Actually, radar and optical sensor evolve just as fast. Reality flies in the face of your claim.
Actually, it matters, a lot. Radars don't operate in the visible spectrum, that's why cloud deck isn't a concern. Satellites with SAR steer their beams actively just like any other AESA radar does, and the beam can be adjusted to cover large area or provide high-resolution imagery for a specific spot. EM signals will be picked up by ELINT satellites.
This is wrong. Civilian SARs that are only meant for mapping do not have the capability to detect/id ships. Not so for military SARs. In fact, some AESA radars fitted to modern aircraft are doubled as SARs with battlefield mapping and target tracking simultaneously.
Military radars are built with capabilities that civilian radars don't need. In the case of SARs, civilian version doesn't require the ability to detect/track moving targets, where as military version does. And as I have pointed out already, SARs are used on modern day battlefield for both mapping and detection/tracking of targets, showing your claim that SARs cannot detect/id ships as being false.
Actually, resolution isn't a problem here. SARs that use narrow beam and high resolution are for detecting targets such as tanks or "small ships". Aircraft carrier is huge, which justifies the use of low resolution, allowing large area can be scanned quickly. Anything that is half the size isn't worth detecting anyway. Jamming signal will be detected by ELINT satellites, but ultimately needs to be countered by redundancies of multiple satellites. China will need to keep on launching Earth observation satellites.
resolution is a problem for any image sensor vs distance/area, there are more oil tankers, ships on the sea than a single carrier. in the radar image, you don't see the image of ship, you only see a spot. you are try to detect something in a million square mile area. when using narrow area SAR and high resolution, this mean revist, longer time. so basically divide a million square mile into thousands grid, and search each grid one by one. take long time, alot other ships in the area that are also big, also carrier is a moving target, which mean when you searching grid 2, the ship might already move to grid 1 from adjacent grid
Military radars are built with capabilities that civilian radars don't need. In the case of SARs, civilian version doesn't require the ability to detect/track moving targets, where as military version does. And as I have pointed out already, SARs are used on modern day battlefield for both mapping and detection/tracking of targets, showing your claim that SARs cannot detect/id ships as being false.
If there is one area that military sensors are better than civilian ones, it would definitely be in the field of radars. There is no such thing as civilian equivalents of APG-77 or SPY-1D radars.
Can ships be detected? The answer is yes. Once the ships are detected, narrow beam can then be used to rescan the targets for identification. This might be done by the same satellite after the initial scan took place, or by a different satellites later on flying over the same area. There is no black-or-white requirement that you the entire system must use only one scan setting.
You are being off tangent here. This isn't about whether civilian electronic is more advanced. This is about capabilities, and capabilities that civilian don't need of course won't appear on a civilian platform. You cannot use this as a proof and say that the same thing cannot exist on a military platform. Likewise, capabilities that military doesn't need aren't going to be found on military platform. If a micro-controller is sufficed in control and guidance of an air-to-air missile, then you don't put in a quad-core processor just because you can.