So Far, Yet So Close: Space and Geopolitics
Space, once the final frontier for exploration, might now be the next battlefield. During the Cold War, it showcased ideological supremacy; today, it is a focal point for military dominance. Both China and the United States are investing billions to secure superiority in this boundless arena, developing new technologies and weapons that turn space into a potential war zone. The lack of comprehensive regulation heightens the risks associated with this militarization. Beyond the military dimension, the promise of rare metals and other resources drives investments in asteroid and lunar mining, offering immense wealth and strategic advantages.
Space “Governance”
While Earth has mostly clear national borders, the enormity of space and our limited knowledge make it difficult to establish clear delimitations. Both traditional spacefaring nations and new challengers are sending more rockets and spacecraft in a renewed interest in exploration. Yet, nobody knows who owns what. With multiple countries vying for military and resource dominance, the potential for conflict and a new form of colonization is a threat. Thus, establishing space governance and legal and ethical frameworks is crucial for a peaceful and sustainable use of space.
The first major legal framework was the Outer Space Treaty of 1967. Drafted by the United States and the Soviet Union for the United Nations (U.N.), it was ratified by the drafters, the United Kingdom, and 112 other countries. The treaty emphasized the use of space for peaceful purposes and the responsibility of nations for their space activities. Crucially, it prohibited the placement of weapons of mass destruction, including nuclear weapons, in orbit, on celestial bodies, or stations. It also banned national appropriation of outer space, the moon, and other celestial bodies.
The Moon Agreement, adopted by the U.N. in 1979 and coming into force in 1984, built on the principles established by the Outer Space Treaty. It emphasized the peaceful purposes of space exploration and the non-appropriation of outer space. Most notably, it proposed an international regime to govern the exploitation of lunar resources to ensure that possible benefits are distributed equitably. However, most major spacefaring nations, like the U.S., Russia, and China, did not ratify the framework due to potential limitations on exploiting those resources they invested heavily in accessing.
Other significant legal guidelines are the Liability Convention and Registration Convention. The Liability Convention, which came into force in 1972, establishes states’ liability for damage caused by their space objects on the surface of Earth and outer space. The Registration Convention, which became binding in 1976, obliges countries to furnish information to the U.N. about each space object launched into Earth orbit or beyond.
The most recent intent to regulate space is the Artemis Accords, announced by NASA in 2020. The accords require signatories to conduct their activities transparently and provide emergency assistance to astronauts in distress. As of July 2024, 40 countries have signed the framework. However, China and Russia have not, mainly due to tensions with the U.S. Both countries have criticized the concept of “safety zones,” which are areas around lunar operations designed to prevent harmful interference and ensure mission safety. Thus, under these guidelines, a Russian spaceship could not land next to a Japanese base. The then head of the Russian Space Agency referred to this as an “invasion,” although the post was later deleted.
The United Nations Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space (COPUOS), established in 1959, is the primary governing body for space governance. It has played a pivotal role in drafting many key space treaties. However, most of its guidelines are non-binding, significantly limiting its enforcement power.
As one can tell, the current situation is vague. Most frameworks are not signed by every country, and the lack of clear guidelines allows for different interpretations. Advancements in technology and new types of missions (asteroid mining, lunar bases) have changed the space sector. Yet, space legislation is outdated and has not anticipated most developments. Until now, no provision could stop commercial operations on the moon. The Artemis Accords showed the division between the Western world, Russia, and China. To counter U.S. American space dominance, the latter two have heavily invested in their space agencies and agreed to build a nuclear power plant on the moon by 2035.
Resources in Space: Future of Energy Generation or Disruptor of Economy
According to NASA, the asteroid 16 Psyche is about three times farther from the Sun than Earth. NASA has already launched a mission to explore this 225-kilometer-wide, potato-shaped asteroid. The discoveries it offers could have profound repercussions on our economy. In an interview with Space.com, Lindy Elkins-Tanton, the mission’s lead scientist, estimated that if the metals on Psyche were on Earth, they would be worth more than the entire world economy. Scientists believe that the asteroid is primarily composed of rock and metal, with metal making up between 30% and 60%. According to Elkins-Tanton, the metals alone would be worth $100.000 quadrillion. By comparison, the world GDP in 2023 was $104 trillion.
While metals could bring immense wealth, water is the resource that could profoundly expand space exploration. Although samples from the Apollo missions appeared dry, new analysis technology and missions have found water ice below the moon’s surface. The south pole’s shadowed craters, in particular, are the most concentrated areas for water ice. For scientists, lunar water ice could provide a record of volcanoes, the origin of oceans, and materials delivered to Earth by comets and asteroids. For future moon explorations, sufficient lunar water could be a source of drinking water and help cool equipment. The ice might also be converted into hydrogen for fuel and oxygen to breathe, enabling longer space exploration missions or lunar mining.
According to Boeing, the moon alone is home to more than 15 rare metals. Combined with the amount of rare earth metals on asteroids, space could become the new mine for Earth. Many vital components of our smartphones, computers, and televisions require metals like scandium or yttrium. These metals are also needed for producing wind turbines, solar panels, and electric vehicle batteries. Additionally, they are used in various military applications, including missile guidance systems, lasers, and radar systems. The availability of these resources is strategically important for spacefaring countries, as space mining could shift economic and strategic balances on Earth.
A lesser-known resource is Helium-3. Rare on Earth, NASA estimates there are about a million tonnes of Helium-3 on the moon. This isotope of helium has the potential to be used in nuclear fusion reactors, which produce energy by fusing atoms, unlike current nuclear reactors that rely on fission. This fusion would produce almost no radioactive waste and become a nearly limitless energy supply. Its use would revolutionize energy generation not only on Earth but also on the moon. However, the development of nuclear fusion reactors has been slow, and it will probably take decades to see the first reactors installed.
The big question is how resources will be distributed. While the Moon Agreement aims for fair distribution, the lack of important signatories makes it irrelevant. The same goes for the Artemis Accords, which only resonates in the Western hemisphere. Therefore, the risk of resource exploitation and conflicts over mining “properties” — which the Outer Space Treaty forbids — is high. The last time large territories were unassigned, imperialist European countries benefited from global riches and left local economies in shambles.
A New Arms Race
“He who controls the air controls everything,” said General Giulio Douhet in 1921. More than a century later, his idea remains relevant. A country that controls and dominates space could hit targets worldwide anytime and anywhere. It could mine resources for itself and secure the highest chances for successful space exploration. While this scenario sounds far-fetched, it highlights the relevance of space for military intervention. Consequently, space militarization is increasingly the focus of major countries.
The United States acknowledged the importance of space militarization when it created the U.S. Space Force (USSF). Signed into law by former President Donald Trump in 2020, the USSF is the first new branch of the U.S. Armed Forces since establishing the Air Force in 1947. The branch’s objectives can be categorized into three areas:
- Protecting U.S. interests in space
- Ensuring space superiority
- Developing new space-based capabilities
The USSF is tasked with protecting commercial and military space infrastructure, such as satellites for communications, navigation, and intelligence. Moreover, it aims to develop capabilities to deter adversaries, defend U.S. space assets, and maintain readiness to respond to hostile actions. To secure its superiority, it collaborates with NASA, private space companies like SpaceX and international allies to invest in advanced technologies, such as satellite defense systems and space-based surveillance.
China also recently restructured its Space Force. In April 2024, the Strategic Support Force, integrating space, cyber, and electronic warfare capabilities, was divided into three branches. One of these is the People’s Liberation Army Aerospace Force (PLAASF), which administers all existing launch sites and manages all military space assets. Russia boasts its Aerospace Forces, which integrate air and space defense operations.
While the United States had the edge in space since the Cold War, China is rapidly closing the gap. According to Major General Gregory J. Gagnon, the Space Force’s deputy chief of space operations for intelligence, China has launched over 200 satellites into orbit each year in recent years. “And over half of those satellites are for sensing, designed to watch U.S. forces, Japanese forces, and Australian forces operating in the western Pacific,” he said. Chief of Space Operations General Chance Saltzman added that China has “more than 470 ISR (intelligence, surveillance, reconnaissance) satellites.”
The list of space infrastructure is long. Here are the most relevant tools used by the military:
- Navigation satellites provide global positioning, navigation, and timing services. They are crucial for military interventions to ensure accurate location indications.
- Reconnaissance satellites offer high-resolution images that permit detailed observation of terrestrial and space-based behaviors. They are useful for gathering intelligence data.
- Early warning satellites detect missile launches, alerting the necessary defense systems.
- Communication Satellites ensure reliable and secure communications for military operations.
- Electronic Intelligence (ELINT) and electronic warfare satellites gather signals intelligence and conduct electronic warfare. ELINT satellites intercept and analyze electronic signals, while electronic warfare satellites can disrupt or manipulate enemy communications and radar systems.
- Anti-satellite weapons (ASAT) are designed to disable or destroy satellites. ASATs can be kinetic, physically colliding with and destroying satellites, or non-kinetic, using directed energy to incapacitate satellites without creating debris.
- Directed energy weapons, such as lasers, are being developed to target satellites’ optical sensors or solar panels, disabling them without physical impact. These weapons offer a means to neutralize threats without adding to the space debris problem.
- Jamming devices interfere with satellite communications, rendering them useless for military or civilian purposes. They can block GPS signals or disrupt communication links.
- Spoofing devices send false signals to satellites, causing them to malfunction or relay incorrect data. This can mislead navigation systems or disrupt satellite-based operations.
