Reuters reports that the Obama administration will "seek a worldwide ban on weapons in space." This was one of Obama's dumber campaign pledges (and that's saying a lot), and hopefully will be relegated to a back burner and forgotten amidst more pressing concerns. Here is a type of issue that tells you quite a bit about a person's thinking regarding national security matters. If you actually believe that passing a treaty banning space weapons benefits the U.S., you might as well wear a sign saying, "I'm really naive and can't be trusted with national security."
Most of the countries that might be a threat to the U.S. in space cannot be trusted to abide by any treaty banning weapons. A treaty of this nature will have the following effect: it will restrict the U.S. from developing and deploying effective weapons, and allow potential adversaries to gain advantages, forcing us to play catch-up later on. The very idea that we can or should ban weapons from space is, in my opinion, completely ridiculous. Space is already militarized and we should recognize that fact. The U.S. should be working to strengthen its military advantages in space, as well as identifying and developing defenses to lessen its vulnerabilities. Pretending that we can effectively demilitarize space is the worst sort of utopian thinking. Along with being unattainable, the demilitarization of space is undesirable. U.S. technological innovation is one of our greatest strengths. There is no reason we shouldn't take full advantage of the military opportunities offered by space. And we should certainly not trust our security in this critical area to some feel-good treaty.