An expert in space law and international relations says that the entry of commercial companies will not solve the problem either because they are subject to the laws of the country in which they are registered.
By Svetla Ben-Yitzhak Professor of Assistance to Space and International Relations, Air University
Even in times of conflict on the ground, space has historically been an arena of cooperation between countries. But trends in the last decade indicate that the nature of space cooperation is changing, and the fallout from Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has highlighted these changes.
I’m researching international relations that explores the distribution of power in space – who the main players are, what capabilities they have and with whom they decide to cooperate. Some researchers predict a future in which individual countries will pursue different levels of dominance, while others anticipate a scenario in which commercial entities meet between countries.
But I believe the future may be different. In recent years, groups of nations with similar strategic interests on Earth have banded together to advance their interests in space, creating what I call “bloc states in space.”
The United States and the Soviet Union controlled space activity during the Cold War. Despite tensions on the ground, both acted cautiously to prevent crises and even collaborated on a number of space projects.
As more countries developed their own space agencies, several international cooperative groups emerged. These include the United Nations Office on Outer Space, the United Nations Committee on Peaceful Outer Space and the Advisory Committee on Space Information Systems.
In 1975, ten European countries established the European Space Agency. In 1998, the United States and Russia joined efforts to build the International Space Station, which is now partnered by 15 countries. These multinational ventures focused primarily on scientific cooperation and data exchange.
The emergence of the blocs of countries in space
The European Space Agency, which now includes 22 countries, could be considered among the first space blocs. But a more marked change can be seen towards this type of power structure after the end of the Cold War. Countries that shared interests on the land began to unite to accumulate specific space assets, creating the space blocks.
In the last five years, several new space blocs with different levels of political entities have emerged. These include the African Space Agency, with 55 member states; The Latin American Space Agency and the Caribbean Common to Seven Member States; And the Arab Space Coordination Group, which includes 12 member states in the Middle East.
These groups allow countries to cooperate closely with other countries in their blocs, but the blocs also compete with each other. The last two space blocks – the Artemis Agreement and the Sino-Russian Moon Agreement – are an example of such competition.
Race to the moon
The Artemis Agreements were launched in October 2020. They are managed by the US and currently include 18 member states. The group aims to bring people back to the moon by 2025 and establish a governmental framework for exploration and mining on the Moon, Mars and beyond. A supporting lunar space station called Gateway.
Similarly, in 2019, Russia and China agreed to collaborate on a mission to send people to the moon’s polar pole by 2026. This Sino-Russian joint mission also aims to eventually build a lunar base and place a space station in orbit around the moon.
The fact that these clumps do not cooperate to perform similar missions on the moon indicates that strategic interests and rivalries on the ground have been transferred to space.
Any nation can join the Artemis Accords, but Russia and China – along with a number of their allies on Earth – have not done so because some see the agreements as an effort to extend US-controlled international order to outer space.
Similarly, Russia and China plan to open their future lunar research station to all stakeholders, but no member state of Artemis has expressed interest. The European Space Agency has even stopped several joint projects it has planned with Russia and instead is expanding its partnerships with the US and Japan.
The effect of lumps of space on the ground
In addition to increasing their presence in space, countries are also using space blocks to strengthen their spheres of influence on the ground.
One example is the Asia-Pacific Cooperation Organization, established in 2005. Led by China, it includes Bangladesh, Iran, Mongolia, Pakistan, Peru, Thailand and Turkey.
While its broad purpose is the development and launch of satellites, the main goal of the organization is to expand and normalize the use of the Chinese navigation system BeiDou – the Chinese version of GPS. Countries that use the system may become dependent on China, as in the case of Iran.
The role of private space companies
In the last decade we have experienced tremendous growth of commercial space activities. As a result, some researchers see a future of collaboration in a space defined by common commercial interests. In this scenario, commercial entities act as intermediaries between countries, uniting them behind specific commercial projects in space.
However, it is likely that commercial companies will not dictate future international cooperation in space. Under current international space law, any company operating in space does so at the behest of – and under the jurisdiction of – the government of its own country.
The dominance of countries over space companies has been clearly demonstrated through the crisis in Ukraine. As a result of sanctions imposed by the state, many commercial space companies have stopped cooperating with Russia. Given the current legal framework, it is likely that states – not commercial entities – will continue to dictate the rules in space.
Space blocks for cooperation or confrontation
I believe that later on, configurations of states – like space blocs – will be the main means by which states will encourage their national interests in space and on land. There are many benefits when countries unite and form lumps of space. Space is a difficult medium, and therefore makes sense for a lake of resources, manpower and knowledge. However, such a system also comes with built-in hazards.
History offers many examples that show that the more rigid alliances become, the greater the likelihood of conflict. The growing rigidity of two alliances – the Triple Antant and the Triple Alliance – in the late 19th century is often cited as the key factor in the First World War.
A key lesson in it is that as long as the existing blocks of space remain flexible and open to all, cooperation will flourish and the world may still avoid an open confrontation in space. Maintaining a focus on scientific goals and exchanges between and within space blocs – while maintaining political rivalries – will help ensure the future of international cooperation in space.
For an article in The Conversation
More on the subject on the Yadan website: