The U.S. Space Force is accelerating the deployment of counterspace weapons under a new policy aimed at reasserting and ensuring American dominance over China and Russia in any potential orbital conflict. The force is deploying three electronic satellite jammers and racing to match the more advanced space forces of Moscow and Beijing, which include arsenals of anti-satellite weapons.

Space Force Gen. B. Chance Saltzman, chief of space operations, says the goal for the U.S. military is to dominate in space. “And the Space Force was created to do just that,” Gen. Saltzman told National Security Correspondent Bill Gertz this week. “The service has and will continue to invest in a full range of counterspace capabilities to deter conflict in space and to win decisively if called upon.”

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, meanwhile, said in a speech to workers at the space company Blue Origin last week that the $25 billion being spent on the Golden Dome national missile and drone defense system would include the development of advanced satellite sensors to be paired with space-based interceptors capable of neutralizing “any ballistic missiles, any hypersonic weapon, any drone long before it threatens our homeland.” That is “how we will establish total orbital supremacy,” he said.

U.S. Navy efforts to deploy large numbers of drone weapons advanced this week with the disclosure of a coming autonomous warship and a new undersea drone. Both are likely to become part of what the commander of the U.S. Indo-Pacific Command, Adm. Samuel J. Paparo Jr., has called a “hellscape” strategy to deter China.

Blue Water Autonomy, a Boston-based shipbuilding startup, announced the first autonomous warship — the 190-foot Liberty drone ship with a range of more than 10,000 nautical miles — that the company says will provide advanced warfare capabilities for the Navy later this year.

Separately, defense contractor Lockheed Martin this week disclosed its development of the Lamprey, a new class of smart, stealthy, multi-mission autonomous undersea drone. The vessel, which can be hitched to submarines or warships, is capable of launching drone aircraft from the surface and is described by the company as a “do-it-all” submersible, “built to disrupt and deny enemy forces at sea.”

The Pentagon’s Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering — an outfit tasked with identifying new technologies — lacks the authority to actually direct investments, leaving critical capabilities to counter China and Russia underfunded even as warfighters request them, according to a government watchdog report.

Mr. Seward offers a deep dive on how the report by the Government Accountability Office has caused unease among U.S. lawmakers overseeing Department of Defense spending, which is set to approach $840 billion in 2026.

The problem, according to the watchdog report, is that each service is pursuing technologies that don’t always align with each other or a broader defense strategy, duplicating research investments and letting already developed technologies languish as forever prototypes.

Even if Artemis II performs flawlessly whenever it launches, it “will not change this central fact: The current government-built launch architecture is not designed for high cadence, rapid reuse or long-term affordability,” writes Stephen J. Yates, a senior research fellow at The Heritage Foundation.

“Those attributes are what determine whether we can maintain leadership rather than merely visit the moon intermittently,” Mr. Yates writes in an op-ed for The Washington Times. “The Space Launch System was conceived in a different strategic era, built around expendable components and slow production timelines.

“After more than 13 years of development and more than $64 billion in expenditures, it has flown once. Artemis II will be only the second time,” he writes. “Each launch carries a multibillion-dollar price tag and requires years of preparation. That model cannot support sustained presence, rapid iteration or strategic resilience in a competitive environment.”

• Feb. 12 — The State of American Energy Dominance, Foundation for Defense of Democracies

• Feb. 13 — A Strategic Response to Sino-Russian Cooperation: Perspectives from Europe and the Indo-Pacific, Hudson Institute

• Feb. 13 — Golden Dome One Year In, Center for Strategic and International Studies

• Feb. 13-15 — Munich Security Conference 2026

• Feb. 17 — Defense Tech Leadership Summit

• Feb. 17 — Turkey’s Evolving Role in a New Global Geopolitical and Security Order, Atlantic Council

• Feb. 18 — Post-Maduro Venezuela, Alexander Hamilton Society

• Feb. 23-25 — Warfare Symposium, Air & Space Forces Association