INTERNATIONAL SPACE SECURITY OF THE THIRD DECADE OF THE TWENTY-FIRST CENTURY (SELECTED ASPECTS)

The beginning of the 21st century saw many complex phenomena, events and processes with diverse backgrounds shaping the new order related to international security after the breakdown of the bipolar division of the world. Despite the ongoing euphoria, the time of transition has been a string of military and non-military conflicts, whose participants have fought for dominance in the international security environment and for leadership in the global security space. The three main actors: The United States, China and Russia are pursuing their partisan goal, which is do-minion in the global security space. The U.S. policy, which is aimed at confrontation, both with Russia and China is noteworthy. This conflict is present in the political, economic, military and scientific-technical spheres, as in the cases of China, which is a leader in access to artificial intelligence. The world is watching the Rus-sia-Ukraine armed conflict. Each side has opponents and supporters. The conflict is affecting international political, economic and military relations. This complex and unpredictable situation is accompanied by a global information war, with participants pointing to their particular political goals. The global security space is evolving, but will politicians be able to make rational decisions so as not to cross the tipping point?


Introduction
Security is a fundamental value for every human being.With the ongoing changes on a global scale, it is threatened at every level as a result of the deliberate actions of man and natural forces.Decisions of politicians which are most often aimed at the destruction of the enemy are particularly dangerous.They are the ones who are reinforced by knowledge, access to modern techniques and information technology, financial resources, having authority over the armed forces, special services, law enforcement and justice agencies, as well as other instruments that allow them to shape the global security space.The world is dominated by information warfare, which is present in all spheres of state and non-state actors, including those that violate existing international and national laws.It is appreciated by the leaders of states whose domestic and, above all, foreign policies are offensive in nature, where information is not only a resource but a means of destruction, equal to nuclear weapons.The study addresses issues in the global security space, taking into account the states striving to maintain the position of a global power, or aspiring to this role.

Contemporary threats
The world is dominated by the politics of confrontation, involving not only states with strong potentials primarily military (nuclear triad), supported by economic and scientific activities but also dependent states as executors of their decisions.These decisions do not always coincide with the national interest of the state which is its security.Today's international security environment, and thus that of individual states, is constantly evolving.The processes taking place are asymmetric, turbulent and unpredictable, which directly affects the level of global security, including threats.
In the face of many threats, despite the efforts of state and non-state entities, the international community is helpless to many of them.International terrorism and organized crime, (including computer crime), which very often intermingle, cyber-terrorism -threats of this nature are very often used by states in the process of implementing foreign and domestic policy; ups -these are the dominant elements in modern global communications; medical experiments and the drive to take control of the human mind, etc., epidemics and pandemics: global warming and its effects; space and the depleted satellites there (space junk: defunct satellites, lost hardware, rocket members, the effects of testing anti-satellite weapons), the fall of comets or asteroids to Earth, magnetic storms that disrupt artificial satellites, etc., are multifaceted, sometimes cumulative known threats that challenge the international community.
Their substrate, as well as their occurrence, scale and dynamics vary region to region, country to country.Many of them are supported by planned (targeted) information operations, where, in addition to information acquisition, information disruption deserves special attention.The greatest threats to an individual, a social group, a nation, a state, or the international environment are the disruption of personal and technical information spaces.It is the human being situated in these spaces that is always exposed to information aggression, which always accompanies human action, and defence is extremely difficult and sometimes impossible.That is why it is so important to know its nature, scope and effects1 .
The above threats accompany the ongoing globalization, which is subordinated to global capital, which dictates the conditions for the development of individual countries, regions.The ongoing processes include a world of slaves, as not only individual people, but entire countries have become slaves of the financial system 2 .This global dependence, among other things, is putting certain conditions for the operation, subordination and exercise of effective control of individuals, nations, states, regions, sub-regions and the entire world by a few.
Of particular note, however, are the risks associated with epidemics and pandemics.Such an example is the COVID-19 coronavirus, which in 2019 ignited a global biological conflict.It undermined the security of the international environment and individual countries, revealing lack of preparedness of authorized actors to effectively respond to the crisis threat.The time of the pandemic is a global crisis in the non-military sphere, which has revealed increased political, technical, military and, above all, economic rivalry, which is evident in the pharmaceutical business (vaccine production).Countries such as the US, China and Russia view the invention and sale of the COVID-19 vaccine as a potential source of political and economic and even military benefits.It is worth bearing in mind that the ongoing pandemic is accompanied by a flood of false and misleading information, attempts by state (and non-state) actors to influence, among other things, debates within the European Union.In addition, preying on people's fears and exerting influence on rapidly changing situations related to coronavirus is evident.The disinformation being carried out includes misleading objects of information activity about taking care of health, dangerous fictions based on conspiracy theories, and deceiving consumers pose a health risk to the international community3 .
In the case of the coronavirus pandemic, the crisis has a health dimension that threatens the life and health of an unspecified number of the population.Lack of knowledge of its source (manipulation and accusations), disregard by authorities of many countries of information about the scale and dynamics of the spread, and its aggressive nature (disregard of intelligence reports), apparent lack of preparation of health services to minimize the biological attack, gaps in the supply of non-violent stockpiles (medical sector), lack of procedures in case of a crisis, ministries unprepared to deal with a pandemic, lack of a sound information policy, lack of a vaccine (unspecified prospect), lack of education in the population and so on and so forth.It gave rise to questions, such as: are the armed forces prepared for a coronavirus emergency?Do they have the knowledge, equipment and developed procedures?The course of the pandemic and the varying involvement of the armed forces by individual states, and above all the lack of access to information, may mean that, like the states, the armed forces are also surprised and unprepared to deal with this type of threat.
In addition, the coronavirus pandemic proved that COVID-19 signifies: unlimited range, multiple attack objects; no boundaries: spatial, geographic, political, ad hoc; it is ubiquitous; poorly defined countermeasure undertakings; no quick fixes, etc.It is also (and perhaps above all): threat of loss of life, fear, survival, challenge, and arrogance.The coronavirus can be treated in terms of an offensive weapon, and then it will mean: power, money, politics, the ability to parley control over a person and his environment.
The ongoing pandemic is a paralysis visible in the administration, entities competent in the sphere of state security and defence, the state and private economic sector, education, culture, tourism, justice, supply, communications, transportation, etc. lack of knowledge should be borne in mind, especially among decision-makers.Particularly dangerous is the arrogance of the authorities, who use the pandemic for their partisan political interests, do not respect human rights, do not comply with exist-ing laws, use the apparatus of oppression against citizens in the absence of respect for human rights (overstepping powers at the will of those in power).The coronavirus has breached existing national and international security systems on a global scale.It is likely that societies will have to operate under a permanent threat, the scale and dynamics of which cannot be determined.Most likely, such a limit will be a vaccine that will allow its inhibition but the duration of research may result in its subsequent mutations.
It is worth bearing in mind that coronavirus has made all the problems from before the pandemic and concerning the security of the modern world secondary.Conflicts in Syria, Ukraine, the Middle East; nuclear programs of North Korea, Iran; relations between the United States and Russia, India and Kashmir, the United States and China, the United States and the European Union, the United States and NATO, Israel and Palestine, Turkey and the Kurds, Turkey and NATO, conflicts in Africa, etc.Therefore, the question can be posed, how COVID-19 pandemic will influence the participants of international relations, their foreign policy on security in the broadest sense?Certainly, the conditions will be different, we will perceive our reality differently, however, politicians faced with these complex and difficult conditions should be guided by reason and make rational decisions.Undoubtedly, it will be very difficult.The effects of the pandemic are felt by the economies of individual countries, the global financial system, communications, and above all human relations, which are very tense, where nationalist, racist movements are making themselves known.

New dimension of security
The evolving international security environment is also changing approaches to the emerging global order.Ongoing and fuelled armed conflicts with diverse backgrounds are being initiated and exploited by entities pretending to be global or regional powers.Also, private sector actors interested in exercising control over, among other things, natural (energy) resources are supporting states in their offensive operations not only on the political but financial-economic and even military level.
A particular entity shaping modern international relations is the United States, NATO, the European Union, imposing its will on the rest of the state and private sector 4 .Particularly noteworthy is the US presi-dential election (2020), a continuation of outgoing President Trump's foreign policy.Joe Biden visited the State Department on February 4, 2021, where he outlined the new administration's most important foreign policy.He stressed that "international alliances are the most valuable asset of the United States, especially at a time when the entire world faces challenges never before seen.[...] for dealing with the coronavirus pandemic, international cooperation is more important than ever.But the challenges of climate change and the ever-increasing influx of migrants can also only be met by joint forces" 5 .
Particularly noteworthy, however, was the statement that "the U.S. must regain the credibility and moral authority for which it was known.He acknowledged that it would take some time to repair the massive damage done by his predecessor, but that would be (our) goal.He announced the introduction of concrete measures that will give a new face to American foreign policy" 6 .
At the same time, the directions of US foreign policy are indicated, which include: 1) completely withholding support for the Saudi Arabia-led military coalition involved in the civil war in Yemen.This means ending all US military operations in Yemen, including arms deliveries, 2) regarding Germany, he announced that he would examine Donald Trump's plans to withdraw 12,000 US troops from there.The plan has been frozen, and the US defence secretary is expected to first conduct a global review of the state of US forces around the world, 3) the principle of the power of moral leadership will apply in foreign policy, where moral and humanitarian aspects are to play a key role, 4) increase the annual limit of refugees and migrants accepted annually by the US to 125,000 7 .President Joe Biden, "pointed to the two biggest challenges facing the United States; Russia and China, he pointed to as the biggest challenge to American foreign policy.He said that the soft, conciliatory approach toward Russia is coming to an end.Russia is a country that wants to destroy our (American) democracy, and China, with its great economic ambitions, is a threat to the United States.He pointed out that the United States must act decisively toward these countries but through diplomatic means" 8 .This means that he will continue the US National 5 Joe Biden: "America returns, diplomacy returns", Deutsche Welle, https://www.dw.com, 05.02.2021 (16.02.2023).
Security Strategy adopted by the Trump administration, points directly to Russia and China as those revisionist powers that pose a direct threat to the United States.Joe Biden has pointed out that there is too great a challenge for the US, on its own it will not win this confrontation, so it needs the support of allies.As far as China is concerned, this support is to be received from Pacific Rim countries such as Australia, India, Japan, South Korea.Attention has been drawn to China's growing power in the East China Sea and South China Sea basins, as well as the threat from North Korea.He has warned that China's struggle to become a global power will be the biggest threat to U.S. security.According to the Intelligence Report, called the 2021 Risk Assessment, China will continue to fight to strengthen its global position and converge to eliminate US influence, as well as conflate America with its partners and allies9 .The indicated directions of U.S. foreign policy and the decisions made pose a serious threat not only to regional security but also to global security.It is worth bearing in mind that the United States, Russia and China are countries that are permanent members of the UN Security Council as well as holders of the nuclear triad, dominant participants in the ongoing arms race (e.g.access to electromagnetic, laser, hypersonic boron), actively participating in space exploration, shaping security not only regionally but also globally.It should be borne in mind that they are also active participants in the ongoing global information conflict.The ongoing struggle in the political sphere, supported by information operations involving foreign ministries and secret services, is an increase in threats whose scale, scope and prospect of expansion is real 10 .
The meeting of the presidents of Russia and the United States (June 2021), could fundamentally change the foreign policy directions created by the indicated participants in the negative cooperation.Significant changes may have followed the NATO summit held in June 2021, in Brussels.At the Alliance's summit, the United States, in this new reality and taking into account the meeting between the presidents of Russia and the United States, undoubtedly worked out its position, while indicating tasks for NATO and the member states (this is to be assumed).
Considering that the North Atlantic Alliance participates in humanitarian missions outside its area of responsibility and under US leadership, it may be involved in the implementation of US foreign policy, in other geographic regions where it has vital interests.The question is, will all NATO member states unanimously support the US and engage politically and militarily?The identification by the US side of a forged adversary Russia, China, Iran may result in the rapprochement of these countries at the political, economic, scientific-technical and military levels to counteroffensive actions by the US and its allies.
This complex situation in the international security environment continues to be accompanied by diplomatic warfare.For example, because on January 23, 2021, employees of the Polish and Swedish consulates in St. Petersburg and the German embassy in Moscow took part in illegal actions in defence of Russian oppositionist Alexei Navalny, they were declared undesirable and had to leave Russian territory (Russia's point of view) 11 .In turn, in a gesture of solidarity with the Czech Republic, Romania expelled (26.04.2012) one Russian diplomat -a deputy military attaché -for his activities contrary to the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations.Russia, in turn, stated that an employee of the military attaché at the Italian embassy in Moscow was declared an undesirable person on the Russian territory.It should be noted that "in March 2021, they expelled two Russian diplomats.The Italian service reported that a captain of the Italian navy handed over to them, for money, secret documents containing state security information" 12 .
In an ongoing war of nerves, "the president of the Russian Federation has signed an order summoning all reservists in the Russian army to military training.His order took effect on April 26, 2021.According to international observers, such a move by the Kremlin could be related to the situation on the frontline in the Donbass, where both sides are preparing for an escalation of the conflict.The Russian Armed Forces and government security agencies took part in the exercises.The locations of the exercises were not known" 13 .
Another conflict concerns a number of difficulties concerning the internal cohesion of the North Atlantic Alliance."One of the three most important problems of this kind -in addition to the risks to the transatlantic relationship provoked by former President Donald Trump and the disintegration processes intensifying in the European Union (but affecting NATO) -was the Turkish crisis, which could seriously affect the future of the Alliance.Surprising the allies with the Turkish invasion against the Kurds in Syria, the purchase of Russian anti-missile systems (S -400), and the consequent suspension of the sale of aircraft -35, blackmail by blocking the update of plans, or the emerging threats regarding the presence of a NATO/US nuclear base on Turkish territory are the growing concerns of this"14 .Relations between the U.S. and Turkey, are increasingly tense, the reason being, among other things, President Biden's recognition of the Armenian massacre as genocide (1915 -1917), which was met with a harsh response from the Turkish government.The Armenian Genocide has been recognized by 30 countries around the world, including Poland.Turkey's opposition to the admission of Sweden and Finland into NATO structures should also be kept in mind 15 .
Accordingly, many specialists believe that: 1) the Turkish crisis appears to be one of the very important factors shaping the future Euro-Atlantic security environment.It has already crossed a critical point, and it will be difficult to defuse it enough to fully return to Turkey's former relations with the West, including relations within NATO, 2) it seems that the uncomfortable option of Turkey as an unruly and uncertain ally will continue for a long time to come, with the highly likely possibility of a tendency to treat it as an unwanted ally, 3) it cannot be ruled out that Turkey itself will decide to suspend its participation in NATO's military structures.In the long run, Turkey's complete exit from NATO may be more likely than its return to the status of a fully credible member of the Alliance.The role of a regional power balancing actor may be attractive for Turkey (using for its own purposes), the play of interests of other powers on the geostrategically important borderland of the Euro-Atlantic and Asian areas 16 .It should be assumed that the scenario of the European and global security area will be built by the leaders of the United States and the Russian Federation.This landmark moment is undoubtedly their meeting held on June 16, 2021, as well as the NATO summit.It can be assumed that under these complex and asymmetric conditions, China, Russia and the US are preparing their economic and military potentials.In the scenarios being built, it is also assumed that Alliance member states will participate in the Euro-Atlantic security system.Due to the different political-military goals of NATO member states, in the absence of solidarity -the internal situation is extremely difficult.In the absence of rational decisions and actions, the situation could lead to a political and military stalemate, threatening international security.The major players in the global security environment should also be considered.
In an ongoing information conflict directly affecting global security, a meeting of representatives of 9 Central and Eastern European countries took place in Bucharest on May 10, 2021: Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Romania and Slovakiawhich are the so-called eastern flank of both the North Atlantic Alliance and the European Union.The meeting was also attended by US President Joe Biden and NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg.
According to the meeting participants, "among the threats and challenges facing the Alliance today, the below were mentioned: 1) aggressive actions and increased military capabilities in NATO's immediate vicinity, including the recent escalation in the Black Sea, along the border with Ukraine and illegally annexed Crimea, as well as aggressive hybrid actions, 2) condemned Russia's acts of sabotage on Alliance territory, the 2014 munitions explosions in the Czech town of Vrbietice, which constituted a serious violation of international law, 3) expressed concern over reports of similar events on Bulgarian territory, which are currently being investigated by Sofia, 4) terrorism was also mentioned.Hybrid warfare, disinformation and lies, indicated are aimed at slinging distrust in our societies to ultimately undermine, the most important foundations of our democracies and weaken the unity of the societies"17 ."At the same time, they stressed that while building its deterrence and defence capabilities, NATO remains open to dialogue, and constructive relations with Russia, when Russia's actions make this possible (…) The B-9 leaders said they remain committed to security and stability in the Western Balkans, and expressed support for the independence, sovereignty and territorial integrity of Georgia, Ukraine and Moldova within their internationally recognized borders" 18 .
The meeting of the countries of Group B-9 may have an impact on the unity of the North Atlantic Alliance.One may get the impression that the meeting was exclusively about the security of the Central and Eastern European countries (their interests), especially since they stood on the opposite side of the barricade in the recent past, being members of the Warsaw Pact.This raises a question of crucial importance for the unity and effectiveness of the Alliance; at the summit, were declarations made on behalf of all NATO member states?Consequently, what decisions will be made by the other Alliance member states?What will be the role of the United States in this situation?It is worth bearing in mind that the combined economic-defence potential of the countries indicated, in the face of the potential of the hatched adversary (Russia), does not present much combat value.Any armed conflict: conventional, with nuclear weapons or in virtual space will end in their defeat.It should be assumed that the other European NATO member states, are not interested in confrontation (including military confrontation) with the Russian Federation.The countries of Group B-9 can be seen as opposition to the other member states, while supporting and engaging in the implementation of US foreign policy.Threatened unity, solidarity and leaning towards an alliance with the United States could not only damage internal cohesion but also the security level of the Euro-Atlantic security system, as well as other geographic regions.The endorsement of U.S. policy toward China is a dangerous signal.Such involvement could damage the existing economic relations between the European Union and China.Therefore, the above developments could lead to open conflict on the political, economic and scientific levels between Europe, China and the Russian Federation.The state that will benefit from the ongoing conflict supported by information operations may be the United States but also the politicaleconomic-military rapprochement between China and Russia.Such a scenario is possible, while shaping the level of internal relations between the countries, as well as their security, which is already at risk.
Global diplomatic warfare, supported by information operations of foreign ministries and their foreign representations (diplomatic and consular missions), offensive activities of special services conducted in the personal and technical information space, electronic and traditional media.The primary tool of state authorities' contacts in international and domestic relations is the media, whose importance is increasingly significant.This allows to carry out propaganda, manipulation, to disintegrate the activities of states of interest and international organizations, touching virtually all the functions carried out concerning the security of individual states and the international environment.It is worth bearing in mind that the third decade of the 21st century is dominated by the confrontation of the United States with the Russian Federation, as well as with China.The plane of this confrontation is the political sphere supported by information operations.
The U.S. and Russia -participants in negative cooperation, where information dominates mutual contacts -are activating their activities at the diplomatic level.On April 23, 2021, President Putin signed Decree No. 243 "on the Application of Measures of Influence (Counteraction) to Unfriendly Actions of Foreign States."It concerns Russia's response to "unfriendly actions of other countries," which restricts the ability of embassies, consulates of such countries to employ Russian citizens.In turn, on May 9, 2021, a list of countries unfriendly to Russia was published.It includes: United States, Poland, Czech Republic, Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia, United Kingdom, Canada, Ukraine, Australia 19 .
Achieving strategic goals by individual states, or international organizations is a constant struggle to gain an information advantage over the opponent.In an ongoing negative cooperation, the first meeting between US Secretary of State Anton Blinken and Russian diplomatic chief Sergey Lavrov took place in Reykjavik on May 19, 2021.The occasion was the participation of the two diplomats in an Arctic Council meeting at the level of foreign ministers."In the communiqués issued after the meeting both sides stressed their readiness and willingness to cooperate in areas where their interests converge -strategic arms control, curbing the nuclear programs of North Korea and Iran, and stabilizing Afghanistan"20 .
The meeting of foreign ministry representatives did not bring significant changes in mutual relations, which are the worst since the Cold War.However, the parties are interested in lowering tensions, stabilizing and normalizing mutual relations.It should be noted that the meeting also touched on a key event concerning not only current U.S. -Russian relations but the meeting between the presidents of Russia and the United States planned for June 2021.The summit-meeting between Presidents Putin and Biden took place on June 16, 2021 in Geneva, during Joe Biden's trip to Europe, in connection with the NATO summit in Brussels, which was scheduled for June 14, 2021.Joe Biden attended summits of the G7, NATO, the European Union.The trip was initiated from the United Kingdom."As experts stressed, the main message the US president came to Europe with was to move away from the isolationist policies of his predecessor, Donald Trump, and to reassert his commitment to international alliances, as well as to signal a fresh start in relations with Russia.Biden sought to spice up relations with European allies damaged by Trump's decisions on trade tariffs with the EU and his with-drawal from international agreements such as the Paris climate accord, the JCPoA nuclear deal with Iran, and organizations like the WHO"21 .Ahead of the G7 summit, the U.S. president met with British Prime Minister Boris Johnson, which is seen as an opportunity to renew the special relationship between the two countries following Britain's withdrawal from the European Union."The NATO summit covered: China, Nord Stream 2, member states' defence spending, as well as Russia's activities, China's growing power, cyber security and climate change.The most difficult part of the trip was the meeting with the Russian president.President Joe Biden assured that he was not looking for conflict with Russia.He stressed that Washington wishes stable and predictable relations with Moscow, nevertheless the US will respond strongly if Russia continues to take aggressive actions"22 .
The impact of President Joe Biden's first trip, will be evident in US foreign policy, as well as in the North Atlantic Alliance Strategy in effect until 2030.All the more so because we do not know the details of the conversation between the US and Russian presidents.For the copper-bearded community and the global security space, this is a great unknown.
The global security space with an indication of the European one has changed with the outbreak of the Russia-Ukraine armed conflict (February 2022).The interests of the United States and China in the South China Sea should also be kept in mind."The issue has many dimensions in the process.It is another instalment of the clash between a sea power and a land power, between an open society and an autocratic system, between an old power and a new contender for the role of world hegemon"23 .This affects the current as well as the future security space, the shape of which no one can predict.Only the wisdom of politicians, with rational decisions devoid of hatred can control the ongoing armed conflict.
warfare.Its participants have only partisan interests in mind and they are making preparations for confrontation on various levels and with complex means of physical destruction.This is particularly evident in normative documents that are translated into political decisions.Pointing at adversaries, with their own arrogance in international relations, is very dangerous.More than thirty-three years of systemic change, the world faces serious challenges, where threats dominate.The flashpoints are not only the Russia-Ukraine armed conflict but also the interests of China and the US in the South China Sea basin, as well as ongoing conflicts of varying background and intensity in other areas of the world.The world's attention is drawn to the aforementioned Russia-Ukraine conflict, which will undoubtedly determine the future formula of global security and relations between states.