International Relations in Outer Space - A Study in ...

4 downloads 88 Views 714KB Size Report
Chapter I – Origins of Space Power in the West and East . ... Chapter II – International Space Law: Probing for a Global Regime .......................... 15. II. Evolutions: ...
Université catholique de Louvain

Louvain School of Political and Social Sciences

Power, Progress & Prestige: International Relations in Outer Space A Study in Global Astropolitics, 1940s-2030s Asher S. de Sadeleer

Director: Tanguy de Wilde d’Estmael Referee: Alain De Neve

Thesis presented as part of the Master 120 in Political Sciences, International Relations, Focus on: Diplomacy and Conflict Resolution

June 2013

Deontology I give my word of honor that this thesis has been written by me without soliciting illegitimate assistance, that it is not based on a work submitted for assessment in another institution, and that it has never been published in whole or in part. All the information (ideas, sentences, graphics, maps, tables, …) borrowed or referring to primary or secondary sources is adequately referenced according to the academic method in vigor. I declare to have read and adhere to the Code of deontology for students regarding quotations, references and exploitation of various sources. I am aware that plagiarism represents a serious misconduct. Je déclare sur l’honneur que ce mémoire a été écrit de ma plume, sans avoir sollicité d’aide extérieure illicite, qu’il n’est pas la reprise d’un travail présenté dans une autre institution pour évaluation, et qu’il n’a jamais été publié, en tout ou en partie. Toutes les informations (idées, phrases, graphes, cartes, tableaux, …) empruntées ou faisant référence à des sources primaires ou secondaires sont référencées adéquatement selon la méthode universitaire en vigueur. Je déclare avoir pris connaissance et adhérer au Code de déontologie pour les étudiants en matière d'emprunts, de citations et d'exploitation de sources diverses et savoir que le plagiat constitue une faute grave.

Hello! You’re consulting a sample document. Thank you for your interest in this work. The full version is available for a fee at the following address: http://gradworks.umi.com/10/11/10113372.html © Asher S. de Sadeleer Protected as of 2013 under the Belgian Copyright Law (1994 –)

I

Acknowledgements Many thanks to Professor de Wilde d’Estmael for his patience, openness and good advice. Many thanks to Mr. De Neve for his attention to this paper. This work is for my Mother and our lucky Family-of-Six.

II

Table of Contents Deontology ....................................................................................................................... I Acknowledgements .........................................................................................................II

Introduction: Nations to the Test of Space ...................................................... 1 I. Inceptions: The Impulse of the 20th Century ........................................... 5 Chapter I – Origins of Space Power in the West and East ............................................. 5 1.

Across the West: The Burning-Hot Artifacts of the Cold War ................................................... 5

2.

Within the East: China, India and Japan’s Secondary Space Race ........................................... 11

Chapter II – International Space Law: Probing for a Global Regime .......................... 15

II. Evolutions: A New Century’s Constellations ................................ 19 Chapter I – Introducing Four Space Superpowers ........................................................ 19 1.

The United States of America: A Star-Spangled Banner .......................................................... 19

2.

The Russian Federation: Spreading its Wings Again ................................................................ 23

3.

The European Union: A Unifying Flying Object ...................................................................... 26

4.

The People’s Republic of China: A Celestial Empire and its Borders ...................................... 30

Chapter II – Cooperation: Spaceflight, Orbital Zone, Into Deep Space ....................... 34 1.

The International Space Station: A Shot in the Thermospheric Dark ....................................... 34

2.

The International Telecommunication Union: Earth’s Orbital Arena ....................................... 38

3.

International Space Exploration: Coordinating Cosmic Diving ................................................ 42

Chapter III – Tensions: Space Armament and Situational Awareness ......................... 46 1.

Weapons Over Earth: Breaking the Silence of These Infinite Spaces....................................... 46

2.

Space Situational Awareness: Scattered Surveillance and Control ........................................... 52

III. Expansion: A New Millennium’s Perspectives ............................. 59 Chapter I – An Age of Space Entrepreneurship ........................................................... 59 Chapter II – Selenopolitics: Taking the Pulse of Space Ambitions.............................. 65 1.

The Mercurial US: From Bush Jr.’s Vision to Obama’s Honeymoon ...................................... 65

2.

The Steadfast PRC: Chang’e and Shenzhou for Moon Migration ............................................ 69

3.

Russia and Europe: International Courses Towards Colonization ............................................ 74

Chapter III – To Mars, Asteroids & Beyond: Testing Space Conquest ....................... 78 1.

The USA – Strategic and Socioeconomic Stakes in Outer Space............................................... 79

2.

Europe’s Future – Becoming the Nodal Power in Deep Space ................................................. 87

3.

Russia, China and Free Enterprise – Framing the Final Frontier ............................................... 92

Conclusion: Charting a Cosmic Civilization ....................................... 95 III

Bibliography ........................................................................................ 96 Reference Books ........................................................................................................... 96 Academic Articles and Working Papers ....................................................................... 96 Official Programs and Statements, Conferences and Letters ....................................... 99 Background and Opinion Articles, Space Science Studies; Factsheets, Master Papers, Documentaries and Online References ....................................................................... 101 Governmental Space Agencies and Offices as Sources.............................................. 105

Annexes ............................................................................................. 106 Annex I: Types of Earth Orbits ................................................................................... 106 Annex II: American Space Shuttle Policy .................................................................. 107 Annex III: Outer Space Treaty.................................................................................... 108 Annex IV: American Spirit on Mars........................................................................... 114

List of Illustrations and Tables Fig. 1: Pickering, Van Allen, von Braun – NASA, 1958, via Iowa Space Science, 2013....................... 7 Fig. 2: French Astérix capsule, launched by Diamant in 1965 – SEREB, via CNES, 2013. .................. 7 Fig. 3: “Five Men, Two Nations, One Crew”: Apollo-Soyuz Mission, 1975 – NASA, 2013................ 10 Fig. 4: Lunokhod, measuring about 2.3 meters long and 1.5 meters tall – NASA, 2013. ..................... 10 Fig. 5: Mir as seen from Discovery (STS-63: US-Russia Shuttle-Mir Mission, 1995) – NASA, 2013. 10 Fig. 6: Qian Xuesen and Mao Zedong, 1956......................................................................................... 14 Fig. 7: Long March-1 for Dōng Fāng Hóng 1, 1970............................................................................. 14 Fig. 8: Vikram Sarabhai (ISRO) and Thomas O. Paine (NASA), 1969 ................................................ 14 Fig. 9: India’s first satellite Aryabhata, 1975 ........................................................................................ 14 Fig. 10: Model of Japan’s satellite Taiyo, 1975 – JAXA/ISAS, 2013................................................... 14 Fig. 11: Model of Japan’s satellite Hakucho, 1979 – JAXA/ISAS, 2013. ............................................ 14 Fig. 12: ISS seen from Endeavour (STS-130) – NASA, Feb. 2010. ..................................................... 22 Fig. 13: Astronauts Feustel and Grunsfeld at work on ESA/NASA’s Hubble – NASA, 2009. ............ 22 Fig. 14: STEREO, SOHO and ACE positions model – NASA/GSFC, 2013........................................ 22 Fig. 15: “Pointing X-ray Eyes at our Resident Supermassive Black Hole” – NASA/JPL, 2013. ......... 22 Fig. 16: Map of Russia’s Baikonur Cosmodrome (Republic of Kazakhstan) – NASA, 2010. ............. 25 Fig. 17: Three-stage Proton heavy rocket moving towards Baikonur launch-pad, 2000. ..................... 25 Fig. 18: Soyuz spacecraft docked to the ISS, 2002. ............................................................................... 25 Fig. 19: Jules Verne assembled at Kourou – ESA/CNES/Arianespace/CSG, 2007-2008. ................... 29 Fig. 20: “Galileo onto Soyuz-VS01” for first launch – ESA / Corvaja, Oct. 2011. .............................. 29 Fig. 21: ESA Science – Galactic & Cosmic Microwave Background (CMB) Radiation structures. .... 29 Fig. 22: Model of China’s orbital docking practice – Xinhua, Nov. 2011. ........................................... 33 Fig. 23: Manned ship Shenzhou-7 atop rocket Long-March II-F – Xinhua, Sept. 2008. ...................... 33 Fig. 24: Taikonaut Zhai Zhigang’s Shenzhou-7 spacewalk – Xinhua, September 2008. ...................... 33 Fig. 25: Schematic of ISS components – NASA, 2009. ........................................................................ 37 Fig. 26: Astronaut Scott E. Parazynski working on Canadarm-2 – NASA, 2001. ................................ 37 Fig. 27: ESA Cupola – Bowen, ESA/NASA, 2011. .............................................................................. 37 Fig. 28: ESA Columbus lab – NASA, 2008. ......................................................................................... 37

IV

Fig. 29: Mass-Sorted Overview of Major National Launch Vehicles, 2009 ......................................... 41 Fig. 30: GES Framework for Coordination, Space Exploration Diagram, 2007. .................................. 44 Fig. 31: ISECG, GER Pathways for Common Exploration (op. cit., p. 3), 2011. ................................. 44 Fig. 32: Impact of Tunguska Event (1908) over 40 km of Russian forest – Kulik, 1927. .................... 54 Fig. 33: Comet Shoemaker-Levy-9 impacting Jupiter, Galileo spacecraft – NASA, 22 July 1994. ..... 57 Fig. 34: Shoemaker-Levy-9 scars on Jupiter, Hubble Space Telescope – NASA/ESA, 22 July 1994. 57 Fig. 35: Bolden (NASA) & Musk (SpaceX) with Dragon (Falcon-9), 13 June 2012 – NASA. .......... 62 Fig. 36: Dragon (Falcon-9) berthed onto the ISS by Canadarm-2, 25 May 2012 – NASA. ................ 62 Fig. 37: Overview of suborbital SpaceShipOne and SpaceShipTwo – Virgin Galactic, 2013. ............. 62 Fig. 38: Orbital Complex construction concept – Bigelow Aerospace, 2010. ...................................... 62 Fig. 39: Orion prototype MPCV capsule – Dryden Center, NASA, 14 June 2011. .............................. 68 Fig. 40: Orion MPCV being tested in Hydro Impact Basin – NASA, 13 December 2011. .................. 68 Fig. 41: SLS Project – adapted from NASA, “Space Launch System Facts”, 2011. ............................ 68 Fig. 42: Principal elements developed in the 2009 US Spaceflight Integrated Options ........................ 68 Fig. 43: China’s 3-step CLEP – Xinhua/Qin, 2007. .............................................................................. 72 Fig. 44: Chang’e-1 aims – Xinhua/Feng Qi, 2007. ............................................................................... 72 Fig. 45: Planned station – Lu Zhe/Xinhua, 2011................................................................................... 72 Fig. 46: A popular lunar vision – Xinhua/Qin, 2007. ............................................................................ 72 Fig. 47: President Hu meeting Shenzhou-9 taikonauts – Xinhua/Ma Zhancheng, 27 July 2012. ......... 72 Fig. 48: Russian lunar landers foreseen in 2012 for the 2010s-2020s – Zak, 2012............................... 75 Fig. 49: Cutaway view of aborted Kliper craft – Zak, 2006. ................................................................. 75 Fig. 50: ESA Lunar Lander concept – ESA, 2012. ............................................................................... 75 Fig. 51: Elements of Lunny Poligon concept – NPO Lavochkin, 2006, via Zak, 2012. ....................... 75 Fig. 52: ESA concept of a 3D-printed lunar base – ESA/Foster + Partners, 2013. ............................... 77 Fig. 53: Twin Voyager probes reaching Solar end-zone – NASA/JPL/ Walt Feimer, 2010. ................ 80 Fig. 54: Scale models of Sojourner (below), Spirit/Opportunity (left) and Curiosity (right)................ 80 Fig. 55: MSL spacecraft and MPCV comparison – NASA, 2012. ........................................................ 80 Fig. 56: Curiosity’s landing phases – NASA, 2012. ............................................................................. 80 Fig. 57: ISECG, “Global Exploration Roadmap”, Moon Next, op. cit., 2011, p. 21. ........................... 83 Fig. 58: ISECG, “Global Exploration Roadmap”, Asteroid Next, op. cit., 2011, p. 19. ....................... 83 Fig. 59: Diagram of Sun-Earth and Earth-Moon Lagrange Points – Caltech, 2001. ............................. 86 Fig. 60: Gravity Well Theory Schematic – via Jusell Judson J., op. cit., 1998, p. 45. .......................... 86 Fig. 61: “Aurora Mission Roadmap” – ESA, “The Aurora Programme”, op. cit., 2004, p. 2............... 90 Fig. 62: ExoMars Rover Concept – Vago et al., in ESA Bulletin, op. cit., May 2006, p. 19................. 90 Fig. 63: Overview of ESA’s Fleet in the Solar System – European Space Agency, February 2013. ... 91 Fig. 64: Overview of ESA’s Fleet Across the Spectrum – European Space Agency, February 2013. . 91 Fig. 65: Phobos-Grunt mission scenario – Anatoly Zak, op. cit., December 2011. .............................. 94 Fig. 66: Model of the Mars500 isolation facility – ESA, October 2012. .............................................. 94 Tab. 1: Liberal MSSP framework – Al-Rodhan, op. cit., 2012, p. 92. .................................................. 49 Tab. 2: Orbital Object Growth, 1956-2012 – NASA/DoD Space Surveillance Network, 2011. .......... 49 Tab. 3: “In-Space Propulsion Technology, Area Breakdown Structure” – NASA, 2010. .................... 86

V

Asher S. de Sadeleer

International Relations in Outer Space

June 2013

Introduction: Nations to the Test of Space

S

pace represents one of the most groundbreaking evolutions in human history. The field of observation and imagination up to the 20th century, its accessibility paved the way for a wide range of new prospects. Spacecraft and their spin-offs boost global

development and life quality. Satellites’ benefits cover telecommunications, environment and meteorological monitoring, navigation, mapping, border patrol, disarmament surveillance, and many more nodes of the modern world. Fundamental research is carried out more diligently than ever, while the odds of future ‘giant leaps for mankind’ inspire perspectives of expansion beyond Earth’s limits. For all these reasons, space can be called a hallmark of this era and a core component of international relations (IR). Its stakes are the focus of this paper. Who is driving today’s space policies? According to the Space Foundation, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) weighs about $17.78B. It is thus ahead of the European Space Agency (ESA: $5.16B), Japan ($3.72B), Russia ($2.90B), China ($1.79B), as well as India ($1.06B). However, “by the end of 2010, government, commercial, or academic organizations in at least 52 nations[…]were operating one or more satellites, or planning to launch [one] before the end of 2012”1. The pattern is thus that of a great power-led sector, but ever more open to transnational actors and private society. As a result, this paper treats the US, Europe, Russia and China as key players, alongside international organizations (IOs) and public and private entities. It starts from the assumption that an all-round approach is necessary to put present-day IR to the test of space. Complex questions underpin the study of astropolitics. What motivates actors to take up programs? What kind of global legal regime applies; how may it impact progress, as it shapes interactions in the field? How may extraterrestrial works change the world, if new resources induce power shifts or if entrepreneurship overtakes public initiatives? Clearly, the theoretical axes (or schools) of realism, liberalism and critical geopolitics are all relevant to this domain. As explained by Nayef R. F. Al-Rodhan, philosopher, neuroscientist and geostrategist whose comprehensive analytical framework is emulated in this work, classical IR paradigms have lent their strengths and weaknesses to the exploration of space policies:2  Realism rests on the premises of anarchy, competition, and states as rational unitary actors. Raw power-building drives nations’ interests. In this view, space applications were 1

Space Foundation, “Introduction to Space Activities”, US, printed 2011, pp. 7, 13: http://tinyurl.com/76k4qkb. Cf. AL-RODHAN Nayef R. F., Meta-Geopolitics of Outer Space: An Analysis of Space Power, Security and Governance, Palgrave Macmillan, St Antony’s Series, New York, May 2012, pp. 6-16. 2

1

Asher S. de Sadeleer

International Relations in Outer Space

June 2013

“a by-product of rival superpowers striving for[…]military capacities” 3, only to become a present-day means of leveraging national capabilities. A case in point, the Revolution in Military Affairs (RMA) theorized in the 1990s relies a lot on space for data gathering and transmission.4 One major source is E. C. Dolman, whose Astropolitik offers a competitive model with as best outcome, no less than a stabilizing US hegemony.5 States remain the only relevant units. New resources, including the military high ground, must be conquered in a ‘free market’ regime – as opposed to space law’s ‘global commons’ logic.  Liberalism is in contrast willing to consider how domestic factors influence space policy, and advocates institutional regimes “to facilitate cooperation and avoid market failure”6. Driving interests are thus socioeconomic, technological and security benefits for all space stakeholders. Cooperation began during the Cold War, and continues today to that end. An emblematic author, D. Deudney, deems hegemony a peril to be avoided via collaboration. Sub-schools are global institutionalism (drawing on law and multilateralism; seeing space as an opportunity to transcend an anarchic world), technological determinism (analyzing cooperation as arising from the very costs and benefits of space R&D; predicting ensuing global stability and ideological convergence) and social interactionism (supporting a soft law, rules-of-the-road approach to bind space actors of various legal statuses).  Critical geopolitics at last brings in a constructivist and normative angle. Space policies “are shaped by world views and beliefs about what space does, or might represent” 7. As Montluc, an aeronautical strategist whose analyses will often be referred to, puts it: “for the emerging countries[…]space technologies[…]act as a symbol[…]of a determination to achieve national independence, regional influence and technological maturity” 8. Prestige is a key factor for great players too. Authors like Duvall and Havercroft are representative: in considering the hegemony scenario, they cite the “drive for Americans to seek out new frontiers as a way of[…]promoting[…]individuality, innovation, and exceptionalism”9 and warn against the threat of a “de-territorialized global rule”10 based on space weaponry. 3

AL-RODHAN, op. cit., p. 7. Cf. GARCIN Thierry, Les enjeux stratégiques de l’espace, Bruylant, Coll. Axes Savoir, Paris, 2001, pp. 99-105. 5 Cf. DOLMAN Everett Carl, “The Case for Weapons in Space: A Geopolitical Assessment”, School of Advanced Air & Space Studies, US, 2010, pp. 29-32, SSRN: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1676919. 6 AL-RODHAN, ibid., p. 10. 7 Ibid., p. 13. 8 MONTLUC Bertrand (de), A New International Strategic Context for Space Policies, Nova Science Publishers, Inc., New York, 2011, pp. 17-18. 9 DUVALL Raymond, HAVERCROFT Jonathan, “Taking Sovereignty Out of This World: Space Weapons and Empire of the Future”, The University of British Columbia, Liu Institute for Global Issues, US, Oct. 2006, p. 12: http://www.ligi.ubc.ca/sites/liu/files/Publications/Havercroft_paper.pdf. 10 Ibid., p. 17. 4

2

Asher S. de Sadeleer

International Relations in Outer Space

June 2013

These approaches combined provide the rationales of space conquest: power, progress and prestige. Rather than choosing one of these dynamics, this paper will seek to balance all three. By itself, each view is insufficient: realism neglects non-state actors and cooperative settings, liberalism omits great power rivalry, critical geopolitics overlooks material factors and holds a merely normative discourse. Moreover, the authors all focus on space weapons in a traditional reading of power: for a true pattern of astropolitics to emerge, the full array of sectors counts. This is what Al-Rodhan calls the meta-geopolitics of outer space – a framework encompassing classical and critical standards, applied to seven analytical areas covering modern society as a whole.11 Though taking into account several such aspects, this essay necessarily offers a less extensive exploration of contemporary space policies. How is it to be conducted? Examining the 2009 Space Security Index (SSI), Montluc assures that “emerging countries are emerging fast, and they[…]wish[…]to be accorded the geopolitical role which they feel is their due”12. The geopolitics of space – astropolitics – is being actively shaped by interacting interests in a challenging, yet highly rewarding strategic milieu. The extent to which it mirrors or affects today’s ‘multipolar’ world will be explored through past, present and future times.  The first and briefest part of this paper will consist of a review of the Cold War era, on the Western side of the world (US, Russia, Europe) as well as Eastward (China, India, Japan). A short chapter will then uncover the international legal framework in vigor.  The second part will enter the 21st century with a survey of the four superpowers’ space policies. This will pave the way for the analysis of chosen partnerships (ISS, ITU, ISECG) and tensions (space weaponry, situational awareness) up to the last decade.  Ultimately, exciting expectations for 2020, 2030 and beyond shall be assessed, through the growing role of space entrepreneurs, current lunar initiatives, and planetary projects. This paper will thus demonstrate the ever-deepening links of astropolitics and geopolitics. Sources will cover official statements and treaties, analyses by experts of varied backgrounds, and up-to-date papers by space watch institutes. They will reveal the field as a too rarely used gateway to “themes as topical and varied as sustainable growth, globalization, identity or territory”13. Indeed, space power integrates and interlinks ever more military, commercial and civilian stakes; it involves key governance issues in a mutating world. For these reasons and more to be seen, astropolitics can be deemed the social science of civilization’s next frontier. 11

Cf. AL-RODHAN, ibid., p. 19. The 7 areas of power (capacities) are: social and health issues, domestic politics, economics, environment, science and human potential, military and security issues, and international diplomacy. 12 MONTLUC, ibid., p. 17. 13 Cf. SOURBÈS-VERGER Isabelle, « Géopolitique spatiale », séminaire « Sciences de la vie et de la Terre au 21e siècle : enjeux et implications », France, 2004: http://eduscol.education.fr/cid46160/geopolitique-spatiale.html.

3

I. Inceptions: The Impulse of the 20th Century.......... 5 Chapter I – Origins of Space Power in the West and East ...................... 5 1. Across the West: The Burning-Hot Artifacts of the Cold War ......................... 5 2. Within the East: China, India and Japan’s Secondary Space Race .......... 11

Chapter II – International Space Law: Probing for a Global Regime ...... 15

*

*

Buzz Aldrin on the Moon with Apollo-11 mission, 1969. Credit: NASA, 14 July 2009.

You’re still with me?  If I sparked your interest, please consider supporting me and researchers worldwide by purchasing this thesis via ProQuest: http://gradworks.umi.com/10/11/10113372.html

Astropolitics … Is the analysis of international and transnational space policies. … Integrates classical geopolitics and expands it to new dimensions. … Opens up theoretical windows on the “final frontier” of civilization.

It has been 70 years since the start of the Space Age. The Earth’s extreme boundary has become a strategic area for global development, great power rivalry, and governance challenges. In a changing world, it has come to stand for an increasingly accessible and competitive sphere: carried by a transnational society which they in turn sustain, space assets contribute to shrinking the world at the same time as they promise to expand it. Their use involves all three classical paradigms: power, liberal progress and prestige. Offering a dynamic picture of space policies, this work successively adopts historical, present and prospective approaches. It begins with a targeted overview of the Cold War’s foundations. It then delves into the 21st century, with a focus on four major spacefarers – China, Europe, Russia, and the United States – so as to study cases of cooperation into orbit and in deep space, as well as to tackle weaponization and planetary security issues. Ultimately, it undertakes to probe the forthcoming decades via space entrepreneurship, selenopolitics, and the stakes of actual conquest – all of it rooted in present-day realities. Based on a multidisciplinary, meta-geopolitical framework, this thorough investigation of space policies integrates the sector’s latest evolutions in a vivid and illustrated way. It aims to uncover strategic, economic, legal and rhetorical dimensions of astropolitics. It explores the domain’s complex relation with geopolitics via military, civilian, as well as commercial axes. Unifying scattered trends, it attempts to shape a balanced and practical outlook on a multicausal phenomenon: the emergence of a space-sustained species.

Keywords: Astropolitics – Geopolitics – Global – History – Science – Technology – Space