Abstract
What is the underlying precursor to the space race that is now well underway? This book has positioned its analysis firmly within the context of geopolitical history for a reason: it is my view that nations without reassurance of their security will militarise. In recent years we have seen a dilution of assurances from the world’s traditional Super Power as to whether it is a dependable guarantor of the security of its allies. The success of the post-WWII liberal order lay in two things. First, the renouncement of militarisation and the denial of a sphere of influence to both Japan and Germany. This not only provided an unprecedented sense of security in European and Asia-Pacific neighbourhoods, but benefited Germany and Japan themselves. Liberated from a militarised pathway, both countries were free to focus their national energy on economic success, with miraculous recoveries in both nations the result. Secondly, the US guarantee of the security of its allies created a new liberal world order with America at its heart, such that regional powers were less inclined to invest in their own militaries, which suited all parties. Three-quarters of a century of relative peace was sustained in this way.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
Kagan (2018).
- 2.
id. 43.
- 3.
ibid.
- 4.
Arguably the hesitation and subsequent equivocation President Obama showed for international intervention in Syria, during that country’s crisis, marked a significant turning point in US foreign policy. See Kagan (2018), p. 143.
- 5.
This shift is combined with an unease among Western allies about whether the US remains committed to come to their aid under the “all-for-one, one-for-all” principle of Article 5 of the NATO Treaty. As NATO welcomed its newest State to the Alliance in 2018, President Trump publicly asked: “would we really risk World War III for Montenegro?”: Guardian Staff (2018).
- 6.
ibid.
- 7.
Kagan (2018), p. 43.
- 8.
- 9.
Hardin (1968), p. 1243. Hardin notes the influence of the Oxford lecture by William Forster Lloyd in 1833, who proposed a similar analogy.
- 10.
id 1244.
- 11.
id 1246.
- 12.
ibid.
- 13.
ibid.
- 14.
There is perhaps a parallel in the manner in which the global community continues to grapple with the fact that the Tech Giants operate everywhere, but pay tax nowhere. It is another example of exploitation of the commons by these players, who benefit from getting “something for nothing”.
- 15.
https://archive.defense.gov/news/newsarticle.aspx (Last accessed 03.08.2020. Link no longer accessible).
- 16.
Article I OST.
- 17.
Agreement between US, UK, EU, Russia, China and India would likely lead to international consensus, because other nations would see it as in their interests to refrain from establishing mega-constellations in LEO as long as the major players are prepared to.
- 18.
Mentioned in Articles I, III, V OST.
- 19.
The phrase used by Ambassador Gregory Schulte, Deputy Assistant Secretary for the US Department of Defense.
- 20.
Martinez (2019), p. 1.
- 21.
Interview with Dr. Gaida by European Space Agency (ESA): http://www.esa.int/Enabling_Support/Space_Engineering_Technology/The_Kessler_Effect_and_how_to_stop_it (Accessed 15.08.2022).
- 22.
On transactional cost theory see Williamson (1996).
- 23.
Prepared Testimony of NASA Administrator Jim Bridenstine to the US House of Representatives, 27 March 2019, C-Span.
- 24.
A further Russian ASAT test followed on 15 November 2021: https://www.armscontrol.org/act/2021-12/news/russian-asat-test-creates-massive-debris (Accessed 15.08.2022).
- 25.
Hardin (1999), Letter to the Editor, p. 4.
- 26.
Hardin (1998), pp. 682–683.
- 27.
Constitution and Convention of the International Telecommunication Union, Art. 44 (ITU Constitution) 1992.
- 28.
Tronchetti (2009), p. 131.
- 29.
Constitution and Convention of the International Telecommunication Union, Art. 44 (ITU Constitution) 1992.
- 30.
ibid.
- 31.
ibid.
- 32.
id 167.
- 33.
ibid, noting this was specifically required in the drafting because of a scientific view that GEO is actually inexhaustible.
- 34.
Interview with Prof. Heino Falcke by the author on 7 January 2020.
- 35.
id 167. The current drafting of Article 44 of the ITU Constitution was adopted in 1992.
- 36.
See Final Acts of the World Administrative Radio Conference for Space Telecommunications, ITU Res. No. Spa 2-1 (1971) and discussed id 174.
- 37.
Dunoff (2015), pp. 267–300.
- 38.
ibid.
- 39.
id 269.
- 40.
- 41.
Kalshoven and Zegveld (2011).
- 42.
Kadomtsev (2020).
- 43.
ibid.
- 44.
The oft-repeated phrase used by Ambassador Gregory Schulte, Deputy Assistant Secretary for the US Department of Defense.
- 45.
Bowman and Boyle (2002), p. 5.
- 46.
Gavanas et al. (2018), pp. 294–307.
- 47.
- 48.
Williams (2019).
- 49.
Weaver (2008), pp. 91–98.
- 50.
Fischer et al. (2019), pp. 165–178.
- 51.
Joao et al. (2011), pp. 170–180.
- 52.
Da Silva (2020), pp. 3–15.
- 53.
Gupta (2016), pp. 20–43. The author recognises the OST has a narrow exception to this, in providing that “adverse changes in the environment of the Earth” must be avoided by States, and that States should adopt measures to avoid “harmful contamination” of celestial bodies. See Article IX OST.
- 54.
- 55.
- 56.
Hendricks (2019).
- 57.
ibid.
- 58.
IAU (2001).
- 59.
The US FCC regulates interstate and international communications by radio, television, wire, satellite, and cable in all 50 states, the District of Columbia and US territories. An independent US government agency overseen by Congress, the FCC is the federal agency responsible for implementing and enforcing US communications law and regulations. See: https://www.fcc.gov/about/overview (Accessed 15.08.2022). Commercial, as well as government, space actors have also become accustomed to compliance with the Committee on Space Research (COSPAR) Guidelines for space missions, which also adopt risk-based probability analysis.
- 60.
See https://www.fcc.gov/about-fcc/rulemaking-process (Accessed 15.08.2022).
- 61.
See https://www.fcc.gov/proceedings-actions (Accessed 15.08.2022).
- 62.
As a member of the IAU Working Group on Dark Skies/Mega-constellations, SATCOM 2020, the author proposed the pursuit of a regulatory strategy which was rejected by the Working Group in favour of pursuing proposals in relation to luminosity at UNCOPUOS.
- 63.
I recognise that reform via these institutions remains important, but it requires a longer-term view, for which there is insufficient time given the licensing and launch of mega-constellations continues unabated.
- 64.
Basu and Kurlekar (2016), pp. 44–70, 49.
- 65.
EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) 2016.
- 66.
- 67.
Witze (2020), p. 577.
- 68.
Jenkins (1999), pp. 87–96.
- 69.
Adilov et al. (2015), pp. 81–98.
- 70.
Attempts were made to model the value of the combined astronomy infrastructure of EU bodies—EUMETSAT and ESO—for this book. This proved impossible as neither organisation accounts for its infrastructure or investment in the way that a corporation is required to, and neither budgets nor asset values are accessible on their websites. Historically perhaps such organisations have been circumspect about the disclosure of budgets spent on astronomy, in order to avoid horrifying the public. This position should be reversed. If we understand the value of an investment in terms of tax-payer money, it can be defended from interference by new entrants, on the basis of defending “shareholder value”. Greater transparency is required in the astronomical community.
- 71.
Tronchetti (2009).
- 72.
Reunification with Taiwan, reintegration of Hong Kong, and international recognition of its sovereignty in the South China Seas, are clearly on China’s agenda. See Kagan (2018), p. 117.
- 73.
Mendis and Wang (2019), p. 36.
- 74.
id 33.
- 75.
Deng (2018), p. 30.
- 76.
ibid.
- 77.
ibid.
- 78.
Ni and Davidson (2021).
- 79.
- 80.
Under the Trump administration the world witnessed US withdrawal from the Paris Agreement on Climate Change, withdrawal from the Iranian nuclear deal, the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), and from the confidence-building arms treaty, Open Skies. See: https://www.armscontrol.org/act/2020-12/news/us-completes-open-skies-treaty-withdrawal (Accessed 15.08.2022).
- 81.
See https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/176155.htm (Accessed 15.08.2022).
- 82.
Deng (2018), p. 30.
References
Adilov, N., et al. (2015). An economic analysis of Earth orbit pollution. Environmental and Resource Economics, 60, 81–98. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10640-013-9758-4
Basu, A., & Kurlekar, A. (2016). Highway to the danger zone: United States legislative framework regulating the commercial space sector. Astropolitics, 14(1), 44–70. https://doi.org/10.1080/14777622.2016.1149382
Bowman, M., & Boyle, A. (2002). Environmental damage in international and comparative law: Problems of definition and valuation. Oxford University Press.
Byers, M. (2017). Crises and international relations: An Arctic case study. International Relations, 31(3), 375–402. https://doi.org/10.1177/0047117817735680
Byers, M. (2019). Cold, dark, and dangerous: International cooperation in the arctic and space. Polar Record, 55, 32–47. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0032247419000160
Da Silva, G., et al. (2020). A multicriteria proposal for large-scale solar photovoltaic impact assessment. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal, 38(1), 3–15. https://doi.org/10.1080/14615517.2019.1604938
Deng, Y. (2018). How China’s belt and road is reordering Asia. Harvard International Review, XXXIX(4), 30.
Dunoff, J. (2015). Mapping a hidden world of international regulatory cooperation. Law & Contemporary Problems, 78(4), 267–300.
Egre, D., & Senecal, P. (2003). Social impact assessments of large dams throughout the world: Lessons learned over two decades. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal, 21(3), 215–224. https://doi.org/10.3152/147154603781766310
Fischer, T. (2019). Editorial: Evolution, revolution, climate change and current EIA. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal, 37(5), 369–370. https://doi.org/10.1080/14615517.2019.1641778
Fischer, T., et al. (2019). Reflecting on the preparation of guidelines for strategic environmental assessment (SEA) of nuclear power programmes. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal, 37(2), 165–178. https://doi.org/10.1080/14615517.2018.1560667
Gavanas, N., et al. (2018). The Territorial Impact Assessment of transport: The case of the Egnatia motorway system in the cohesion potential of Southeast Europe. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal, 36(4), 294–307. https://doi.org/10.1080/14615517.2018.1445181
Guardian Staff. (2018, July 19). ‘Very aggressive’: Trump suggests Montenegro could cause World War Three. The Guardian. Retrieved August 15, 2022, from https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/jul/19/very-aggressive-trump-suggestsmontenegro-could-cause-world-war-three
Gupta, V. (2016). Critique of the international law on protection of the outer space environment. Astropolitics, 14(1), 20–43. https://doi.org/10.1080/14777622.2016.1148462
Hardin, G. (1968). The tragedy of the commons. Science, 162(3859), 1243.
Hardin, G. (1998). Extensions of “The Tragedy of the Commons”. Science, 280(5364), 682–683. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.280.5364.682
Hardin, G. (1999). Letter to the Editor, published as “The Tragedy of the Commons Revisited.”. Environment: Science and Policy for Sustainable Development, 41(2), 4–45.
Hendricks, B. (2019). Testimony of Nokia Corporation, Head of Technology Policy and Public Affairs for the Americas Region, Brian M. Hendricks, before the US Senate Committee for Commerce, Science and Transportation, Hearing on Investing in America’s Broadband Infrastructure, 6 December 2019.
Howard, D. (2013). Distilling general principles of international space law. In Paper presented at Colloquium of the IISL IAC-13 E7.5.
IAU. (2001). In R. Cohen & W. Sullivan (Eds.), Symposium No. 196: Preserving the astronomical sky (pp. 7–9). The Astronomical Society of the Pacific.
Jenkins, G. (1999). Evaluation of stakeholder impacts in cost-benefit analysis. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal, 17(2), 87–96. https://doi.org/10.3152/147154699781767927
Joao, E., et al. (2011). Emphasising enhancement in all forms of impact assessment. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal, 29(3), 170–180. https://doi.org/10.3152/146155111X12959673796326
Kadomtsev, A. (2020). The end of START – global consequences. Modern Diplomacy, 28 July, 2020. https://moderndiplomacy.eu/2020/07/28/the-end-of-start-global-consequences/ (Accessed 30.08.2022).
Kagan, R. (2018). The Jungle Grows Back: America and our imperilled world. Pub. Alfred Knopf.
Kalshoven, F., & Zegveld, L. (2011). Constraints on the Waging of War: An introduction to international humanitarian law. Cambridge University Press together with International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC).
Macenaite, M. (2017). The “Riskification” of European data protection law through a two-fold shift. European Journal of Risk Regulation, 8(3), 506–540. https://doi.org/10.1017/err.2017.40
Martinez, L. (2019). Legal regime sustainability in outer space: Theory and practice. Global Sustainability, 2(e26), 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1017/sus.2019.21
Mendis, P., & Wang, J. (2019). Unveiling China’s Grand Plan: How America is waging a futile war with other means. Harvard International Review, XL No. 3, 36.
Ni, V., & Davidson, H. (2021, December 8). ‘More cautious’ China shifts Africa approach from debt to vaccine diplomacy. The Guardian. Retrieved August 15, 2022, from https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/dec/08/more-cautious-china-shifts-africa-approach-from-debt-to-vaccine-diplomacy
Nooteboom, S. (2019). Environmental assessment as an institution of liberal democracy. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal, 37(5), 369–370. https://doi.org/10.1080/14615517.2019.1641778
Parsons, R. (2020). Forces for change in social impact assessment. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal, 38(4), 278–286. https://doi.org/10.1080/14615517.2019.1692585
Reuters Staff. (2020, June 7). China to strengthen global cooperation in COVID-19 vaccine trials. Reuters. Retrieved August 15, 2022, from https://www.reuters.com/article/us-healthcoronavirus-china/china-to-strengthen-global-cooperation-in-covid-19-vaccine-trials-idUSKBN23E02Z
Rhoen, M. (2017). Rear view mirror crystal ball: Predictions for the future of data protection law based on the history of environmental protection law. Computer Law & Security Review, 33(5), 603–617. S0267364917301668. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clsr.2017.05.010
Tronchetti, F. (2009). The exploitation of natural resources of the Moon and other celestial bodies: A proposal for a legal regime. Brill, Nijhoff.
Weaver, A. (2008). Contributing to sustainability as an environmental impact assessment practitioner. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal, 26(2), 91–98. https://doi.org/10.3152/146155108X316423
Williams, G. (2019). Future potential of economic impact assessment. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal. https://doi.org/10.1080/14615517.2019.1684097
Williamson, O. (1996). The mechanisms of governance. Oxford University Press.
Witze, A. (2020). How the fight over a Hawaii mega-telescope could change astronomy. Nature, 577, 457–458. https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-020-00076-7
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2023 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Millwood, S. (2023). Establishing a Governance Framework for the Orbital Internet in Outer Space. In: The Urgent Need for Regulation of Satellite Mega-constellations in Outer Space. SpringerBriefs in Law. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-19249-4_4
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-19249-4_4
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-031-19248-7
Online ISBN: 978-3-031-19249-4
eBook Packages: Law and CriminologyLaw and Criminology (R0)