Asian Approaches to Space Security.
Mike
Center for Nonproliferation Studies, Monterey Institute of
International Studies. http://www.cns.miis.edu/pubs/week/070510.htm
Asian Approaches to Space Security
Despite a lack of consensus and differences in space programs, broad
support exists in Asia to prevent further space weaponization and to
enhance cooperation.
By Erik R. Quam and James Clay Moltz
10 May 2007
China's recent anti-satellite test has heightened the importance of
addressing conflicting national approaches to space security. In an
effort to begin bridging these gaps, the Monterey Institute's Center
for Nonproliferation Studies (CNS), George Washington University's
Space Policy Institute (SPI), and the Tokyo-based Research Institute
for Peace and Security (RIPS) co-hosted a conference in Tokyo, Japan,
on April 23-24, 2007, entitled "Collective Security in Space: Asian
Perspectives on Acceptable Approaches." The conference featured
presentations by scientists, policymakers, and experts from China,
India, Japan, Malaysia, South Korea and the United States. The 50
participants in the meeting discussed current Asian space
capabilities, regional perspectives on space security, and possible
regional and international initiatives to improve space security.
Overall, the conference showed that Asia currently lacks any regional
consensus on space security. Moreover, large differences in purpose,
capabilities, and plans divide the various national space programs.
However, there is broad support for new efforts to prevent the further
weaponization of space and to craft new initiatives to enhance
international cooperation. This report summarizes the specific
presentations made at the Tokyo meeting with the aim of familiarizing
experts and policymakers around the world with these views. By late
fall, the best of these studies will be published in a collected
volume for further distribution.
The conference opened with remarks by the two U.S. co-sponsors, Drs.
John Logsdon (SPI) and Clay Moltz (CNS). Dr. Masashi Nishihara
(President, RIPS) next offered a keynote address, which laid out the
regional security context surrounding space activity in Asia. Dr.
Nishihara surveyed a range of challenges facing Asia today, including:
the North Korean nuclear crisis, China's military modernization,
political instability in Northeast Asia and in South Asia, and the
economic competition taking place among Asian nations. While stating
his belief that regional cooperation will continue to grow, Dr.
Nishihara predicted that that the priority of national sovereignty
will remain a hindrance to Asian space security cooperation for the
near future.
Asian Space Assets
In the panel on "Current Capabilities for Space Security," Mr. Yoichi
Kamiyama, from the Mitsubishi Corporation, discussed the Japanese
space program, its limited budget and the recent shrinkage of Japan's
aerospace workforce. Mr. Kamiyama argued that these trends are a
result of the absence in Japan of any defined space strategy outside
of the areas of civilian science and technology.
Dr. Changdon Kee from Seoul National University analyzed South Korean
space capabilities. He noted that South Korea currently has 10-11
satellites in orbit, but plans to expand to as many as 20 by 2015. Dr.
Kee also discussed recent progress toward the completion of a domestic
space launch facility being constructed on the southeastern tip of
South Korea. He concluded with some observations about the problem of
redundancy in national space-based navigation systems (such as the
U.S. GPS system, the European Union's Galileo system, China's Beidou
system, Russia's GLONASS, Japan's QZSS, and India's IRNSS) and
outlined a plan for increasing collaboration and cost-savings through
regional cooperation.
Dr. Rajeev Lochan from the Indian Space Research Organization in
Bangalore, India, spoke next on the history of the Indian space
program and Indian perspectives on space security. His remarks
highlighted the Indian emphasis on national development, independence
(such as in the space launch field) and international cooperation.
Referring to the more than 47 missions that the Indian space program
has launched, Dr. Lochan noted particularly their role in advancing
agriculture, health care and educational opportunities for the Indian
population. He said that India defined space security as the
"sustainable and denial-free access to and use of space for peaceful
purposes for one and all," emphasizing that space activity must
provide redistributive benefits. Finally, Mr. Lochan told the
conference that cooperation on space security issues was the only
option for the international community and that there was no room for
unilateralism in the space environment.
The morning session closed with an address by Dr. Yang Mingjie,
representing the China Institutes of Contemporary International
Relations. He focused on China's role in regional space security
cooperation and the Asia Pacific Space Cooperation Organization
(APSCO). After a brief introduction to the history of the Chinese
space program, Dr. Yang emphasized China's adherence to the principle
of the peaceful use of outer space, while noting that high technology
and the high cost of space missions should promote cooperation. But
Dr. Yang noted the still-limited membership of APSCO and the need for
broader confidence-building and cooperative measures in space. Dr.
Yang posited that a good arena to promote cooperation and begin the
dialogue necessary for these measures was Track II conferences, where
ideas can be floated freely.
Asian Views on Space Security
Dr. Setsuko Aoki from Keio University in Tokyo opened the next panel
on Asian perspectives of space security, which featured experts from
Japan, South Korea, China, India, Australia and the United States.
Drawing on her legal background, Dr. Aoki reviewed past space security
treaties and agreements, but concluded that current Asian security
cooperation remains weak, given the absence of a clear forum and the
necessary prerequisites for near-term progress. However, she suggested
several different measures that could be adopted by Asia in the next
five years, including: better implementation of existing UN space
treaties, progress on debris mitigation, the use of Article IX of the
Outer Space Treaty as a confidence-building measure (CBM) among Asian
states and efforts to establish other regional CBMs for space. More
concrete mechanisms, she predicted, might then be possible, beginning
around 2020.
Dr. Kyung-Min Kim from Hanyang University in Seoul, South Korea, began
his remarks by noting that South Korea still remains behind a number
of other Asian space powers. Regarding Asian space security, he
emphasized the limits of the possible, given the differences in
national capabilities and the role of nationalism. After a brief
discussion of the history of South Korean satellite development, Dr.
Kim explained that the biggest security objective in space for South
Korea was to develop a system capable of monitoring North Korean
missile and nuclear development. He also pointed out that South Korea
has also selected two astronauts for space missions, one of whom is
scheduled to go to space next year aboard a Russian launcher.
Dr. Zhong Jing from Beijing's National Defense University next
outlined China's perspective on space security, explaining that her
country strongly supports the peaceful use of space, as well as
comprehensive and coordinated space development. However, she noted
that China had opted to develop a "limited defense capability" given
the delay in reaching agreement on a new space treaty and the U.S. aim
through missile defense to "conquer and control outer space." Dr.
Zhong also offered two recommendations: development of a consensus
definition of space security and the initiation of formal discussions
toward a new arrangement for preventing space's weaponization.
Wing Commander K.K. Nair from the Center for Air Power Studies in New
Delhi, India, began his remarks by rejecting the notion of Wilsonian
"collective security" in space. "Common security," he argued, was a
more relevant concept, given the increased use of space assets by
modern militaries, the growing number of space-faring nations with
differing capabilities and intentions and emerging trends in missile
defenses. On the positive side, he pointed out that there had thus far
been no known instances of weapons deployment in space, no foreign
satellite-on-satellite attacks and few ASAT tests, suggesting that
space security is not yet at a critical juncture, despite 10 years of
deadlock at the Conference on Disarmament. Commander Nair suggested
that the international community should start instead with such
"common security" topics as debris mitigation, space resource
allocation, traffic management, regulation of non-state activities and
reinforcement of the Outer Space Treaty. He concluded on a note of
optimism, arguing that Asian states have strong incentives to
cooperate, given Asia's status as the "most disaster-prone continent
in the world," its need for human development, and its ability to
benefits from low-costs investments in space.
Group Captain (Royal Australian Air Force, ret.) Brett Biddington, now
of Cisco Systems in Canberra, then analyzed Australia's role in
international space exploration and development. He pointed out that
while Australia has not contributed a great deal in terms of
investment, it has made tremendous contributions in terms of real
estate by hosting ground stations for the U.S. and U.K. militaries.
Captain Biddington also noted that Australia had called in the Chinese
Ambassador to express Australia's unease with Beijing's recent ASAT
test. In assessing the future of Australia's space program, he
explained that change was on the way and that investment in
Australia's space program is rising drastically, due mainly to non-
military factors, such as Australia's current 10-year drought and the
desire to use space reconnaissance to track and, if possible, mitigate
its effects. In terms of space security for Asia, Captain Biddington
pointed to the need for service guarantees in the area of space
utilities and enhanced monitoring and management of the near-space
environment as important emerging requirements.
Dr. Joan Johnson-Freese of the U.S. Naval War College, in Newport,
Rhode Island, closed the panel by discussing U.S. perspectives on
space security in general, as well as specific reactions to and
implications of China's ASAT test. As a baseline, she cited three U.S.
commissions that have affected U.S. space policy: the Commission to
Assess the Ballistic Missile Threat to the United States (the
"Rumsfeld Commission"), the Commission on U.S. National Security and
Military/Commercial Concerns with the People's Republic of China (the
"Cox Commission"), and the Commission to Assess U.S. National Security
Space Management and Organization (the "Rumsfeld Space Commission").
Turning her remarks to the U.S.-China space relationship, Dr. Johnson-
Freese pointed out how China focuses on the wide range of seemingly
threatening U.S. space assets while the United States, especially
after the January 11, 2007 ASAT test, focuses on the Chinese "threat"
to these assets. Dr. Johnson-Freese explained that while the China
threat had been an earlier theme and one against which U.S. voices of
moderation had been starting to make some progress, China's ASAT test
had drowned out these voices. Dr. Johnson-Freese concluded on a note
of pessimism regarding chances for improving U.S.-Chinese space
relations in the near-term and even in the next administration, given
current negative trends.
New Space Security Initiatives
Opening the third panel of the conference on "Regional and
International Space Security Initiatives," Dr. Yang Junhua, vice
president and secretary general of the Chinese Society of
Astronautics, focused on the challenges of international management of
such threats as weaponization, debris and other environmental
concerns. Dr. Yang explained that China is working on space debris
research and space environmental prediction models. He mentioned the
need for enhanced space object registration. In response to a question
about the reasons for the Chinese ASAT test in January, Dr. Yang
reiterated that China is committed to peaceful use of outer space.
Major General (Indian Army, ret.) Dipankar Banerjee, now director of
the Institute for Peace and Conflict Studies in New Delhi, began his
remarks by noting the major impact of the first Gulf War in forcing
China and India to recognize the value of space assets for modern
militaries. He predicted the "early weaponization" of space unless
there is a "major intervention" by leading space-faring states. Still,
he noted the possibility of collaborative approaches, noting the role
of ASEAN, the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, and other agreements
in promoting regional security, as well as the emergence of non-state
actors interested in bridging national boundaries. Closing his
remarks, however, General Banerjee quoted an International Herald
Tribune editorial from January 21 that cautioned: "Future historians
may well see Beijing's use of a missile to destroy an old weather
satellite as having more lasting global impact than the Iraq War."
Dr. Kazuto Suzuki of Japan's Tsukuba University next discussed the
Japanese debate on space security options. Dr. Suzuki began with an
historical discussion of the Japanese space program, addressing the
debate between realism and pacifism in Japanese decisionmaking, while
also citing constraints on Japan's military space developments
stemming from the 1969 Diet Resolution on space activity. He pointed
out that while Japan's space development has thus far been largely
civilian and technology driven, such recent events as North Korea's
1998 Taepodong missile test, the transformation of the U.S.-Japan
alliance and Japan's participation in missile defense are forcing
Japan to reconsider its position and policies on space development. On
the other hand, Dr. Suzuki commented that Japan's small size makes it
unlikely that Japan would be well-served by space-based weapons, given
the need for large numbers of systems to ensure coverage of the
country at any one time. Reform of Japan's current legislation,
however, may allow new military support functions using space. Japan's
growing role in peacekeeping missions and disaster relief, Dr. Suzuki
noted, was forcing the Japanese government to reconsider the 1969 Diet
Resolution. He suggested, however, that Japan should promote regional
fora for discussing space security, noting Japan's technological
advantage as a rationale for possible Japanese leadership in promoting
regional space cooperation.
Dr. Mazlan Othman, director general, Malaysian National Space Agency
and chair of the Science and Technology Subcommittee of the UN
Committee on the Peaceful Use of Outer Space (COPUOS), rounded out the
panel with an analysis of the past and future role of the United
Nations in space security. She began with a review of space-related
activities in the first and fourth committees of the UN General
Assembly, the Geneva-based Conference on Disarmament, and COPUOS. She
explained that while ad hoc statements by different delegations are
often unproductive, going to the United Nations is positive because
there is strength in numbers when discussing issues like space
security. She also reported on the positive developments at COPUOS in
the field of debris management: an international convention is now
ready for approval at its June meeting. Through the United Nations,
Dr. Othman noted, small countries can play an important supporting
role in space development and management. In her own country, Dr.
Othman pointed out the growing recognition that space development and
cooperation are important to the national economy, health and,
recently, disaster relief. In closing her remarks, Dr. Othman
suggested that such measures as an international code of conduct,
improved space traffic management, expanded dialogue and the
development of cooperative databases would all be steps on the road
toward enhancing regional and global space security.
The conference closed with a presentation by long-time Japanese space
scientist and official Dr. Tomifumi Godai (now with the space-oriented
NGO Soranokai), who reviewed the course of Japan's technological
developments in space and noted the need for greater regional
transparency in space activities as a prerequisite for enhanced space
security cooperation.
This conference was supported with funding to CNS from the
Ploughshares Fund and to George Washington University from the John D.
and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation.