- Email: [email protected]
Prospects for international space cooperation in the Pacific Basin
Viewpoint
Prospects for international space cooperation in the Pacific Basin Brenda Forman
This article examines the possible avenues of cooperation in space activity between nations of the Pacific Basin. It looks at possible members of a regional space organization and their areas of common interest. The European Space Agency is suggested as a model, and some of the useful lessons that could be learned from it, as well as significant differences between the European and Pacific regions, are discussed. Brenda Forman is Director, International Marketing Policy, Lockheed Corporation, 4500 Park Granada Boulevard, Calabasas, CA 91399, USA.
The future always arrives before we are ready for it. Before this century ends, the spacefaring nations of the Pacific Basin are likely to find that their future will increasingly involve them in international cooperative space ventures focused on regional needs. These nations have an interesting opportunity to begin planning for that future now. Some of the Pacific Basin's spacefaring nations are, of course, already deeply involved in a wide range of international cooperative projects in space. But as both their national and international space efforts expand in the 1990s and beyond, their ambitions, goals and requirements in space are likely increasingly to outstrip both their national borders and the constraints of their national budgets. As this process accelerates, it could increasingly be in their interest to develop new organizations and institutional arrangements for regional cooperation in increasingly complex and sophisticated projects. Developing such cooperative institutional vehicles is a lengthy process. The nations of the Pacific Basin might well begin to plan now for their future increased regional cooperation in space by: •
SPACE POLICY May 1992
analysing and identifying areas of shared interest in space research,
development and/or operations that would serve as the best bases upon which to build a structure of Pacific Basin cooperation in space; • studying and discussing the type of institutional arrangements best suited to their particular national and regional needs; and • identifying preliminary and less complex joint projects in which they could test out techniques and institutional arrangements before moving on to larger and more ambitious objectives. In this undertaking they can benefit by the hard-won experience of those who have gone before. Notable among these efforts is the European Space Agency (ESA). In this Viewpoint we will suggest certain areas in which the history and organization of ESA may serve as a possible model for the Pacific Basin, and discuss some of the obstacles rooted in the history, economics and geography of the Pacific Basin that could impede effective regional cooperation in space, together with possible approaches to overcoming these obstacles.
Possible membership Who might be the members of a possible Pacific Basin Space Agency? There are plenty of potential candi-
111
Viewpoint
'rather than searching for members, the problem might be to narrow the field'
112
dates. Space activity in the Pacific Basin is accelerating at such a remarkable rate that rather than searching for members, the problem might rather be to narrow the field of candidates so as to maintain a clear regional focus. A primary candidate would necessarily be Japan. Its space programme is perhaps the most advanced in the Western Pacific. The programme is based on a long-range plan, reaching well into the next century, and covers nearly the entire spectrum of space activities. The Japanese are readying a new and improved expendable rocket, the H-II, for launch in the early 1990s. They are deeply involved in research into hypersonic flight, with an eye to possibly developing a single-stage-toorbit spaceplane. They are designing their own reusable shuttle-type vehicle, the Hope. International cooperation, moreover, is a fundamental element of Japanese space policy. Japan has a long history of cooperative space projects, chiefly with the USA. Currently Japan is a partner in the largest cooperative space venture in history, the International Space Station Freedom. China also has an ambitious space programme. Thus far it has focused most heavily on their expendable rocket, the Long March. From a standing start in the mid-1980s the Chinese have made the Long March a new and noteworthy competitor in the i n t e r n a t i o n a l c o m m e r c i a l rocket launch market. Their plans reach well beyond rockets, however. China clearly aspires to becoming a firstrank, broad-based space power. Its chief problem is likely to be finding the resources to match its aspirations. That, of course, is the primary motivation for any nation to enter into international cooperative projects and therefore might make an appropriately designed Pacific Basin Space Agency an attractive prospect to the Chinese. Australia still intends to go forward with the construction of a commercial space launch port on the Cape York peninsula, despite formidable political and financial challenges. This is an adventurous undertaking that would involve an international consortium
with members from both governments and industry. Like all such ambitious projects, it confronts some major difficulties. One consortium has already dropped out of the project; US export controls continue to raise questions as to whether Western payloads will be permitted to go to Cape York for launch on Russian Zenit vehicles; and the turbulence in the erstwhile USSR raises questions as to whether the Zenits themselves might be dependably available in the longer term. However, Australia continues to pursue the project seriously. Another country that might well be considered as a potential member of a Pacific Basin cooperative space organization is India. To be sure, it is not geographically part of the Pacific Basin. However, the Indians have a strong, well-established space programme that has involved them extensively in international cooperative projects. Despite geography, therefore, India's skills and experience might well make it a prospective partner worth considering. The USA, Russia and Canada, of course, are also Pacific Basin nations deeply involved in space, but it is hard to see how they would fit into any future Pacific Basin Space Agency without radically diluting its focus. Yet at the same time it is hard to see how they might be entirely excluded. Perhaps they could be accorded some sort of observer status. Other non-spacefaring nations in the region might well be interested in participating in a regional space agency, despite their relatively modest level of space achievement at present. Taiwan, for example, is deeply interested in becoming a serious space power and possesses an educated, talented workforce capable of rapidly mastering sophisticated space technology. Equally as important, Taiwan's extremely large cash reserves give it the necessary financial resources to implement those aims. Other possible members include Thailand and Indonesia. To be sure, they do not have active space programmes at present, but several members of ESA did not have significant space programmes at the time ESA was formed. They were attracted to
SPACE POLICY May 1992
Viewpoint the idea of regional cooperation precisely because it offered them a way to p a r t i c i p a t e in c o m p l e x , h i g h technology projects that they could not have afforded on a national basis. The same could well prove true in the Pacific Basin. A possible Pacific Basin Space Agency would therefore certainly not lack for members. The problem might instead turn out to be how to choose among potential candidates.
Possible shared interests Charles de Gaulle said it best: There are no allies, only interests. Nations cooperate on complex, expensive projects - in space or anywhere else - for one reason only: it is in their interest to do so. Therefore any effort to design suitable organizations and techniques for Pacific Basin regional cooperation in space must begin by identifying areas of shared interest where cooperation would be advantageous to all the parties involved. Two m a j o r possibilities suggest themselves fairly immediately: •
1Moustafa T. Chahine, 'Extraction of climate parameters from operational satellite observing systems', in Proceedings of the Pacific ISY Conference: A Planning Meeting for the International Space Year (unpublished), held Kona, HI, 19-21 August 1987, pp 15-16. 2Peter J. Mouginis-Mark, 'Volcanic hazards in the Circum-Pacific Basin: a proposed ISY project', in ibid, pp 17-24. 3Nobukiko Kodaira, 'Training course in remote sensing for developing countries', in ibid, pp 34-35. 4Takashi lida, 'Satellite and geostationary platform for Pacific Basin information network', in ibid, pp 83-92.
S P A C E P O L I C Y May 1992
Joint efforts in the areas of global change and environmental monitoring. This is the broad range of activities associated with the concept of Mission to Planet Earth. The health of the home planet affects every nation. Furthermore, space technology is absolutely essential to any accurate assessment of, or remedy for, global change. T h e r e f o r e Mission to Planet Earth could prove a particularly promising focus for international cooperation in space. • Joint scientific research in areas where the technological and financial demands involved are beyond the resources of individual nations acting alone. This was a central motive in the formation of the European Space Agency. It could well play the same role in the Pacific Basin. Other interesting possibilities for Pacific Basin cooperation in space were suggested at a conference held in Hawaii in 1987 as part of the planning for the International Space Year (ISY). The conference was organized
to examine possible projects suitable for the ISY that would serve the needs of Pacific Rim nations. The following are a few of the candidates put forward there: •
Coordinating the use of space observations from the US N O A A weather satellite system and other international satellites with improved ground-based observations to improve the quality and usefulness of weather and climate data. 1 In addition to cooperating to develop an expanded ground segment, Pacific Basin nations might find it useful to identify gaps of specific interest to them in the space-based segment's capabilities and cooperate in developing satellites and/or sensors to fill these gaps. • Mapping volcanoes around the basin and assessing the hazards they pose. 2 The Pacific Basin contains over 70% of the world's volc a n o e s , and their d e v a s t a t i n g effects include ash falls, tsunamis, mud and lava flows and effects on global climate. As with the previous proposals, Pacific Basin nations might usefully assess the effectiveness of existing spacebased and ground-based detection systems and examine what cooperative effort might serve their mutual needs. • Expanding training in the use of remote-sensing technology for developing c o u n t r i e s ) Developing countries are increasingly recognizing the value of remote-sensing data but they still often lack the skills necessary to use them effectively. In 1977 Japan began a yearly two-month training course to educate remote-sensing scientists from developing countries. This effort might provide the nucleus for an expanded effort involving other Pacific Basin nations to whom remote-sensing data offer a vital developmental tool. • A geostationary satellite platform for a Pacific Basin information network. 4 Japanese technical studies indicate that the technology exists for a geostationary platform that could be used for a Pacific
113
Viewpoint
Basin information and/or education network. Such a network could be a prime focus for regional cooperation by Pacific Basin nations in developing both the ground and space segments.
'Could Cape York be to a Pacific Basin Space Agency as Kourou is to ESA?'
Yet another intriguing possibility might be to reconceptualize Australia's proposed Cape York launch facility in the context of a Pacific Basin Space Agency. Could Cape York be to a Pacific Basin Space Agency as Kourou is to ESA? Cape York is currently planned as a purely commercial undertaking. However, it might be interesting to examine the project's potential future role in the expanded context of formal regional cooperation in space. These are only a few illustrations of the sort of shared interests among Pacific Basin nations upon which a new regional cooperative structure might be based. We could expect others to emerge as the nations of the region discussed their mutual needs and interests in space.
E S A as a possible model In designing a possible Pacific Basin Space Agency it will be useful to benefit from the hard-won experience of those who have gone before. The history and organization of the European Space Agency can provide valuable pointers. ESA as we know it today is the product of the sometimes difficult experience of its predecessor organizations, the European Space Research Organization (ESRO) and the European Launch and Development Organization (ELDO). Designers of a Pacific Basin Space Agency could learn much from that experience and, with luck, skip at least some of the painful preliminary stages. The ESA experience, of course, must be constantly tested against the history and current needs of the Pacific Basin. Whatever emerges must be something new, tailored to a very different region with very different histories and cultures. However, one of ESA's central organizational features is likely to be equally valid for the Pacific Basin. This is the division of ESA activities into two classes:
114
mandatory and optional. The mandatory programmes include the science programme and the agency's basic activities (ie what it actually takes to run the agency). All members must participate in these programmes in proportion to their respective gross national products. All other programmes are optional. Members can participate or not as they wish. If they want to participate they can specify the percentage of that particular programme budget that they will assume. This a la carte approach to common projects was the product of considerable - and sometimes painful - experience and experimentation by ESA's predecessor organizations. It is central to ESA's success because it allows the organization essential flexibility for taking into account the widely varying needs and resources of its members. Those needs and resources will vary at least as widely among Pacific Basin nations as they do among the members of ESA - and possibly even more widely. Consequently, the technique of combining mandatory with optional programmes should be examined early on as a basic organizational feature.
Q u e s t i o n areas The ESA model certainly provides a valuable starting point, but it will require some significant 'tweaking' before we could confidently apply it in the context of the Pacific Basin. Historically, economic and cultural differences between the two regions will necessarily influence organizational options. The first question area arises from the widely differing levels of technological advancement and economic power of the various potential members of a Pacific Basin Space Agency. If cooperative institutions are to succeed, each member, small or large, must be satisfied that its own interests are served by its participation and that those interests are not being obscured by the dominance of other more wealthy or technologically advanced members. If any member comes to believe it is putting more in than it is getting out of the organization, it will eventually withdraw. ESA deals with this problem by
SPACE POLICY May 1992
Viewpoint means of the concept of 'just return'. Just return means that whatever money each member puts into a cooperative project will come back to it in the form of contracts connected with that project. This is never an easy process, but it is workable so long as the participants are all reasonably technologically advanced. It becomes increasingly difficult, however, when a p r o s p e c t i v e participant lacks the necessary technological capability to fulfil contracts that would constitute its just return. Among the nations of the Pacific Basin there is an extraordinarily wide range of technological capability, from superb to embryonic. This disparity must be recognized and dealt with in any institutional planning for a regional cooperative space agency. Perhaps a special status might be established for less-advanced participants under which their 'just return' would take the form of technology transfer or training, designed to enhance their ability to participate more effectively in future programmes. Another question area concerns the Pacific Basin's long history of warfare and cultural tensions. These are deeply differing cultures that have clashed, at times bloodily, in the recent past.
SPACE POLICY May 1992
Bringing them together in a major cooperative effort will require political adroitness and cultural sensitivity. Yet precisely the same thing can be said of the nations of Western Europe. A mere 50 years ago the nations of ESA were locked in deadly combat. Today they are partners in great undertakings. Out of the destruction of the second world war, in one of history's great flowerings of vision and leadership, there was born the historic resolve that never again would the nations of Western Europe go to war against each other. In the ensuing decades a structure of new institutions was built, of which ESA is only one, designed to ensure that peace and cooperation would always be more attractive options than renewed war. We see the fruits of that labour in the impending economic unification of Europe. Had anyone spoken of 'EC92' in 1939, when Europe was foundering in blood, who would have believed them? It is not altogether beyond possibility, therefore, that the nations of the Pacific Basin might find the political will to devise a more cooperative future for themselves. As always in history, the essential elements are vision, leadership and determination.
115
Prospects for international space cooperation in the Pacific Basin Brenda Forman
This article examines the possible avenues of cooperation in space activity between nations of the Pacific Basin. It looks at possible members of a regional space organization and their areas of common interest. The European Space Agency is suggested as a model, and some of the useful lessons that could be learned from it, as well as significant differences between the European and Pacific regions, are discussed. Brenda Forman is Director, International Marketing Policy, Lockheed Corporation, 4500 Park Granada Boulevard, Calabasas, CA 91399, USA.
The future always arrives before we are ready for it. Before this century ends, the spacefaring nations of the Pacific Basin are likely to find that their future will increasingly involve them in international cooperative space ventures focused on regional needs. These nations have an interesting opportunity to begin planning for that future now. Some of the Pacific Basin's spacefaring nations are, of course, already deeply involved in a wide range of international cooperative projects in space. But as both their national and international space efforts expand in the 1990s and beyond, their ambitions, goals and requirements in space are likely increasingly to outstrip both their national borders and the constraints of their national budgets. As this process accelerates, it could increasingly be in their interest to develop new organizations and institutional arrangements for regional cooperation in increasingly complex and sophisticated projects. Developing such cooperative institutional vehicles is a lengthy process. The nations of the Pacific Basin might well begin to plan now for their future increased regional cooperation in space by: •
SPACE POLICY May 1992
analysing and identifying areas of shared interest in space research,
development and/or operations that would serve as the best bases upon which to build a structure of Pacific Basin cooperation in space; • studying and discussing the type of institutional arrangements best suited to their particular national and regional needs; and • identifying preliminary and less complex joint projects in which they could test out techniques and institutional arrangements before moving on to larger and more ambitious objectives. In this undertaking they can benefit by the hard-won experience of those who have gone before. Notable among these efforts is the European Space Agency (ESA). In this Viewpoint we will suggest certain areas in which the history and organization of ESA may serve as a possible model for the Pacific Basin, and discuss some of the obstacles rooted in the history, economics and geography of the Pacific Basin that could impede effective regional cooperation in space, together with possible approaches to overcoming these obstacles.
Possible membership Who might be the members of a possible Pacific Basin Space Agency? There are plenty of potential candi-
111
Viewpoint
'rather than searching for members, the problem might be to narrow the field'
112
dates. Space activity in the Pacific Basin is accelerating at such a remarkable rate that rather than searching for members, the problem might rather be to narrow the field of candidates so as to maintain a clear regional focus. A primary candidate would necessarily be Japan. Its space programme is perhaps the most advanced in the Western Pacific. The programme is based on a long-range plan, reaching well into the next century, and covers nearly the entire spectrum of space activities. The Japanese are readying a new and improved expendable rocket, the H-II, for launch in the early 1990s. They are deeply involved in research into hypersonic flight, with an eye to possibly developing a single-stage-toorbit spaceplane. They are designing their own reusable shuttle-type vehicle, the Hope. International cooperation, moreover, is a fundamental element of Japanese space policy. Japan has a long history of cooperative space projects, chiefly with the USA. Currently Japan is a partner in the largest cooperative space venture in history, the International Space Station Freedom. China also has an ambitious space programme. Thus far it has focused most heavily on their expendable rocket, the Long March. From a standing start in the mid-1980s the Chinese have made the Long March a new and noteworthy competitor in the i n t e r n a t i o n a l c o m m e r c i a l rocket launch market. Their plans reach well beyond rockets, however. China clearly aspires to becoming a firstrank, broad-based space power. Its chief problem is likely to be finding the resources to match its aspirations. That, of course, is the primary motivation for any nation to enter into international cooperative projects and therefore might make an appropriately designed Pacific Basin Space Agency an attractive prospect to the Chinese. Australia still intends to go forward with the construction of a commercial space launch port on the Cape York peninsula, despite formidable political and financial challenges. This is an adventurous undertaking that would involve an international consortium
with members from both governments and industry. Like all such ambitious projects, it confronts some major difficulties. One consortium has already dropped out of the project; US export controls continue to raise questions as to whether Western payloads will be permitted to go to Cape York for launch on Russian Zenit vehicles; and the turbulence in the erstwhile USSR raises questions as to whether the Zenits themselves might be dependably available in the longer term. However, Australia continues to pursue the project seriously. Another country that might well be considered as a potential member of a Pacific Basin cooperative space organization is India. To be sure, it is not geographically part of the Pacific Basin. However, the Indians have a strong, well-established space programme that has involved them extensively in international cooperative projects. Despite geography, therefore, India's skills and experience might well make it a prospective partner worth considering. The USA, Russia and Canada, of course, are also Pacific Basin nations deeply involved in space, but it is hard to see how they would fit into any future Pacific Basin Space Agency without radically diluting its focus. Yet at the same time it is hard to see how they might be entirely excluded. Perhaps they could be accorded some sort of observer status. Other non-spacefaring nations in the region might well be interested in participating in a regional space agency, despite their relatively modest level of space achievement at present. Taiwan, for example, is deeply interested in becoming a serious space power and possesses an educated, talented workforce capable of rapidly mastering sophisticated space technology. Equally as important, Taiwan's extremely large cash reserves give it the necessary financial resources to implement those aims. Other possible members include Thailand and Indonesia. To be sure, they do not have active space programmes at present, but several members of ESA did not have significant space programmes at the time ESA was formed. They were attracted to
SPACE POLICY May 1992
Viewpoint the idea of regional cooperation precisely because it offered them a way to p a r t i c i p a t e in c o m p l e x , h i g h technology projects that they could not have afforded on a national basis. The same could well prove true in the Pacific Basin. A possible Pacific Basin Space Agency would therefore certainly not lack for members. The problem might instead turn out to be how to choose among potential candidates.
Possible shared interests Charles de Gaulle said it best: There are no allies, only interests. Nations cooperate on complex, expensive projects - in space or anywhere else - for one reason only: it is in their interest to do so. Therefore any effort to design suitable organizations and techniques for Pacific Basin regional cooperation in space must begin by identifying areas of shared interest where cooperation would be advantageous to all the parties involved. Two m a j o r possibilities suggest themselves fairly immediately: •
1Moustafa T. Chahine, 'Extraction of climate parameters from operational satellite observing systems', in Proceedings of the Pacific ISY Conference: A Planning Meeting for the International Space Year (unpublished), held Kona, HI, 19-21 August 1987, pp 15-16. 2Peter J. Mouginis-Mark, 'Volcanic hazards in the Circum-Pacific Basin: a proposed ISY project', in ibid, pp 17-24. 3Nobukiko Kodaira, 'Training course in remote sensing for developing countries', in ibid, pp 34-35. 4Takashi lida, 'Satellite and geostationary platform for Pacific Basin information network', in ibid, pp 83-92.
S P A C E P O L I C Y May 1992
Joint efforts in the areas of global change and environmental monitoring. This is the broad range of activities associated with the concept of Mission to Planet Earth. The health of the home planet affects every nation. Furthermore, space technology is absolutely essential to any accurate assessment of, or remedy for, global change. T h e r e f o r e Mission to Planet Earth could prove a particularly promising focus for international cooperation in space. • Joint scientific research in areas where the technological and financial demands involved are beyond the resources of individual nations acting alone. This was a central motive in the formation of the European Space Agency. It could well play the same role in the Pacific Basin. Other interesting possibilities for Pacific Basin cooperation in space were suggested at a conference held in Hawaii in 1987 as part of the planning for the International Space Year (ISY). The conference was organized
to examine possible projects suitable for the ISY that would serve the needs of Pacific Rim nations. The following are a few of the candidates put forward there: •
Coordinating the use of space observations from the US N O A A weather satellite system and other international satellites with improved ground-based observations to improve the quality and usefulness of weather and climate data. 1 In addition to cooperating to develop an expanded ground segment, Pacific Basin nations might find it useful to identify gaps of specific interest to them in the space-based segment's capabilities and cooperate in developing satellites and/or sensors to fill these gaps. • Mapping volcanoes around the basin and assessing the hazards they pose. 2 The Pacific Basin contains over 70% of the world's volc a n o e s , and their d e v a s t a t i n g effects include ash falls, tsunamis, mud and lava flows and effects on global climate. As with the previous proposals, Pacific Basin nations might usefully assess the effectiveness of existing spacebased and ground-based detection systems and examine what cooperative effort might serve their mutual needs. • Expanding training in the use of remote-sensing technology for developing c o u n t r i e s ) Developing countries are increasingly recognizing the value of remote-sensing data but they still often lack the skills necessary to use them effectively. In 1977 Japan began a yearly two-month training course to educate remote-sensing scientists from developing countries. This effort might provide the nucleus for an expanded effort involving other Pacific Basin nations to whom remote-sensing data offer a vital developmental tool. • A geostationary satellite platform for a Pacific Basin information network. 4 Japanese technical studies indicate that the technology exists for a geostationary platform that could be used for a Pacific
113
Viewpoint
Basin information and/or education network. Such a network could be a prime focus for regional cooperation by Pacific Basin nations in developing both the ground and space segments.
'Could Cape York be to a Pacific Basin Space Agency as Kourou is to ESA?'
Yet another intriguing possibility might be to reconceptualize Australia's proposed Cape York launch facility in the context of a Pacific Basin Space Agency. Could Cape York be to a Pacific Basin Space Agency as Kourou is to ESA? Cape York is currently planned as a purely commercial undertaking. However, it might be interesting to examine the project's potential future role in the expanded context of formal regional cooperation in space. These are only a few illustrations of the sort of shared interests among Pacific Basin nations upon which a new regional cooperative structure might be based. We could expect others to emerge as the nations of the region discussed their mutual needs and interests in space.
E S A as a possible model In designing a possible Pacific Basin Space Agency it will be useful to benefit from the hard-won experience of those who have gone before. The history and organization of the European Space Agency can provide valuable pointers. ESA as we know it today is the product of the sometimes difficult experience of its predecessor organizations, the European Space Research Organization (ESRO) and the European Launch and Development Organization (ELDO). Designers of a Pacific Basin Space Agency could learn much from that experience and, with luck, skip at least some of the painful preliminary stages. The ESA experience, of course, must be constantly tested against the history and current needs of the Pacific Basin. Whatever emerges must be something new, tailored to a very different region with very different histories and cultures. However, one of ESA's central organizational features is likely to be equally valid for the Pacific Basin. This is the division of ESA activities into two classes:
114
mandatory and optional. The mandatory programmes include the science programme and the agency's basic activities (ie what it actually takes to run the agency). All members must participate in these programmes in proportion to their respective gross national products. All other programmes are optional. Members can participate or not as they wish. If they want to participate they can specify the percentage of that particular programme budget that they will assume. This a la carte approach to common projects was the product of considerable - and sometimes painful - experience and experimentation by ESA's predecessor organizations. It is central to ESA's success because it allows the organization essential flexibility for taking into account the widely varying needs and resources of its members. Those needs and resources will vary at least as widely among Pacific Basin nations as they do among the members of ESA - and possibly even more widely. Consequently, the technique of combining mandatory with optional programmes should be examined early on as a basic organizational feature.
Q u e s t i o n areas The ESA model certainly provides a valuable starting point, but it will require some significant 'tweaking' before we could confidently apply it in the context of the Pacific Basin. Historically, economic and cultural differences between the two regions will necessarily influence organizational options. The first question area arises from the widely differing levels of technological advancement and economic power of the various potential members of a Pacific Basin Space Agency. If cooperative institutions are to succeed, each member, small or large, must be satisfied that its own interests are served by its participation and that those interests are not being obscured by the dominance of other more wealthy or technologically advanced members. If any member comes to believe it is putting more in than it is getting out of the organization, it will eventually withdraw. ESA deals with this problem by
SPACE POLICY May 1992
Viewpoint means of the concept of 'just return'. Just return means that whatever money each member puts into a cooperative project will come back to it in the form of contracts connected with that project. This is never an easy process, but it is workable so long as the participants are all reasonably technologically advanced. It becomes increasingly difficult, however, when a p r o s p e c t i v e participant lacks the necessary technological capability to fulfil contracts that would constitute its just return. Among the nations of the Pacific Basin there is an extraordinarily wide range of technological capability, from superb to embryonic. This disparity must be recognized and dealt with in any institutional planning for a regional cooperative space agency. Perhaps a special status might be established for less-advanced participants under which their 'just return' would take the form of technology transfer or training, designed to enhance their ability to participate more effectively in future programmes. Another question area concerns the Pacific Basin's long history of warfare and cultural tensions. These are deeply differing cultures that have clashed, at times bloodily, in the recent past.
SPACE POLICY May 1992
Bringing them together in a major cooperative effort will require political adroitness and cultural sensitivity. Yet precisely the same thing can be said of the nations of Western Europe. A mere 50 years ago the nations of ESA were locked in deadly combat. Today they are partners in great undertakings. Out of the destruction of the second world war, in one of history's great flowerings of vision and leadership, there was born the historic resolve that never again would the nations of Western Europe go to war against each other. In the ensuing decades a structure of new institutions was built, of which ESA is only one, designed to ensure that peace and cooperation would always be more attractive options than renewed war. We see the fruits of that labour in the impending economic unification of Europe. Had anyone spoken of 'EC92' in 1939, when Europe was foundering in blood, who would have believed them? It is not altogether beyond possibility, therefore, that the nations of the Pacific Basin might find the political will to devise a more cooperative future for themselves. As always in history, the essential elements are vision, leadership and determination.
115