- Email: [email protected]
International cooperation — how to proceed
Reports dards, complete the preparation work in using these international standards, and fully utilize foreign space technologies, space science research results and applied satellite assets. Through over thirty years' hard work, China has laid a technical and material foundation for further developing its space technology industry in the next decade. The time is coming when its space technology industry will achieve great progress. China is going to meet the
approaching twenty-first century with new and brilliant achievements, and strive to make the space technology industry into one of the backbones of our national economy.
Zhu Yilin Secretary-General Science and Technology Commission Chinese Academy of Space Technology 100081 Beijing People's Republic of China
International cooperationhow to proceed As part of a project exploring ways that international cooperation can maximize the benefits of space activities in the new pofitical climate of the 1990s, the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics (AIAA) has been organizing expert workshops on the subject. The latest of these, held in December 1994, focused on five areas: global space systems services; human and robotic exploration; space transportation; solar power to Earth; and international peacekeeping. It is only in the last few years that recommendations on the latter topic could realistically have been put forward and, as a prelude to our presentation of the Executive Summary of the report produced by AIAA, two of the 60-plus participants drawn from 15 countries, Robert Fuhrmann and JGrgen Wild, discuss the implications of this new found openness over international security and analyse the background to its genesis.
-
The authors believe that the discussions that took place during this conference were precedent-setting. This conference was the first occasion for representatives from the major spacefaring nations to engage in an open and far ranging dialogue on space cooperation for peacekeeping, covering the broad array of mutual assets that might be involved in cooperation and the breadth of issues that will have to be addressed. There had been and continue to be government-togovernment discussions involving cooperation on specific systems and specific missions, but there had never been such a general, multilateral review and discussion of both the technical and the political issues involved and, more importantly, on how to proceed to resolve them. Even though the views expressed by government repre-
142
sentatives during this conference were unofficial, we were impressed by the degree of sincerity shown by all parties and by the extent to which there was conviction that the recommendations set forth in this respect were both prudent and achievable. Second, the authors were frankly surprised at the scope of the issues on which the participants were able to agree. Cooperative use of the assets of the major spacefaring nations for peacekeeping will involve declassifying and opening up some of the most highly sensitive national assets ever devised. These assets represent collective investments of hundreds of billions of dollars and are derived from cutting edge technologies that individual nations will continue to leverage to their competitive advantage for years to come. It would be no small
matter and, indeed, would represent a major reversal of policy for some of these nations to attenuate longstanding national security and economic concerns for the promised benefits of cooperation. Yet not only did the status quo have less support than we might have imagined - though probably for different reasons for each participant - common ground for change was less difficult to define than we had anticipated. In this area, perhaps, more than any other area of national security and defense, the geopolitical upheaval of the last six years has caused a serious rethinking of national policies and priorities, and the inevitability and necessity of change is more widely perceived than we had thought. Finally, and most importantly, the fundamental recommendation made by the group was itself remarkable. We had anticipated that a group with broad technical expertise as well as government and industry experience might be able to reach consensus on a series of findings with relative dispatch. However, the central question A I A A had posed to the group - how do we proceed? - required a recommendation on process, often as contentious an issue in international frameworks as substance. Yet the group reached a shared vision: to make progress in space cooperation for peacekeeping will require leadership; that leadership should come from the two nations with the vast majority of space assets - the USA and Russia; these two leaders, along with the other nations, should devise a forum initially outside any pre-existing framework to begin discussions and exchange information. Our belief is that this first step could be implemented with relatively little political difficulty and could lead to meaningful and highly beneficial space cooperative efforts for all nations. The difficult part of this initial process will be bringing a sometimes complex and often unfamiliar subject to the attention of the highest levels of leadership of all involved nations. This would have to involve, at the outset, the USA and Russia and, we would hope, the European nations, which could make a unique contribution given
SPACE POLICY May 1996
Reports their experience in cooperative issues. Lacking such a high-level attention and leadership, cooperation will probably proceed, but it will proceed piecemeal and in fits and starts, jeopardizing much of its potential in the next decade and perhaps even longer. Our hope is that the report of this A I A A working group will help in that education process.
Background A serious discussion of the cooperative use of space among the major providers of national space assets would have been unthinkable as recently as a few years ago. However, the global political changes that have occurred in the last few years, and the ensuing shift from the bilateral superpower Cold War to multiple regional conflicts, have created a new environment with major challenges to international peacekeeping efforts. The geopolitical changes that set the stage for this workshop and encouraged many spacefaring nations to begin exploring these have several dimensions: •
•
•
There has been a general decline in the global strategic military threat with the end of the Cold War. With the r e d u c t i o n in s u p e r p o w e r weapons of mass destruction, there is less concern about the bipolar threat but there is increasing concern about nuclear proliferation and technology transfer leading to other threats to international security. There is an increasing dependence on multilateral coalitions of forces to combat common threats and protect common interests. The new environment requires these coalitions to share information, including i n f o r m a t i o n d e r i v e d from space-based assets, in ways that have not been done before, and to break down long-standing barriers to their cooperative use. The proliferation of high technology weapons systems and weapons of mass destruction is an emerging threat to global security. The growing number of nations with the ability to build or purchase these
SPACE POLICY May 1996
systems and weapons is a threat to all nations and leads to the desirability of a collective understanding of, and reaction to, that threat. • There has been much worldwide technological progress in space systems. The two superpowers' virtual monopoly on military space assets, built on Cold War conflict, has ended with the development and acquisition of space technologies and systems by many countries. The world is no longer dependent on one or other of the superpowers for space-based capabilities. These two countries remain, however, the pre-eminent spacefaring nations. • There is potential for combining resources for the collective benefit. Tremendous financial and infrastructure resources are required to acquire and operate space programs. While some nations can do it alone, combining resources can provide a greater total set of capabilities and avoid duplicative and theoretically redundant efforts. While peacekeeping may be considered the most important area for international cooperation using spacebased assets, the A I A A report also included four other areas for which collaboration is considered particularly worthwhile. Findings and recommendations on all these areas are now presented below.
Areas selected for review The five areas chosen for review and discussion by the working groups were:
•
•
•
Global space systems services. Public application of emerging new, near-term commercial products in remote sensing, navigation, and telecommunications might usefully be expanded through international cooperation. International cooperation for peacekeeping. Changing geopolitical r e l a t i o n s h i p s and the growing commonality in national security interests might set the framework for the collective use of current and future national security space systems to lessen global threats. Cooperative human and robotic ex-
ploration o f space. The full benefit of the knowledge obtained from exploration of our solar system may best be achieved through coordinating the robotic efforts of individual nations and through greater cooperation for future human exploration efforts. International cooperation in space transportation. The availability of low-cost, efficient, and reliable space transportation is key to the viability of many new space programs, and international cooperation might play a role in achieving this objective. Solar power to Earth. An international effort could lead to the demonstration that space-based collection and distribution of solar power might be a viable option for meeting the increasing demands for sustainable sources of energy.
Key findings and recommendations Discussions of the working groups centered primarily on the five topic areas. Many findings and recommendations were unique to specific topics. However, as anticipated, some findings and recommendations appeared to be common to all or portions of the working group topics. Both the unique and common findings and recommendations of five topic areas are reported below.
Findings (1) Continuing with the theme and conclusions of the first A I A A Workshop in 1992, this Workshop reconfirmed that unprecedented opportunities exist today for spacefaring nations to cooperate on a large scale for the benefit of all humankind. While there are many international cooperative ventures in space already underway, there are additional and potential near and long-term projects that will benefit humankind directly and could help develop space as a place for the conduct of new economic activities. (2) The global, political, industrial, and socio-economic climate makes wide ranging cooperation not only
143
Reports possible, but, what is new is that international cooperation may now be a necessary strategy to achieve the goals set out for space-related projects. The political, technical and economic support for space activities may d e m a n d t h a t n a t i o n s exploit the advantages of international cooperation, and accept the difficulties and risks, for the long-term benefit of all. (3) Meeting in plenary session, the participants discovered that each area of space utilization may require a different methodology or approach for achieving international cooperation. A key objective of this workshop was to identify overarching themes applicable to achieving international cooperation in five diverse areas of space utilization. Instead, when participants brought their findings together in plenary sessions, they found that common approaches to international cooperation in specific areas were not readily apparent. (4) T o d a y , the need for global space systems services in telecommunications, r e m o t e sensing, and navigation is growing. These services are becoming accessible to all nations and are increasingly commercial and international. In addition to private sector utility, commercial global space system services offer enormous potential for public service benefit by supporting public safety, disaster warning and relief, search and rescue, as well as health and education services. New methods for international cooperation through the use of legally binding agreements have been used successfully in private sector initiatives. However, as private and public sector utilization of space system services grows, the lack of uniform licensing and technical standards for satellites, ground stations, and consumer products that utilize these services could become a problem. Also, establishing uniform interface standards and interoperability of the space segment should encourage the growth of new applications. (5) Peacekeeping operations around the globe, ranging from crisis prevention, to crisis monitoring, to crisis resolution, are increasingly interna-
144
tional. Precedent setting discussions conducted during the workshop indicate that opportunities may now exist for cooperatively using national space assets for multinational peacekeeping operations in ways that have never been done. Every modern military power has become dependent upon space-based assets for a host of critical functions including communications, navigation, weather, surveillance, and missile early warning. Similarly, successful multinational peacekeeping operations are now dependent upon support from these nationally developed systems. However, these systems are not designed to any international standards of interoperability or otherwise optimized for shared or cooperative use, and therefore fall far short of their potential. There are opportunities to improve p e a c e k e e p i n g capabilities through the expanded and integrated use of existing space assets and, potentially, through the use of new or modified space systems designed for compatibility in a multinational system for peace-keeping. However, there is no effective mechanism for removing impediments to improved cooperation for peacekeeping operations, for defining technical requirements, formulating options, performing cost-benefit analyses, or for resolving issues to optimize the use of these national assets for the collective benefit of all participants. Progress on the cooperative use of space for peacekeeping will come in incremental steps based on a solid foundation of cooperation, trust and confidence-building. (6) Political commitment to a single, long-term, large-scale space exploration initiative in the near future by any country or group of countries seems highly unlikely. Space exploration beyond Earth orbit will focus on robotic missions for the near-term because of their relatively low cost. When a commitment is made to send humans beyond Earth orbit, the magnitude of the endeavor will probably require an integrated, cooperative approach among several countries similar to the International Space Station Program. Several spacefaring nations are setting their
own long-term space exploration program agenda, rather than waiting for space superpowers to take the initiative. Successful execution of the International Space Station Program is essential to the establishment of a firm foundation for future human exploration. (7) Availability of efficient, lowcost, reliable space transportation will play a pivotal role in the successful accomplishment of future space missions. In the near term, lower cost transportation would be beneficial, but is not essential. Currently, space transportation has an existing market and is a highly competitive business where cooperation may be difficult to achieve. However, for the longer term, cooperative ventures, particularly human exploration of space and solar power to Earth, low-cost transportation is essential. Moving space transportation capabilities from the current state to meet aspirations for the future requires development of a market for space transportation which is significantly greater than that which exists today. Through international cooperation, the space transportation industry may be able to improve cost and performance over the longer period. (8) Provision of clean, low-cost energy is an environmental, economic, and international imperative. Capturing solar energy in space and importing it to Earth offers a spacebased solution which can be pursued as one component of achieving a sustainable energy future. However, the enabling technology may be one of space transportation rather than collection and importation of energy. Acquisition of space-based energy is intrinsically an international point of convergence because of the global need for energy, the distribution of enabling technology among several countries, and the need for substantial financing. (9) Existing international fora have not yet focused on, discussed, or debated opportunities for international cooperation addressed by most of the topics discussed in this workshop. The need to hold a series of work-
SPACE POLICY May 1996
Reports shops involving international cooperation is indicative of the lack of a more formal process or mechanism to discuss issues of international cooperation in space.
Recommendations (1) The heads of state and national space agencies of spacefaring nations should continue to recognize that now, more than ever, international cooperation is essential and will be an element of space exploitation and exploration initiatives that contribute beyond domestic objectives. Only through the effective use of international cooperation, with collective use of technology and resources plus elimination of duplication will we be able to implement and conduct more far-ranging space exploration initiatives than would be possible as individual nations. (2) The A I A A should take the lead in establishing a forum where representatives from the private sector and governments can discuss and formulate options for international cooperation in development of technologies that will lower space transportation costs by an order of magnitude. The first step in this process should be understanding the ' m a r k e t demand' for new space transportation systems to meet future space mission needs. In the near-term, 'technology push' should result in incremental progress in performance and cost reduction. The launch community should support the opening of national launch technology development programs to international participation. (3) National governments and international public service organizations should take advantage of the emerging capabilities of global space system services. International regulatory organizations should enhance the public service utility of emerging global space systems services through increased and more efficient allocation of frequency spectra and orbital slot positions. Licensing for these limited assets should be tied to concessions which support public service efforts around the globe. Uniform technical standards need to be developed to
SPACE POLICY May 1996
enhance the interoperability of these systems, thereby improving global public service potential for future generations. (4) The principal providers of military, civil and commercial space capabilities should establish an international forum to investigate the feasibility of improved use of current and future space systems for peacekeeping operations. The U S A and Russia, as primary owners of relevant space capabilities, should take the initiative to establish the forum and invite other peacekeeping participants and space asset providers to attend. Discussions should then focus on requirements, how existing national and international space systems can be applied to satisfy these requirements, and on mechanisms for near-term and far-term cooperation. (5) Heads of space agencies should ensure that actions are taken collectively to review their respective space exploration agenda with a view toward identifying potential opportunities for coordination. When identified, options should be studied to implement opportunities, taking into account the experience gained through existing international cooperative mechanisms. One preferred approach to current exploration programs is for them to consist of internationally coordinated, evolutionary robotic efforts, composed of a series of interlinked phases, each justifiable on its own merit. In the longer term, human exploration missions beyond low earth orbit, because of their magnitude, probably will require an integrated, cooperative approach among several nations. The appropriate level of international coordination for specific projects depends on the nature of each project. Coordinating experiments on a small robotic mission can be facilitated through less formal means. However, coordinating large, expensive, long-term cooperative missions, such as human flights to Mars, requires attention and approval at the highest political levels. The International Space Station is an important technical, operational and management learning project for this type of integrated space program.
(6) An international body needs to be formed and tasked with the responsibility of determining the feasibility of a space-based solution for the collection and distribution of solar power to Earth. Government, industry and professional societies should promote awareness of the need for energy and the potential for a space-based solution. The space community, in concert with other potential stakeholders in energy and e n v i r o n m e n t a l areas, should advocate feasibility demonstrations. Space transportation costs remain high and present a problem which must be resolved before implementation of space solar power systems can take place. (7) Definitive actions need to be taken to establish a mechanism by which the international community can foster and promote beneficial projects of international cooperation in space. The fact that it is difficult to assign responsibility for implementing the recommendations of this report to a specific international agency or organization with appropriate resources and authority is indicative of a major impediment in achieving the full potential of space. Some participants at the workshop suggest that this need be addressed by establishing an 'International Space Cooperation Protocol'. The purpose of this protocol would be to provide a forum for senior leaders to periodically hold international discussions of common interests. It has been recommended that the A I A A , with other appropriate organizations, develop the concept for the protocol along with its staffing requirements and operating procedures.
Conclusion The 1994 A I A A Workshop on International Space Cooperation identified opportunities for international cooperation and recommended specific actions and mechanisms to develop and promote them. Near-term opportunities exist for effective and economical use of space to augment and improve current space-based services and to support worldwide peacekeep-
145
Reports~Letter to the editor
ing operations. Long-term opportunities exist to enhance robotic and human exploration of the solar system and to implement space solar power systems to meet energy needs through international cooperation. Dependable, low-cost transportation to space is basic to all space activity. Those concerned need to work diligently to develop low-cost transportation. Success in this area will enhance the efficiency of current activity and facilitate long-term space activities.
The American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, through its International Activities Committee, and in coordination with other appropriate organizations is working t o promote workshop results and pursue acceptance of the concepts, ideas and
Reprinted with permission from the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Washington, DC, USA.
mechanisms which will advance pertinent international initiatives of cooperation. Copies of the full report are available from A I A A , 370 L'Enfant P r o m e n a d e , SW, Washington DC 20024, USA.
AIAA/Robert A. Fuhrman Lockheed Corporation & JOrgen H. Wild NA TO Advisory Group for AerospaceResearch and Development
Letter to the editor The yon Braun paradigma response to Harry Ruppe Anyone who knows the historiography of Wernher von Braun is aware that there exists what some have called the 'H unt s v i l l e School' of von Braun chroniclers. Composed of von Braun's friends and compatriots, this group jealously guards his legacy and attacks any outsider who attempts to address the subject. Anyone who does not subscribe to their view is automatically the enemy. Dr Ruppe is clearly a member of this group. But I must admit to being surprised by the pettiness and sarcasm in his letter. Rather than assume that he is a cantankerous person, I will give him the benefit of the doubt and assume he was merely having a bad day. I only wish that he had been as careful in reading my essay as I was in writing it. Dr Ruppe shows concern that I may have mistaken Guido von Pirquet for H e rman n Noordung. He failed to notice that Noordung is indeed mentioned in the article (p. 154). I also never gave Pirquet credit for the idea of a space station (which can be substantively traced back at least to 1869 with Edmund Hale's The Brick M o o n , and indeed back to mythology). Nor did I give him credit for the idea of a wheeled space station, which Tsiolkovsky also discussed in a different
146
form. N o o r d u n g (aka Potocnick) wrote the first book on space stations. He advocated the use of a space station for reconnaissance, meteorology and mapping. A number of Pirquet's papers predated Noordung's book. More importantly, Pirquet gets credit for the original idea, as I stated (p. 155), of using a space station as a necessary j u m p i n g - o f f p o i n t to the p l a n e t s . This c o n c e p t was l at er adopted by yon Braun in the Collier's series and Disney films and was a powerful part of his thinking. It appears in latter space policies such as the Space Task Group and the 90-Day Study. As we know, a space station is n o t necessary for human planetary exploration. But this idea persisted in many of the major space plans. It was a flaw which had the effect of increasing the cost of any mission it was linked to and thus making it harder to justify politically. Dr Ruppe is correct in noting that the first American satellite technically flew atop a Juno and not a Jupiter rocket. Juno I was a Jupiter-C with an upper stage and payload. But my mention of the heritage of this rocket was t o make a rhetoricacl point rather than a technical one - that the first successful US satellite launch vehicle was
essentially a direct linear descendent of von Braun's earlier ideas and the V-2. Indigenous American rockets such as the Atlas, Titan and Thor were in many respects far more innovative and even revolutionary than the Redstone, Jupiter and Juno. But it was the evolutionary and philosophical lineage of von Braun's ideas and influence that I was stressing, not his technical achievements (which were considerable, but irrelevant to the subject). As for Ruppe's comment that the A B M A team didn't work 'secretly' to explore space, he ignores quite a bit of historical evidence on this point. He discusses the 1957-58 time frame - i.e. post-Sputnik/pre-NASA - when space plans proliferated as everyone, particularly von Braun, thought that unlimited money was on the way. But I was referring to the 1955-57 time frame, when von Braun was not supposed to be focusing on space, but did so clandestinely. The 1955 decision to launch the US IGY satellite atop Vanguard removed the A B M A team from the space program. This was done for complicated policy reasons unknown to yon Braun at the time. In response to this, Ernst Stuhlinger made quiet contacts with James van Allen to develop scientific instruments for an Army satellite even though General John Medaris later testified that he had received orders to watch von Braun's team closely t o make sure they did not 'accidentally' launch a satellite into orbit. The deci-
SPACE POLICY May 1996
approaching twenty-first century with new and brilliant achievements, and strive to make the space technology industry into one of the backbones of our national economy.
Zhu Yilin Secretary-General Science and Technology Commission Chinese Academy of Space Technology 100081 Beijing People's Republic of China
International cooperationhow to proceed As part of a project exploring ways that international cooperation can maximize the benefits of space activities in the new pofitical climate of the 1990s, the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics (AIAA) has been organizing expert workshops on the subject. The latest of these, held in December 1994, focused on five areas: global space systems services; human and robotic exploration; space transportation; solar power to Earth; and international peacekeeping. It is only in the last few years that recommendations on the latter topic could realistically have been put forward and, as a prelude to our presentation of the Executive Summary of the report produced by AIAA, two of the 60-plus participants drawn from 15 countries, Robert Fuhrmann and JGrgen Wild, discuss the implications of this new found openness over international security and analyse the background to its genesis.
-
The authors believe that the discussions that took place during this conference were precedent-setting. This conference was the first occasion for representatives from the major spacefaring nations to engage in an open and far ranging dialogue on space cooperation for peacekeeping, covering the broad array of mutual assets that might be involved in cooperation and the breadth of issues that will have to be addressed. There had been and continue to be government-togovernment discussions involving cooperation on specific systems and specific missions, but there had never been such a general, multilateral review and discussion of both the technical and the political issues involved and, more importantly, on how to proceed to resolve them. Even though the views expressed by government repre-
142
sentatives during this conference were unofficial, we were impressed by the degree of sincerity shown by all parties and by the extent to which there was conviction that the recommendations set forth in this respect were both prudent and achievable. Second, the authors were frankly surprised at the scope of the issues on which the participants were able to agree. Cooperative use of the assets of the major spacefaring nations for peacekeeping will involve declassifying and opening up some of the most highly sensitive national assets ever devised. These assets represent collective investments of hundreds of billions of dollars and are derived from cutting edge technologies that individual nations will continue to leverage to their competitive advantage for years to come. It would be no small
matter and, indeed, would represent a major reversal of policy for some of these nations to attenuate longstanding national security and economic concerns for the promised benefits of cooperation. Yet not only did the status quo have less support than we might have imagined - though probably for different reasons for each participant - common ground for change was less difficult to define than we had anticipated. In this area, perhaps, more than any other area of national security and defense, the geopolitical upheaval of the last six years has caused a serious rethinking of national policies and priorities, and the inevitability and necessity of change is more widely perceived than we had thought. Finally, and most importantly, the fundamental recommendation made by the group was itself remarkable. We had anticipated that a group with broad technical expertise as well as government and industry experience might be able to reach consensus on a series of findings with relative dispatch. However, the central question A I A A had posed to the group - how do we proceed? - required a recommendation on process, often as contentious an issue in international frameworks as substance. Yet the group reached a shared vision: to make progress in space cooperation for peacekeeping will require leadership; that leadership should come from the two nations with the vast majority of space assets - the USA and Russia; these two leaders, along with the other nations, should devise a forum initially outside any pre-existing framework to begin discussions and exchange information. Our belief is that this first step could be implemented with relatively little political difficulty and could lead to meaningful and highly beneficial space cooperative efforts for all nations. The difficult part of this initial process will be bringing a sometimes complex and often unfamiliar subject to the attention of the highest levels of leadership of all involved nations. This would have to involve, at the outset, the USA and Russia and, we would hope, the European nations, which could make a unique contribution given
SPACE POLICY May 1996
Reports their experience in cooperative issues. Lacking such a high-level attention and leadership, cooperation will probably proceed, but it will proceed piecemeal and in fits and starts, jeopardizing much of its potential in the next decade and perhaps even longer. Our hope is that the report of this A I A A working group will help in that education process.
Background A serious discussion of the cooperative use of space among the major providers of national space assets would have been unthinkable as recently as a few years ago. However, the global political changes that have occurred in the last few years, and the ensuing shift from the bilateral superpower Cold War to multiple regional conflicts, have created a new environment with major challenges to international peacekeeping efforts. The geopolitical changes that set the stage for this workshop and encouraged many spacefaring nations to begin exploring these have several dimensions: •
•
•
There has been a general decline in the global strategic military threat with the end of the Cold War. With the r e d u c t i o n in s u p e r p o w e r weapons of mass destruction, there is less concern about the bipolar threat but there is increasing concern about nuclear proliferation and technology transfer leading to other threats to international security. There is an increasing dependence on multilateral coalitions of forces to combat common threats and protect common interests. The new environment requires these coalitions to share information, including i n f o r m a t i o n d e r i v e d from space-based assets, in ways that have not been done before, and to break down long-standing barriers to their cooperative use. The proliferation of high technology weapons systems and weapons of mass destruction is an emerging threat to global security. The growing number of nations with the ability to build or purchase these
SPACE POLICY May 1996
systems and weapons is a threat to all nations and leads to the desirability of a collective understanding of, and reaction to, that threat. • There has been much worldwide technological progress in space systems. The two superpowers' virtual monopoly on military space assets, built on Cold War conflict, has ended with the development and acquisition of space technologies and systems by many countries. The world is no longer dependent on one or other of the superpowers for space-based capabilities. These two countries remain, however, the pre-eminent spacefaring nations. • There is potential for combining resources for the collective benefit. Tremendous financial and infrastructure resources are required to acquire and operate space programs. While some nations can do it alone, combining resources can provide a greater total set of capabilities and avoid duplicative and theoretically redundant efforts. While peacekeeping may be considered the most important area for international cooperation using spacebased assets, the A I A A report also included four other areas for which collaboration is considered particularly worthwhile. Findings and recommendations on all these areas are now presented below.
Areas selected for review The five areas chosen for review and discussion by the working groups were:
•
•
•
Global space systems services. Public application of emerging new, near-term commercial products in remote sensing, navigation, and telecommunications might usefully be expanded through international cooperation. International cooperation for peacekeeping. Changing geopolitical r e l a t i o n s h i p s and the growing commonality in national security interests might set the framework for the collective use of current and future national security space systems to lessen global threats. Cooperative human and robotic ex-
ploration o f space. The full benefit of the knowledge obtained from exploration of our solar system may best be achieved through coordinating the robotic efforts of individual nations and through greater cooperation for future human exploration efforts. International cooperation in space transportation. The availability of low-cost, efficient, and reliable space transportation is key to the viability of many new space programs, and international cooperation might play a role in achieving this objective. Solar power to Earth. An international effort could lead to the demonstration that space-based collection and distribution of solar power might be a viable option for meeting the increasing demands for sustainable sources of energy.
Key findings and recommendations Discussions of the working groups centered primarily on the five topic areas. Many findings and recommendations were unique to specific topics. However, as anticipated, some findings and recommendations appeared to be common to all or portions of the working group topics. Both the unique and common findings and recommendations of five topic areas are reported below.
Findings (1) Continuing with the theme and conclusions of the first A I A A Workshop in 1992, this Workshop reconfirmed that unprecedented opportunities exist today for spacefaring nations to cooperate on a large scale for the benefit of all humankind. While there are many international cooperative ventures in space already underway, there are additional and potential near and long-term projects that will benefit humankind directly and could help develop space as a place for the conduct of new economic activities. (2) The global, political, industrial, and socio-economic climate makes wide ranging cooperation not only
143
Reports possible, but, what is new is that international cooperation may now be a necessary strategy to achieve the goals set out for space-related projects. The political, technical and economic support for space activities may d e m a n d t h a t n a t i o n s exploit the advantages of international cooperation, and accept the difficulties and risks, for the long-term benefit of all. (3) Meeting in plenary session, the participants discovered that each area of space utilization may require a different methodology or approach for achieving international cooperation. A key objective of this workshop was to identify overarching themes applicable to achieving international cooperation in five diverse areas of space utilization. Instead, when participants brought their findings together in plenary sessions, they found that common approaches to international cooperation in specific areas were not readily apparent. (4) T o d a y , the need for global space systems services in telecommunications, r e m o t e sensing, and navigation is growing. These services are becoming accessible to all nations and are increasingly commercial and international. In addition to private sector utility, commercial global space system services offer enormous potential for public service benefit by supporting public safety, disaster warning and relief, search and rescue, as well as health and education services. New methods for international cooperation through the use of legally binding agreements have been used successfully in private sector initiatives. However, as private and public sector utilization of space system services grows, the lack of uniform licensing and technical standards for satellites, ground stations, and consumer products that utilize these services could become a problem. Also, establishing uniform interface standards and interoperability of the space segment should encourage the growth of new applications. (5) Peacekeeping operations around the globe, ranging from crisis prevention, to crisis monitoring, to crisis resolution, are increasingly interna-
144
tional. Precedent setting discussions conducted during the workshop indicate that opportunities may now exist for cooperatively using national space assets for multinational peacekeeping operations in ways that have never been done. Every modern military power has become dependent upon space-based assets for a host of critical functions including communications, navigation, weather, surveillance, and missile early warning. Similarly, successful multinational peacekeeping operations are now dependent upon support from these nationally developed systems. However, these systems are not designed to any international standards of interoperability or otherwise optimized for shared or cooperative use, and therefore fall far short of their potential. There are opportunities to improve p e a c e k e e p i n g capabilities through the expanded and integrated use of existing space assets and, potentially, through the use of new or modified space systems designed for compatibility in a multinational system for peace-keeping. However, there is no effective mechanism for removing impediments to improved cooperation for peacekeeping operations, for defining technical requirements, formulating options, performing cost-benefit analyses, or for resolving issues to optimize the use of these national assets for the collective benefit of all participants. Progress on the cooperative use of space for peacekeeping will come in incremental steps based on a solid foundation of cooperation, trust and confidence-building. (6) Political commitment to a single, long-term, large-scale space exploration initiative in the near future by any country or group of countries seems highly unlikely. Space exploration beyond Earth orbit will focus on robotic missions for the near-term because of their relatively low cost. When a commitment is made to send humans beyond Earth orbit, the magnitude of the endeavor will probably require an integrated, cooperative approach among several countries similar to the International Space Station Program. Several spacefaring nations are setting their
own long-term space exploration program agenda, rather than waiting for space superpowers to take the initiative. Successful execution of the International Space Station Program is essential to the establishment of a firm foundation for future human exploration. (7) Availability of efficient, lowcost, reliable space transportation will play a pivotal role in the successful accomplishment of future space missions. In the near term, lower cost transportation would be beneficial, but is not essential. Currently, space transportation has an existing market and is a highly competitive business where cooperation may be difficult to achieve. However, for the longer term, cooperative ventures, particularly human exploration of space and solar power to Earth, low-cost transportation is essential. Moving space transportation capabilities from the current state to meet aspirations for the future requires development of a market for space transportation which is significantly greater than that which exists today. Through international cooperation, the space transportation industry may be able to improve cost and performance over the longer period. (8) Provision of clean, low-cost energy is an environmental, economic, and international imperative. Capturing solar energy in space and importing it to Earth offers a spacebased solution which can be pursued as one component of achieving a sustainable energy future. However, the enabling technology may be one of space transportation rather than collection and importation of energy. Acquisition of space-based energy is intrinsically an international point of convergence because of the global need for energy, the distribution of enabling technology among several countries, and the need for substantial financing. (9) Existing international fora have not yet focused on, discussed, or debated opportunities for international cooperation addressed by most of the topics discussed in this workshop. The need to hold a series of work-
SPACE POLICY May 1996
Reports shops involving international cooperation is indicative of the lack of a more formal process or mechanism to discuss issues of international cooperation in space.
Recommendations (1) The heads of state and national space agencies of spacefaring nations should continue to recognize that now, more than ever, international cooperation is essential and will be an element of space exploitation and exploration initiatives that contribute beyond domestic objectives. Only through the effective use of international cooperation, with collective use of technology and resources plus elimination of duplication will we be able to implement and conduct more far-ranging space exploration initiatives than would be possible as individual nations. (2) The A I A A should take the lead in establishing a forum where representatives from the private sector and governments can discuss and formulate options for international cooperation in development of technologies that will lower space transportation costs by an order of magnitude. The first step in this process should be understanding the ' m a r k e t demand' for new space transportation systems to meet future space mission needs. In the near-term, 'technology push' should result in incremental progress in performance and cost reduction. The launch community should support the opening of national launch technology development programs to international participation. (3) National governments and international public service organizations should take advantage of the emerging capabilities of global space system services. International regulatory organizations should enhance the public service utility of emerging global space systems services through increased and more efficient allocation of frequency spectra and orbital slot positions. Licensing for these limited assets should be tied to concessions which support public service efforts around the globe. Uniform technical standards need to be developed to
SPACE POLICY May 1996
enhance the interoperability of these systems, thereby improving global public service potential for future generations. (4) The principal providers of military, civil and commercial space capabilities should establish an international forum to investigate the feasibility of improved use of current and future space systems for peacekeeping operations. The U S A and Russia, as primary owners of relevant space capabilities, should take the initiative to establish the forum and invite other peacekeeping participants and space asset providers to attend. Discussions should then focus on requirements, how existing national and international space systems can be applied to satisfy these requirements, and on mechanisms for near-term and far-term cooperation. (5) Heads of space agencies should ensure that actions are taken collectively to review their respective space exploration agenda with a view toward identifying potential opportunities for coordination. When identified, options should be studied to implement opportunities, taking into account the experience gained through existing international cooperative mechanisms. One preferred approach to current exploration programs is for them to consist of internationally coordinated, evolutionary robotic efforts, composed of a series of interlinked phases, each justifiable on its own merit. In the longer term, human exploration missions beyond low earth orbit, because of their magnitude, probably will require an integrated, cooperative approach among several nations. The appropriate level of international coordination for specific projects depends on the nature of each project. Coordinating experiments on a small robotic mission can be facilitated through less formal means. However, coordinating large, expensive, long-term cooperative missions, such as human flights to Mars, requires attention and approval at the highest political levels. The International Space Station is an important technical, operational and management learning project for this type of integrated space program.
(6) An international body needs to be formed and tasked with the responsibility of determining the feasibility of a space-based solution for the collection and distribution of solar power to Earth. Government, industry and professional societies should promote awareness of the need for energy and the potential for a space-based solution. The space community, in concert with other potential stakeholders in energy and e n v i r o n m e n t a l areas, should advocate feasibility demonstrations. Space transportation costs remain high and present a problem which must be resolved before implementation of space solar power systems can take place. (7) Definitive actions need to be taken to establish a mechanism by which the international community can foster and promote beneficial projects of international cooperation in space. The fact that it is difficult to assign responsibility for implementing the recommendations of this report to a specific international agency or organization with appropriate resources and authority is indicative of a major impediment in achieving the full potential of space. Some participants at the workshop suggest that this need be addressed by establishing an 'International Space Cooperation Protocol'. The purpose of this protocol would be to provide a forum for senior leaders to periodically hold international discussions of common interests. It has been recommended that the A I A A , with other appropriate organizations, develop the concept for the protocol along with its staffing requirements and operating procedures.
Conclusion The 1994 A I A A Workshop on International Space Cooperation identified opportunities for international cooperation and recommended specific actions and mechanisms to develop and promote them. Near-term opportunities exist for effective and economical use of space to augment and improve current space-based services and to support worldwide peacekeep-
145
Reports~Letter to the editor
ing operations. Long-term opportunities exist to enhance robotic and human exploration of the solar system and to implement space solar power systems to meet energy needs through international cooperation. Dependable, low-cost transportation to space is basic to all space activity. Those concerned need to work diligently to develop low-cost transportation. Success in this area will enhance the efficiency of current activity and facilitate long-term space activities.
The American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, through its International Activities Committee, and in coordination with other appropriate organizations is working t o promote workshop results and pursue acceptance of the concepts, ideas and
Reprinted with permission from the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Washington, DC, USA.
mechanisms which will advance pertinent international initiatives of cooperation. Copies of the full report are available from A I A A , 370 L'Enfant P r o m e n a d e , SW, Washington DC 20024, USA.
AIAA/Robert A. Fuhrman Lockheed Corporation & JOrgen H. Wild NA TO Advisory Group for AerospaceResearch and Development
Letter to the editor The yon Braun paradigma response to Harry Ruppe Anyone who knows the historiography of Wernher von Braun is aware that there exists what some have called the 'H unt s v i l l e School' of von Braun chroniclers. Composed of von Braun's friends and compatriots, this group jealously guards his legacy and attacks any outsider who attempts to address the subject. Anyone who does not subscribe to their view is automatically the enemy. Dr Ruppe is clearly a member of this group. But I must admit to being surprised by the pettiness and sarcasm in his letter. Rather than assume that he is a cantankerous person, I will give him the benefit of the doubt and assume he was merely having a bad day. I only wish that he had been as careful in reading my essay as I was in writing it. Dr Ruppe shows concern that I may have mistaken Guido von Pirquet for H e rman n Noordung. He failed to notice that Noordung is indeed mentioned in the article (p. 154). I also never gave Pirquet credit for the idea of a space station (which can be substantively traced back at least to 1869 with Edmund Hale's The Brick M o o n , and indeed back to mythology). Nor did I give him credit for the idea of a wheeled space station, which Tsiolkovsky also discussed in a different
146
form. N o o r d u n g (aka Potocnick) wrote the first book on space stations. He advocated the use of a space station for reconnaissance, meteorology and mapping. A number of Pirquet's papers predated Noordung's book. More importantly, Pirquet gets credit for the original idea, as I stated (p. 155), of using a space station as a necessary j u m p i n g - o f f p o i n t to the p l a n e t s . This c o n c e p t was l at er adopted by yon Braun in the Collier's series and Disney films and was a powerful part of his thinking. It appears in latter space policies such as the Space Task Group and the 90-Day Study. As we know, a space station is n o t necessary for human planetary exploration. But this idea persisted in many of the major space plans. It was a flaw which had the effect of increasing the cost of any mission it was linked to and thus making it harder to justify politically. Dr Ruppe is correct in noting that the first American satellite technically flew atop a Juno and not a Jupiter rocket. Juno I was a Jupiter-C with an upper stage and payload. But my mention of the heritage of this rocket was t o make a rhetoricacl point rather than a technical one - that the first successful US satellite launch vehicle was
essentially a direct linear descendent of von Braun's earlier ideas and the V-2. Indigenous American rockets such as the Atlas, Titan and Thor were in many respects far more innovative and even revolutionary than the Redstone, Jupiter and Juno. But it was the evolutionary and philosophical lineage of von Braun's ideas and influence that I was stressing, not his technical achievements (which were considerable, but irrelevant to the subject). As for Ruppe's comment that the A B M A team didn't work 'secretly' to explore space, he ignores quite a bit of historical evidence on this point. He discusses the 1957-58 time frame - i.e. post-Sputnik/pre-NASA - when space plans proliferated as everyone, particularly von Braun, thought that unlimited money was on the way. But I was referring to the 1955-57 time frame, when von Braun was not supposed to be focusing on space, but did so clandestinely. The 1955 decision to launch the US IGY satellite atop Vanguard removed the A B M A team from the space program. This was done for complicated policy reasons unknown to yon Braun at the time. In response to this, Ernst Stuhlinger made quiet contacts with James van Allen to develop scientific instruments for an Army satellite even though General John Medaris later testified that he had received orders to watch von Braun's team closely t o make sure they did not 'accidentally' launch a satellite into orbit. The deci-
SPACE POLICY May 1996