It takes a minimum of four pieces in a certain pattern to capture a single enemy piece. In go, there is only one type of piece, the advantage does not rest in a single piece, but in the pattern and interlinking of multiple pieces to create ‘positions of advantage’ the initial concept of the game seems simplistic, but becomes much more complex with a multitude of options that develop as the game is played. Go is contrary to chess in many respects. The game looks imposing and complicated at first, but over time, the mastery becomes a sequence of moves that adds simplicity with experience.5 However, in Eastern cultures the strategy game of choice is go. With chess, each piece has its own function that is unique to the piece, and nothing else can replicate it besides another piece of the same type. The expectation is that the opponent must have an equivalent piece to be a peer, lacking one is a disadvantage, and removing one provides an advantage.

In chess, there are different types of pieces, and the power or influence rests in the piece.

Chess aptly and succinctly encapsulates the Western way of thought. The incomprehensible Eastern mind was the Western view of the Eastern thought process for years.4 However, a simple analogy grounded in each culture’s perspective on entertainment may add clarity chess for the west and go for the east. Currently the United States, with its Western way of thought, is ill prepared for the multi-faceted advance of China and its Eastern way of thought. The United States must weaponize the space domain as a matter of self-defense. China has been posturing to weaponize the revision of Space Law to limit the spectrum of operations the United States can execute in the Space Domain. 3 In the last few years, several changes to the space domain have evolved that are necessitating revising Space Law.

The basis of the majority of modern Space Law is in a document that is over a half a century old.1 According to a newer document that makes up Space Law, the launching nation is responsible for any damage from whatever objects launched into space to include terrestrial effects on re-entry.2 The development of Space Law has refined slowly over time by the United Nations, but with heavy influence by those nations with the preponderance of space assets and capabilities. All nations with operations in space follow the current Space Law. Specifically, how they affect the space domain. This strategy effects how the nations respond regarding the space domain and their interactions with other nations. The easiest conceptual frame to understand the two nations is in their recreational games involving strategy. The top two current space powers, the United States and China, have very different cultural perspectives and strategy, and require a frame for understanding. Each nation has a very different strategic approach to space. Nicholas Parsai The United States has a moral obligation to weaponize space to protect its interests and provide freedom of exploration and operations in the space domain. Weaponizing Space for the Future of Humanity by Major A.

Rogue courier soace controls