This launch has been much-discussed and debated because of the ‘spy’ satellite angle. In reality, satellite technology is dual-use; this so-called spy satellite offers imagery much like others. How this information is utilised depends entirely on the end-user: it could be agricultural, or cartographic, or for defence. In the Indian context there appears to be some official silence about the end-user but that is understandable. The issue is: is it always necessary to flaunt what you have?

ISRO mandate is space exploration for peaceful ends. It has achieved considerable success, and is playing a significant role in enhancing India’s soft power. However, when space is also being increasingly viewed as a military asset there is a need to have a well-thought-through space security policy. ISRO’s hands are tied because if it takes an official position on security issues then it might lose international support for its various other space activities, and its future programmes could suffer because of various export control restrictions.

India has already established a space cell to cater to its defence requirements; this concept needs to be developed further. One sensible route is the establishment of a separate military space commission. This should become a multi-agency platform involving the armed forces as well as various internal security organisations. For reasons related to both conventional and unconventional warfare, we need to invest in space technologies, without being apologetic about it. I don’t suggest that India take a position on the ‘weaponisation of space’, but we must look at space assets as an additional tool that can cater to the country’s security requirements. This is entirely possible, and need not violate any international norms.

... contd.