No Place for Jingoism

The contrast in tone between the new national space policy unveiled by President Obama last week and the policy adopted by the Bush administration four years ago is striking. The Bush policy was jingoistic, unilateral in approach, and resistant to arms control in space. The Obama policy is cooperative, international in approach, and open to a verifiable arms control treaty to restrain the development of space weapons.

The idea of an arms race in space or a space-based conflict is not science fiction. China knocked down one of its own satellites in 2007, and the United States did the same the following year. (Beijing offered no explanation for smashing a weather satellite; Washington said it needed to destroy the disabled spy satellite before it tumbled to earth and vented its toxic fuel.)

The United States has a clear strategic interest in curbing the spread of weapons that could destroy satellites from the ground or from perches in space. A treaty is the best hope of doing that. The military relies heavily on communication and intelligence satellites — more so than other nations’ militaries. The American economy is also hugely dependent on satellite communications.

The new policy states that Washington will consider arms control measures that are “equitable, effectively verifiable and enhance the national security of the United States and its allies.” Those are important conditions that should be possible for negotiators to meet. The policy also calls for “openness and transparency” in conducting operations in space, and for responsible behavior by all nations to help prevent “mishaps, misperceptions and mistrust” that could lead to conflict.

Any hawks who fear the administration may shrink from defending American interests in space ought to be mollified by assertions that all nations have the right to use space for national security activities and that the United States stands ready to defend its space systems.

The new policy calls for wider international cooperation in exploring space, studying climate change, and tracking and removing orbital debris that poses a risk to spacecraft passing through.

It reinforces President Obama’s plan to rely more heavily on commercial companies to carry cargo and astronauts into low earth orbit, abandon another landing on the moon, and develop new technologies to send astronauts to an asteroid by 2025 and to the orbit of Mars by 2035. Many members of Congress are resistant, and the president will need to persuade them.

Despite its welcome call for international cooperation, the paper does not invite other nations to join in those trips to distant worlds. Any policy that purports to promote peaceful collaboration in space ought to enlist other nations in these challenging and costly missions.