The article was originally published at The Conversation.
Svetla Ben-Itzhak is an assistant professor at Air University.
During times of conflict, space has historically been an arena of collaboration. The nature of cooperation in space has changed in the past decade, and the aftermath of Russia's invasion of Ukraine has highlighted these changes.
I am an international relations scholar who studies power distributions in space and who the main players are. Some scholars predict a future in which single states dominate, while others think that commercial entities will bring nations together.
I think the future may be different. In the past few years, groups of nations with similar strategic interests on Earth have come together to further their interests in space.
Live updates on the impact of the Ukrainian invasion on space exploration.
During the Cold War, the U.S. and the Soviet Union dominated space activities. Both cooperated on a number of projects in space despite tensions on the ground.
Several international collaborative groups emerged as more countries developed their own space agencies. The United Nations Office for Outer Space Affairs, the United Nations Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space, and the Consultative Committee for Space Data Systems are included.
The European Space Agency was founded in 1975. The International Space Station is supported by 15 countries and was started in 1998 by the U.S. and Russia.
Scientific collaboration and data exchange were the focus of these multinational ventures.
The European Space Agency could be considered among the first space blocs. After the end of the Cold War, a shift in power structure can be seen. Space blocs were formed by countries that shared interests on the ground.
Several new space blocs have emerged in the last five years. The African Space Agency has 55 member states, the Latin American and Caribbean Space Agency has seven member states, and the Arab Space Coordination Group has 12 Middle Eastern member states.
blocs compete with one another, but these groups allow for nations to work closely with each other. Two recent space blocs, the Artemis Accords and the Sino-Russian lunar agreement, are examples of such competition.
The Artemis Accords were launched in October 2020. They include 18 country members and are led by the U.S. The goal of the group is to return people to the moon by the year 2025. The goal of the mission is to build a research station on the south pole of the moon.
Russia and China agreed to work together on a mission to send people to the south pole of the moon. The Sino-Russian mission aims to build a moon base and place a space station in lunar orbit.
The fact that these blocs don't collaborate to accomplish similar missions on the moon indicates that strategic interests and rivalries on the ground have moved to space.
The Artemis Accords can be joined by any nation. Russia and China have not done so because they think the accords are an effort to expand the U.S.-dominated international order.
Russia and China plan to open their lunar research station to all interested parties, but no Artemis country has expressed interest. The European Space Agency discontinued several joint projects with Russia and is now expanding its partnerships with the U.S. and Japan.
In addition to seeking power in space, countries are also using space blocs to strengthen their influence on the ground.
The Asia-Pacific Space Cooperation Organization was formed in 2005. Led by China, it includes Bangladesh, Iran, Mongolia, Pakistan, Thailand, and Turkey.
The organization has a broad goal of development and launch of satellites, but its main aim is to expand the use of the Chinese version of gps. Iran could become dependent on China if they use the system.
Commercial activities in space have grown in the past decade. Some scholars see a future of space cooperation that is defined by shared commercial interests. In this scenario, commercial entities act as conduits between states, unifying them behind specific commercial projects in space.
Future international cooperation in space is unlikely to be dictated by commercial enterprises. According to current international space law, any company that operates in space does so under the jurisdiction of its home nation.
The dominance of states over companies in space affairs has been shown through the Ukraine crisis. Commercial space companies have stopped collaborating with Russia because of state-imposed sanctions.
The current legal framework seems to indicate that states will continue to dictate the rules in space.
I believe that space blocs will serve as the major means through which states will further their national interests in space and on the ground. When nations form space blocs, there are many benefits. It makes sense to pool resources, manpower and know-how. There are inherent dangers to this system.
Conflict is more likely when alliances are more rigid. The key to World War I is the growing rigidity of two alliances at the end of the 19th century.
As long as existing space blocs remain flexible and open to all, cooperation will flourish and the world may yet avoid an open conflict in space. Maintaining the focus on scientific goals and exchanges between and within space blocs will help to ensure the future of international cooperation in space.
The article is licensed under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
Follow all of the Expert Voices issues and debates and become a part of the discussion on social media. The author's views are not necessarily those of the publisher.
All Rights Reserved © 2024
