History demonstrates military innovation continually rewrites the rules of combat, reshaping warfare and rendering strategies from past conflicts obsolete. The introduction of repeating rifles transformed infantry combat during the 19th century. Machine guns and rapid-fire artillery fundamentally altered battlefield tactics during the first World War. Aircraft, radar, armored maneuver and radio communications revolutionized operations during the second World War. Precision-guided weapons shifted warfare from close quarters line formations to highly lethal, long-range and rapid battlefields. Stealth aircraft, satellite navigation and digital communications defined the military dominance enjoyed by the United States during the late 20th century.
Today another transformation is underway.
Persistent space-based surveillance has dramatically reduced the possibility of achieving battlefield surprise. Hypersonic weapons compress decision timelines and challenge existing defensive architectures. Artificial intelligence accelerates decision-making and enhances operational planning. Offensive cyber operations provide strategic options below the threshold of conventional warfare. Counterspace weapons threaten the satellites upon which virtually every modern military operation depends.
Meanwhile, inexpensive unmanned aircraft have fundamentally altered the economics of warfare. The proliferation of drones — capable of operating individually or in coordinated autonomous swarms — allows adversaries to impose disproportionate costs on sophisticated military forces. Defending against thousands of inexpensive drones with million-dollar interceptors is neither economically sustainable nor operationally practical.
Perhaps the most important lesson from the war in Ukraine is that modern conflicts are not won solely through superior tactics or advanced weapons. Victory increasingly depends upon industrial endurance, resilient logistics, secure supply chains and the ability to replace combat losses more rapidly than an adversary. The nation capable of sustaining military operations over time will ultimately prevail.
For the U.S., this means preparing not only to fight effectively, but to compete continuously. Technological innovation and industrial resilience are inseparable elements of national security.
The new great competition with China
China represents the foremost long-term geopolitical, economic and military challenge facing the U.S. Strategic competition with Beijing will shape American national security priorities for decades to come. While diplomacy remains an indispensable instrument of statecraft, history demonstrates that negotiations are most effective when backed by credible military and economic power. Sustaining military deterrence is therefore an essential prerequisite for preserving peace and preventing conflict.
Unlike previous competitors, China has adopted a comprehensive national strategy that integrates economic development, technological innovation, industrial policy and military modernization. Through its doctrine of Military-Civil Fusion, Beijing systematically directs commercial research, universities, state-owned enterprises and private industry toward advancing national defense objectives. Coupled with being a closed society that doesn’t need extensive review and multiple approvals, this approach compresses the traditional timeline between scientific discovery and operational military capability while enabling the military to exploit breakthroughs emerging from China’s commercial economy.
In the strategic competition with China, the U.S. faces a fundamentally different environment than it did during the Cold War. Military superiority can no longer be measured solely by the number of ships, aircraft, tanks, or missiles in the inventory. Instead, national power increasingly depends upon the ability to integrate emerging technologies, manufacture advanced systems rapidly, sustain combat operations over prolonged periods, and adapt more quickly than potential adversaries.
America’s competitive advantage will ultimately rest upon two mutually reinforcing pillars: Technological Superiority and Industrial Capacity and Resilience.
Neither alone is sufficient. Advanced technology without the industrial ability to produce it in meaningful quantities cannot sustain military operations. Likewise, manufacturing capacity without technological innovation cannot maintain military overmatch. Long-term success requires excellence in both.
Pillar One: Technological Competition: Preserving Military Superiority
Maintaining military superiority in an era of strategic competition requires more than incremental modernization. The U.S. must sustain long-term investments in research, development, acquisition and the rapid fielding of advanced technologies that will define future warfare. America’s technological advantage has historically offset numerical disadvantages, enabled global power projection, and strengthened deterrence. However, this advantage is increasingly challenged by competitors — particularly China — which is rapidly integrating emerging technologies through its Military-Civil Fusion strategy. Preserving military overmatch therefore demands a coordinated national effort that accelerates innovation, shortens acquisition timelines, strengthens the defense industrial base and rapidly transitions breakthrough technologies from laboratories into operational military capabilities.Cyber operations: Cyberspace has become a contested warfighting domain where nations can achieve strategic effects without firing a shot. State-sponsored cyber campaigns routinely target critical infrastructure, defense industrial networks, financial systems, transportation, energy, communications and government agencies. Increasingly integrated with electronic warfare, intelligence and conventional military operations, cyber capabilities have become a core element of national defense rather than simply an information technology function.
Future conflicts are likely to begin in space and cyberspace through attacks on command and control, logistics, satellite communications, critical infrastructure and public information to disrupt military operations before conventional combat begins. Protecting America’s digital infrastructure is therefore as essential as defending its physical borders.
The Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency should continue strengthening critical infrastructure resilience through public-private partnerships and threat intelligence sharing. The National Security Agency should protect national security systems while advancing secure communications and quantum-resistant encryption. United States Cyber Command must maintain offensive cyber capabilities and persistent engagement to disrupt adversary networks and deter aggression. The Defense Information Systems Agency (DISA) should modernize the Department of Defense’s Global Information Network to support resilient Joint All-Domain Command and Control. DARPA, OUSD(R\&E) and the military research laboratories should accelerate next-generation cyber technologies, while the Department of Defense strengthens Defense Industrial Base cybersecurity through expanded Cybersecurity Maturity Model Certification implementation and supply-chain security.
Cyber operations will underpin every domain of future warfare by enabling command and control, intelligence, logistics, precision strike, missile defense and space operations. Maintaining superiority in cyberspace is therefore a strategic military imperative. Just as sea power and air superiority defined previous eras of warfare, cyber superiority will be indispensable to preserving U.S. military dominance in the 21st century.
Artificial intelligence and machine learning: Artificial intelligence represents one of the most consequential military technologies since the introduction of precision-guided weapons. AI-enabled decision support, intelligence analysis, logistics optimization, predictive maintenance, autonomous systems and battle management have the potential to dramatically increase the speed and effectiveness of military operations.
However, military adoption of artificial intelligence must emphasize trust, transparency, security, and responsible human oversight. AI should augment human judgment rather than replace it in decisions involving the use of lethal force or actions with significant strategic consequences.
DARPA should continue developing breakthrough AI capabilities while the Defense Innovation Unit accelerates the transition of commercial innovations into operational military systems. The military services should integrate AI into command-and-control architectures, intelligence processing, logistics and autonomous platforms while ensuring that commanders retain meaningful human control over critical operational decisions.
The strategic advantage will belong not to the nation possessing the most sophisticated algorithms, but to the nation capable of integrating artificial intelligence across every aspect of military operations faster than its competitors.
Space superiority: Space superiority has become a prerequisite for success across every other domain of warfare. Communications, positioning, navigation, timing, missile warning, missile tracking, intelligence collection, weather forecasting and precision targeting all depend upon resilient space capabilities. An adversary capable of denying access to space-enabled services gains a significant operational advantage before conventional combat even begins.
The Space Force should continue to accelerate responsive launch capabilities, rapid satellite replacement, on-orbit servicing, and software-defined spacecraft capable of receiving continuous upgrades throughout their operational lives. Partnerships with commercial space providers will be increasingly important to expanding launch capacity, enhancing resilience, and leveraging the extraordinary pace of innovation occurring within the commercial sector. Along with U.S. Space Command, it develops the doctrine, operational concepts and command relationships necessary to conduct military operations in an increasingly contested space environment. Additionally, they should continue leading the development and sustainment of resilient space architectures, along with Tactics \& Techniques for space maneuver and the development and integration of Dynamic Space Operations in the form of offensive and defensive counterspace capabilities, underpinned by a robust knowledge of the current Space Order of Battle.
Maintaining space superiority requires more than protecting American satellites. It also demands the ability to deny adversaries the effective use of space when necessary while preserving freedom of action for U.S. and allied forces. Developing resilient architectures, responsive acquisition, and integrated space operations will ensure that the U.S. retains this decisive strategic advantage
Credible missile defense: The proliferation of advanced ballistic missiles, cruise missiles, hypersonic weapons and long-range precision strike systems have fundamentally altered the strategic environment. The U.S. must restore and expand a layered, integrated missile defense architecture capable of protecting the homeland, forward-deployed forces, allies and critical infrastructure against increasingly sophisticated threats.
The Golden Dome for America Office is spearheading the development of technical capabilities and critical infrastructure against ballistic, cruise, hypersonic and advanced air-breathing threats. This office is orchestrating the whole of the US solution with the U.S. Space Force (through SDA and SSC) providing persistent space-based sensing; MDA providing interceptors and upgrading radars. The army and navy are modernizing terminal and regional defenses through Patriot, THAAD and Aegis systems, while the Air Force develops advanced airborne sensing and battle management capabilities.
This new robust missile defense encompasses space, air, sea and ground-based sensors and interceptors, integrated through resilient command-and-control networks that provide persistent tracking and rapid engagement across multiple domains. Investments in next-generation interceptors, direct-energy technologies and advanced discrimination capabilities are essential to counter increasingly maneuverable and hypersonic threats.
USNORTHCOM is integrating homeland defense, while INDOPACOM will prioritize regional missile defense architectures to deter Chinese coercion in the Indo-Pacific. Continued investment in next-generation interceptors, directed-energy technologies and advanced discrimination algorithms will be essential to counter maneuverable and hypersonic threats.
A credible missile defense capability strengthens deterrence by denying adversaries confidence that a first strike could achieve decisive military or political objectives. By reducing the effectiveness of missile attacks and preserving freedom of action for U.S. and allied forces, missile defense serves as a critical pillar of integrated deterrence and strategic stability. There has been controversy regarding Golden Dome for America funding, but to succeed they need adequate and stable funding and support
Countering drones and autonomous swarms: Unmanned aerial systems are fundamentally reshaping warfare. Low-cost drones can be produced in massive quantities, dispersed across wide areas. The rapid proliferation of unmanned aircraft represents one of the most disruptive developments in modern warfare.
Crucially, unmanned aerial systems/drone technology has democratized precision strike capabilities through low-cost, decentralized attrition warfare. They can be employed to conduct reconnaissance, strike operations and electronic warfare at relatively little cost. Because drones are inexpensive to build and can be manufactured almost anywhere using commercial parts, they bypass traditional industrial bottlenecks and ordinary targeting. They are easily stored in a highly dispersed fashion — making them immune to pre-emptive strikes — and can be cost-effectively deployed in massive, synchronized swarms. Their affordability and scalability make complete elimination of the threat unrealistic.
The emergence of autonomous swarms further magnifies this challenge. These swarms could possibly overwhelm advanced air defenses through sheer volume, effectively replacing traditional infantry weapons, heavy artillery and dedicated tank-killers on the modern battlefield. Artificial intelligence allows hundreds or even thousands of low-cost autonomous systems to coordinate attacks, overwhelm defensive systems, conduct reconnaissance, jam communications and saturate traditional command-and-control architectures. The economic advantage increasingly favors the attacker. Traditional air defense systems were designed to defeat relatively small numbers of sophisticated aircraft and missiles — not thousands of expendable autonomous systems costing only a few thousand dollars each. Relying upon million-dollar interceptors to defeat inexpensive drones is economically unsustainable.
Future counter-drone architectures must therefore emphasize affordability, scalability and magazine depth. Layered defenses combining electronic warfare, directed-energy weapons, autonomous interceptors, low-cost missiles, advanced radar, passive sensing and artificial intelligence-enabled sensor fusion offer the most promising approach. No single technology will solve the problem. Rather, success will require integrating multiple defensive capabilities into a coordinated architecture capable of defeating large numbers of simultaneous threats.
The Joint Counter-Small UAS Office should continue establishing common requirements across the military services while accelerating acquisition of interoperable systems. DARPA and the Defense Innovation Unit should prioritize autonomous defensive systems capable of adapting rapidly to emerging threats, while the military services integrate counter-drone capabilities into every echelon of military operations.
The objective, therefore, is persistent neutralization rather than total destruction. The U.S. must develop layered, low-cost counter-UAS architectures capable of detecting, tracking, identifying and defeating both individual drones and coordinated swarms across every operational environment. Scalable, affordable air defense capable of protecting maneuver forces and critical infrastructure will become as essential as traditional missile defense. Countering autonomous systems will become as fundamental to future military operations as traditional air defense has been during the past century.
Decision advantage: accelerating the OODA loop: Throughout military history, commanders who could observe the battlefield more clearly understand events more rapidly, make better decisions and act faster than their opponents consistently gain decisive advantages. Colonel John Boyd’s Observe–Orient–Decide–Act (OODA) loop remains as relevant today as when it was first developed, but technological advances have compressed decision timelines from hours to minutes — and in some cases, to seconds.
Future military success will depend increasingly upon achieving decision advantage.
Artificial intelligence, resilient communications, integrated intelligence, persistent space-based sensing, cyber operations, autonomous systems and advanced command-and-control networks must function as a unified decision architecture. The objective is not simply collecting more information but transforming data into actionable knowledge faster than an adversary can respond.
Decision advantage requires integrating every domain of warfare. Space provides global sensing and communications. Cyber protects information while disrupting adversary networks. Artificial intelligence processes enormous quantities of data into operationally relevant insights. Command-and-control systems distribute those insights rapidly to commanders and weapons systems capable of immediate action.
Future battle management systems must increasingly employ machine learning to recommend courses of action, allocate defensive resources, prioritize targets and coordinate operations across multiple domains. Human commanders, however, must retain authority over decisions involving lethal force, strategic escalation or actions with significant political consequences.
The nation capable of completing this decision cycle faster than its competitors will consistently seize and maintain the initiative during future conflicts.
Pillar 2: industrial capacity and economic resilience
Technological superiority alone cannot guarantee military success. History consistently demonstrates that nations prevail not simply because they possess superior weapons, but because they can produce, sustain, modernize and replace those weapons throughout prolonged conflict. The second World War ultimately won as much in factories and shipyards as on battlefields. Likewise, the war in Ukraine has underscored that industrial endurance, logistical resilience and manufacturing capacity are decisive elements of military power.
China recognizes this reality. Its strategy of Military-Civil Fusion integrates commercial industry, academia, government and the military into a unified national enterprise capable of rapidly translating technological innovation into military capability. This approach enables China to mobilize industrial resources on a scale unmatched by most nations.
The U.S. possesses the world’s most innovative economy, but innovation alone is insufficient. Maintaining military superiority requires rebuilding the nation’s ability to manufacture advanced defense systems rapidly, and in large quantities (Much like we were able to do in World War 2) to sustain combat operations during prolonged conflicts, and continuously introduce new technologies into operational service. The defense industrial base must therefore become a strategic national asset rather than simply a collection of defense contractors.
Produce at scale and speed: Future conflicts will rapidly consume precision munitions, interceptors, unmanned systems and replacement equipment. The defense industrial base must be modernized through automation, digital engineering and additive manufacturing, relaxing requirements to enable use of commercial parts with greater availability and reduced lead times. and robust supply chains that enable rapid surge capacity and sustained high-volume production
Accelerating defense acquisition: Due to a period of reduced budgets and staffing the resulting acquisition challenges, acquisition had turned into a slow process with constant oversight and review by many organizations. For decades, the Department of Defense has pursued increasingly complex acquisition programs characterized by lengthy development timelines, extensive oversight and continuously expanding requirements
While this approach indeed produced quality systems, it took a huge amount of time, delaying operational capability, increasing costs and allowing adversaries to field competing technologies before U.S. systems become operational and time is no longer a luxury we have if we want to respond to the speed of change being demonstrated by China. As a result of these acquisition practices, America’s technological advantages have been slowed and couldn’t keep pace with commercial innovation or adversary modernization.
The Space Force has realized the acquisition model is no longer compatible with the pace of technological change. Current acquisition policies and processes are changing to meet the demands of the speed of innovation demonstrated by China. The Space Development Agency and now Space Systems Command are implementing approaches that are allowing for rapid fielding of good enough capabilities rather than waiting years for the perfect solution.
The Department of Defense must continue to support the Space Force in its acquisition streamlining approaches, reforming procurement authorities, reducing bureaucratic barriers and leveraging authorities provided through the National Defense Authorization Act to rapidly field both offensive and defensive capabilities. Speed has become a strategic advantage. The current changes in acquisition processes, including high TRL good enough systems getting rapidly to orbit, and on-going technology and system refresh
Future acquisition strategies must emphasize speed, adaptability, affordability and continuous modernization. Programs should establish stable operational requirements early in development, resist unnecessary requirements growth and employ modular open-system architectures that facilitate incremental upgrades rather than wholesale redesigns.
Congress has already provided valuable acquisition authorities — including Other Transaction Authorities (OTAs), Middle Tier Acquisition pathways, and Software Acquisition Pathways — that should be expanded and used more aggressively. These mechanisms enable rapid prototyping, experimentation and transition of emerging technologies into operational service while reducing unnecessary administrative burdens.
Equally important, acquisition success should no longer be measured solely by adherence to cost and schedule. Instead, programs should be evaluated according to the operational capability they deliver, the speed with which that capability reaches warfighters, and their ability to evolve as technology changes.
The objective is not merely acquiring better weapon systems — it is creating a defense acquisition enterprise that values speed of good enough capabilities today while being capable of continually adapting throughout strategic competition.Expand domestic manufacturing: America’s industrial strength has long underwritten its military power. However, decades of globalization and supply-chain optimization have increased dependence upon foreign sources for numerous strategic materials and manufactured components. Semiconductors, rare earth elements, pharmaceuticals, batteries, microelectronics and advanced materials have become essential to both economic prosperity and national defense.
The U.S> must rebuild domestic manufacturing capacity in sectors critical to national security.
The Department of Commerce should continue expanding semiconductor manufacturing while encouraging investment in advanced manufacturing technologies, robotics, additive manufacturing and microelectronics. The Department of Defense should increase investments through the Industrial Base Analysis and Sustainment Program while fully utilizing Defense Production Act authorities to address vulnerabilities within the defense industrial base.
Advanced manufacturing technologies, including digital engineering, robotics, automation, additive manufacturing and artificial intelligence-enabled production, offer significant opportunities to improve productivity while reducing production timelines. These technologies should be integrated throughout the defense industrial base to increase surge capacity during periods of crisis.
America cannot afford to depend upon potential adversaries for the materials and technologies that underpin national defense.
Rebuilding America’s defense industrial base is a strategic imperative. Investments through initiatives such as the CHIPS and Science Act strengthen domestic semiconductor production and reduce dependence on vulnerable foreign supply chains. Similar efforts should expand advanced manufacturing across shipbuilding, aerospace, precision munitions, microelectronics, and critical defense technologies.
Leveraging commercial innovation: One of America’s greatest strategic advantages is the extraordinary pace of innovation occurring within the commercial sector. Advances in artificial intelligence, cloud computing, software engineering, robotics, autonomous systems, launch services, telecommunications and microelectronics are increasingly driven by private industry rather than traditional defense contractors.
The Department of Defense must capitalize on the extraordinary pace of commercial innovation to maintain strategic advantage. Leveraging commercial technologies — such as AI, microelectronics and autonomous systems — offers lower costs, larger supplier bases and faster technology refresh cycles, making it the default approach for defense acquisitions whenever security and reliability permit.
To achieve this integration, the DoD has established targeted frameworks and initiatives to seamlessly bridge the gap between private enterprise and military application:
The Commercial Space Office at Space Systems Command leads the integration of the commercial space industry into military architecture, allowing the government to act as one of many customers and maintain space superiority by delivering more affordable warfighter capability at commercial speed.
Military-unique solutions will always remain necessary for certain mission areas. However, whenever security, reliability, and operational performance permit, leveraging commercial innovation should become the default approach rather than the exception.
Secure critical supply chains: Modern military systems depend upon complex global supply chains involving thousands of suppliers across numerous countries. While these supply chains have historically reduced costs, they have also created vulnerabilities that adversaries can exploit during periods of crisis or conflict.
The U.S. must diversify suppliers, expand domestic production where feasible and build resilient supply networks with trusted allies capable of supporting sustained military operations during crises.
The U.S. must identify and mitigate dependencies involving semiconductors, rare earth elements, strategic minerals, batteries, precision electronics and other defense-critical technologies.
Supply chain resilience requires more than increasing domestic production. It also requires strengthening partnerships with trusted allies capable of providing reciprocal manufacturing capacity during emergencies.
The Department of State should expand industrial cooperation with Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, Australia, Canada, the United Kingdom and NATO allies to establish geographically distributed manufacturing networks capable of sustaining military operations during prolonged conflict.
Diversified supply chains complicate adversary planning while increasing the resilience of the broader allied industrial base.
Measuring success by combat capability: For too long, defense acquisition has emphasized managing programs rather than delivering combat capability. Defense investment should be measured by deployable combat power rather than budget authority alone. While highly sophisticated platforms remain important, future deterrence will increasingly depend upon systems that are affordable, scalable, maintainable and capable of being produced in operationally meaningful quantities. The ability to field thousands of capable systems often provides greater strategic advantages than possessing a handful of exquisite platforms.
Future investment decisions should prioritize operational effectiveness, production scalability, lifecycle affordability and the ability to generate sustained combat power during wartime.
Combatant commanders should play a larger role in establishing operational priorities, ensuring that acquisition decisions remain aligned with real-world military requirements rather than institutional preferences. CAPE should evaluate programs not only according to cost and schedule but also according to their contribution to deterrence, resilience, and operational effectiveness.
The ultimate measure of success is not the sophistication of an individual weapon system — it is the military capability generated by the force as a whole.
Strengthening allied industrial capacity: America’s alliances remain one of its greatest strategic advantages. Collectively, allied nations possess industrial capacity, technological expertise, financial resources and manufacturing capabilities that significantly exceed those of any potential adversary.
The U.S. should deepen industrial integration with trusted partners through cooperative development, expanding co-production, reciprocal maintenance agreements, standardized components, shared logistics, coordinating research and development and building redundant manufacturing capacity across allied nations. A resilient, interconnected industrial network enhances collective deterrence while reducing vulnerabilities to economic coercion and supply disruptions.
Initiatives such as AUKUS demonstrate the strategic value of integrating allied industrial capabilities rather than treating defense production as a purely national endeavor.
Distributed manufacturing across allied nations increases resilience, complicates adversary targeting, and expands production surge during periods of conflict.
The objective should be a truly integrated allied defense industrial base capable of sustaining long-term strategic competition.
A new approach to victory
Victory cannot be achieved by fighting the way we have in previous conflicts. It will be determined by which nation can innovate faster, produce at a greater scale, integrate new technologies more rapidly and sustain military power over time. Technological superiority and industrial capacity are not competing priorities — they are mutually reinforcing foundations of national power. Together, these capabilities provide the credible deterrence necessary to preserve stability, prevent conflict and secure American interests in an increasingly contested world
The U.S. retains extraordinary advantages in its innovation ecosystem, robust alliance network, world-class universities, entrepreneurial culture, military professionalism and free-market economy provide a foundation for long-term success. These strengths, however, cannot be taken for granted. They must be reinforced through deliberate national policies that accelerate technological innovation, revitalize industrial capacity, modernize defense acquisition and strengthen international partnerships.
Central to this effort is recognizing that future military superiority will depend upon resilience rather than exquisite capability alone. Resilient space architectures, layered missile defense, cyber superiority, artificial intelligence, autonomous systems and rapidly refreshable military capabilities must replace legacy acquisition models built around a limited number of expensive platforms expected to remain operational for decades. Success will belong to the nation that adapts faster than its competitors. Success will depend upon building a force that adapts faster than its adversaries, fields new capabilities continuously and integrates commercial innovation into military operations at the speed of technological change.
Deterrence remains the ultimate objective. By fielding credible military capability, sustaining technological leadership and demonstrating the industrial capacity to prevail in prolonged competition, the U.S. reduces the likelihood that conflict will occur. Strong alliances, integrated defense architectures and a revitalized industrial base reinforce that deterrence by convincing potential adversaries that aggression cannot achieve their political objectives.
History consistently favors nations that recognize changes in the character of warfare before their competitors. The U.S. has done so before, and it must do so again. By restoring technological leadership, revitalizing the defense industrial base, strengthening alliances and sustaining credible deterrence, the Nation can preserve peace through strength and ensure that future generations inherit a secure and stable international order.
America has met similar challenges before. By embracing innovation, reforming acquisition, rebuilding industrial strength, and fully integrating the capabilities of government, industry, academia, and allied nations, the United States can preserve its technological edge, maintain military superiority, and secure a stable international order. Success in the strategic competition with China will not come from preparing to fight the last war more efficiently — it will come from building a force capable of continuously adapting to the next one.
Today, the U.S. stands at an inflection point. The decisions made during this decade will shape the balance of power for generations.
Retired Maj. Gen. Thomas “Tav” Taverney is chairman of the Schriever Chapter of the Air and Space Force Association and was Air Force Space Command vice commander prior to his 2006 retirement after 38 years of service.
SpaceNews is committed to publishing our community’s diverse perspectives. Whether you’re an academic, executive, engineer or even just a concerned citizen of the cosmos, send your arguments and viewpoints to opinion (at) spacenews.com to be considered for publication online or in our next magazine. If you have something to submit, read some of our recent opinion articles and our submission guidelines to get a sense of what we’re looking for. The perspectives shared in these opinion articles are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent their employers or professional affiliations.