If Russia uses this to disable another country's satellite passing overhead, is that an act of war, worthy of retaliation? What about if that other country, in retaliation, uses similar technology in a satellite to destroy this Kalina installation?
While not necessarily an act of war, it’s definitely an escalation. As is common with escalations it all depends on who/how/what/why and effective diplomacy. Eg launching a missile is far more aggressive than hacking and destroying Kalina remotely.
way down in the article they mention that it's unclear if it's meant for (or capable of) "dazzling" or "blinding". Dazzling means saturating the sensors so they can't see during saturation, but blinding means burning the sensors so they're broken.
I suppose the answer depends on whether lasting damage is done.
There is no similar technology which would allow such a powerful laser in a satellite. While it's possible in theory, for now it's science fiction. No launch vehicle has enough capacity to lift the necessary power generation.
Geoffrey A. Landis, "Prospects for Solar Pumped Semiconductor Lasers," Paper SPIE 2121-09, Laser Power Beaming, SPIE Proceedings Volume 2121, pp. 58-65, January 27–28, 1994
The line is drawn at damaging equipment. This is just jamming. Radio jamming isn’t an act of war. Doing it in the visible spectrum doesn’t magically make it one.
That’s a pretty arbitrary line. Would you rather russia blow up a car or disable all American satellites? Hyperbole for sure but the distinction is important. Jamming can easily be an act of war depending on scale.
