O regime espacial internacional e a militarização do espaço exterior pelos Estados Unidos no século XXI: o caso Domo de Ouro

Abstract

This paper investigates the gaps of the international space regime and its implications for the strategy of militarization of space adopted by the United States (USA) in the twenty-first century. In the light of Stephen D. Krasner's (2012) theories of international regimes and Susan Strange's (1982) structural power, it is understood that the space regime is conventional structuralist and is conditioned by the behavior of great powers, such as the United States, which can violate principles, norms, rules, and decision-making processes in pursuit of their own interests, such as the militarization of space. The qualitative and exploratory methodology is adopted in this investigation, structured in a case study format and supported by literature review and documentary analysis. The selected case is the Golden Dome (GD) project, which is one of the most contemporary expressions of the U.S. space militarization program. The results indicate that the failures in both the effectiveness and adequacy of space treaties, combined with the absence of enforcement mechanisms, increase the preexisting normative, institutional, and technological gaps. This fragility is accentuated by the increase in US investments in militarization and defense strategies, which fragments the current space regime. Such a scenario acts as a structural permissive for the expansion of U.S. capabilities, exemplified by the Golden Dome project. This case demonstrates how great powers use the ambiguity of regimes to legitimize militarized initiatives. In addition, the work explores future scenarios inferred from this behavior, in which the success of the Golden Dome would represent a turning point, marking the transition from militarization to effective space armament. It is concluded, therefore, that the fragility of the space regime allows the accentuation of space militarization led by the U.S., which, in turn, reinforces asymmetries of structural power and obstructs the applicability and normative modernization.