The establishment of the United States’ Space Force in 2019 certainly turned heads, sparking vibrant conversations not just about state defense agendas but the names of military branches in general. Following a period of lethargy, America’s space program underwent a resurgence, with private corporations like SpaceX taking the lead in exploring the final frontier. It was amidst this renaissance that, suggesting a gesture of claiming credit for popular concepts, President Donald Trump officially formed the Space Force.
Many found the naming of Spaces Force to be somewhat uninspired, and given its embryonic state, there are calls for reconsideration. Perhaps it suffers by comparison to the U.S. Space Command, a name laced with more gravitas and the convenience of an impressive acronym – SPACECOM. An earlier entity by the same name was retired in 2002, only to be brought back into existence in 2019 as a precursor to the Space Force. Interestingly, this awkward naming convention found its way into popular culture, with Hollywood seizing the opportunity for satire by producing a comedy series titled “Space Force”.
The Space Force’s naming decisions did not stop at the branch itself. They proceeded to christen its personnel as “Guardians”, a choice made after a yearlong process involving space professionals and the general public. Critics argue that the designation falls short of striking the desired note of sternness and seriousness associated with military entities.
Ironically, the Space Force has not as yet fully embarked on its mission, with the first “Guardian” scheduled to venture into space only later this summer. Perhaps it is not too late to reconsider the nomenclature associated with it. Suggestions like “Zero-Gravity Marines” and “War Astronauts” have been floated, implying we can certainly do better.
The usage of “Air Force” in naming the respective military arm seems well accepted owing to its longevity, but does this then set a de facto standard of naming military branches after the medium their vehicles traverse through? If so, one could question whether we should rename the Army as “Ground Force” and the Navy as “Sea Force”? Can new naming conventions better reflect the roles and missions of these branches, beyond the physicality of their operations?
In conclusion, while the work of the Space Force is of utmost importance, the naming of military branches should echo the ethos of their mission and character.