Space Law: The USA's New Jingoistic Space Policy

The United States issued a new "National Space Policy" that shrugs off the yoke of common international law and related international treaties; declares sovereignty over the entirety of outer space and celestial bodies; and promises to take action against any nation that attempts to impede its use of outer space. According to an article by the Washington Post (h/t Opinio Juris), four years earlier, a congressionally chartered panel led by Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld recommended developing space weapons to protect military and civilian satellites. However, the administration claims that "there is no space arms race." This seems highly unlikely considering China's growing space program and the simple fact that just last month China shot a laser at a USA satellite.

An editorial published by the New York Times said, "The new policy reflects the worst tendencies of the Bush administration - a unilateral drive for supremacy and a rejection of treaties. And it comes just as the White House is desperately seeking help to rein in the nuclear programs of North Korea and Iran. That effort depends heavily on cooperation from China and Russia, two countries with their own active space programs."

In 2003, China became only the third country to launch a man into space aboard its own rocket. In October 2005, it sent two men into orbit and plans a space walk by 2008. Next year China plans to send a probe to orbit the moon, laying the way for a possible manned mission further down the road. According to Reuters, the budget for the Chinese space program is currently $1.7 billion (h/t Space Politics Blog). In 2002 the Bush administration ordered a review of the USA's military and civilian space policies. The result was a shift in emphasis at NASA from research and unmanned exploration to returning Americans to the moon and then sending them on to Mars.

Lt. Gen. C. Robert Kehler, deputy commander for U.S. Strategic Command, said, "Space capabilities enable the American way of warfare. Today, our global awareness, global connectivity and precision strike capabilities are largely enabled by our space capabilities," (see here). The FP Passport blog features an interview with space security expert Theresa Hitchens. She admits that there is at least a rhetorical space race with China and she points out that a recent report by the Pentagon suspects China of developing anti-satellite weapons.  According to Hitchens:

If you look at Chinese documents, they very much view the United States as a potential adversary in space. They see U.S. policies as trying to contain and block China’s progress as a space power. And second, they also see the value—and you would be stupid if you were a Chinese general and did not see the value—of disrupting U.S. space capabilities in any war over Taiwan. So what we’re seeing, particularly on the part of the militaries in both countries, is the development of a Cold War-like psychology.

Enabling the American way of warfare is just one of the precipitators of the new American space policy and the other is an atavistic sense of manifest destiny. Michael Griffin, a NASA administrator, wondered aloud what language future settlers of the Moon and Mars would speak. "Will my language be passed down over the generations to future lunar colonies?" he asked. "Or will another, bolder or more persistent culture surpass our efforts and put their own stamp on the predominant lunar society of the far future?" These dual concerns have driven the American space policy away from it's original intent: to keep war from entering outer space and any advancements in space would be for the benefit of all humankind. 

In a "A Cursory Glance at Space Law" it was stated that the history of colonization and exploration is intertwined with war and exploitation. The U.S. ambassador to the UN said of the Outer Space Treaty: “We must make sure that man’s earthly conflicts will not be carried into space.” In an address to the UN General Assembly, in 1958, Lyndon B. Johnson warned, "Until now our strivings toward peace have been heavily burdened by legacies of distrust and fear and ignorance and injury. Those legacies do not exist in space. They will not appear there unless we send them on ahead."

The Popular Science Blog has an exclusive online video of former Vice President Al Gore condemning the new space policy (h/t Space Politics Blog). Here is an excerpt:

Very few people have analyzed the insides of this new space policy. I urge all of you who are interested in space to analyze it very carefully. It has the potential, down the road, to create the [same] kind of fuzzy thinking and chaos in our efforts to exploit the space resource as the fuzzy thinking and chaos the Iraq policy has created in Iraq. It is a very serious mistake, in my opinion. We in the United States of America may claim that we alone can determine who goes into space and who doesn’t, what it’s used for and what it’s not used for, and we may claim it effectively as our own dominion to the exclusion, when we wish to exclude others, of all others. That’s hubristic.

Comments

[Patrick S. O'Donnell]

Excellent, timely analysis of something that should indeed concern us all. I will do my best to circulate your post on this topic among colleagues and friends. I've been rather surprised at how little there appears to be 'out there' in the spirit of your comments.

[Travis Hodgkins]

Thanks, Patrick. All of us at TLB appreciate your support. Although it doesn't seem as pressing as the issues currently confronting our nation here on the Earth's surface, I strongly believe that the policies set today regarding outer space and celestial bodies will be of great concern by the close of the century. We are the progenitors of space law policies and precedents that will determine the course of humanity.

As pointed out by Opinio Juris, "Space law is truly a new area of law and is in many ways unburdened by custom. The law of outer space, such as it is, is likely to be all about treaties. But if it is going to be custom driven at all, I imagine that (uncontroversially), its rules will largely be developed unilaterally by various U.S. Presidents over the next few decades."

As opposed to the CIL of international waters, the customs of space law are currently being set by 3 countries (the USA, Russia, and China)! And although the UN has spoken on the subject, we all know that doesn't seem to bind the USA (e.g. America's infamous disregard for the UN's view on the death penalty and human rights). I highly encourage everyone to cogitate on space law and how they want future generations to interact a 100 miles or a 100 lightyears from the Earth's surface.

[New Passports]

Nice Blog. Keep posting more

Regards