2006 report in the Boston Globe, ‘specialists believe the classified portion of the . . . budget, blacked out for national security reasons, almost certainly includes other space-related programs.’ The New York Times Magazine (Sunday, 10 December 2006, p. 70) reports that ‘one study of nonclassified budgets released earlier this year indicated that spending on space-weapons research has grown by more