Krepon, Hitchens, and Katz argue there are four unavoidable dilemmas regarding spacepower. Which statement best describes one of those dilemmas?

• A. Taking war to space could result in the loss of many satellite services, such as direct broadcast and VSAT, and there are few backup methods or technologies to mitigate these losses.
• B. Space disruption is far more achievable than space control.
• C. Because U.S. military operations abroad are supported mainly by satellites in the eastern hemisphere, whereas communications services in the United States are supported mainly by satellites in the western hemisphere, there is little the commercial satellite industry can do to support U.S. forces in war.
• D. Space disruption is easy to achieve.

Answer: (B)

In spacepower, there’s a built-in tension between degrading space services and actually achieving secure, uncontested control of space. Disrupting or denying access to space assets is much more feasible for adversaries than permanently controlling space or preventing others from disrupting it. That reality drives a core dilemma: you must design and operate in a environment where threats can degrade or deny services far more readily than you can guarantee continuous, unquestioned space superiority. It pushes emphasis toward resilience, redundancy, and robust countermeasure options—knowing that an attacker can often degrade space services without ever needing to conquer space itself. The statement captures this asymmetry and its implications for doctrine, deterrence, and force design. The other options either exaggerate the ease of disruption or misstate the balance between disruption and control or the role of commercial space, so they don’t reflect the same fundamental dynamic.