Everett Dolman

Dolman's signature framework (Dolman 2002 article; book-length, Routledge 2005, DOI 10.4324/9780203016640). Astropolitik is the deliberate application of *Realpolitik* and classical geopolitics to outer space: the state that controls the most strategically valuable orbital terrain can dominate the commercial and military use of space, and through it terrestrial affairs. It is explicitly normative and nationalist: Dolman argues the United States should "seize" control of LEO, declare a custodianship, and set the rules of the regime while it can. This is the most-cited and most-contested element (the critique is Anti-Astropolitik, MacDonald 2007, DOI 10.1177/0309132507081492, 108 citations).

Dolman divides near-Earth space into four strategically distinct regions: (i) Terra (Earth surface to lowest orbit), (ii) Earth Space (LEO out to GEO, the militarily and commercially decisive band), (iii) Lunar Space (GEO to the Moon, including the Lagrange points), and (iv) Solar/Deep Space. The key strategic insight is that orbits are *terrain* with chokepoints, lines of communication, and high ground, not an undifferentiated void. This anti-uniformity claim is what makes "control" meaningful (contrast Klinke 2024 on the German geopolitical roots; Ćirković & Costa-Leite 2025 on its methodological status).

Borrowing from Mahan's sea-power theory and Corbett's maritime strategy, Dolman identifies specific orbits and transfer trajectories (LEO insertion bands, the GEO belt, Hohmann transfer lanes, Lagrange points, low-lunar orbits) as chokepoints whose control confers disproportionate strategic leverage, the orbital analogue of straits and canals. Whoever holds the chokepoints holds the commons (the maritime-school lineage is explicit in Cameron 2022, DOI 10.1080/14777622.2022.2145191).

Because reaching orbit requires escaping most of Earth's gravity well, LEO is the energetically decisive position: from LEO one can deny, degrade, or dominate access to all higher orbits and to Earth itself. Dolman treats LEO control as the modern strategic high ground, the position from which space power is projected both upward (cislunar) and downward (terrestrial).

Dolman does not merely describe; he prescribes a sequencing: establish presence, declare a regime, set property and traffic rules, and use first-mover advantage to lock in a favorable order before rivals can contest it. This is the realist "window of opportunity" logic applied to a new domain; it intersects directly with great-power-competition framings (Freeman 2025, DOI 10.3389/frspt.2025.1664300; Golemo 2025, DOI 10.1080/14777622.2025.2569309).

For Dolman, space is not an end but a means: orbital dominance is valuable because it translates into terrestrial economic and military advantage. This subordinates space governance, sustainability, and commons-management questions to the prior question of *who controls the regime*, the central tension the review lens exploits.