In 1957, as Americans watched the Soviet Sputnik satellite orbiting Earth, concerns over space-based weapons, particularly nuclear ones, emerged. This anxiety led to significant agreements in the 1960s aimed at preventing the militarization of space.
Rising Concerns Over Space Warfare
Amid growing fears of space warfare, a recent analysis suggests that current international laws might already address the issue of attacks on satellites and similar acts of aggression in space.
Dr. Chris O’Meara from the University of Exeter Law School has conducted a comprehensive study on the applicability of existing international laws to anti-satellite (ASAT) weapons. By examining how laws governing conventional warfare can be extended to space, O’Meara underscores the stringent requirements that must be met to justify military actions in the extraterrestrial realm.
Historical Laws in a Modern Context
In 1957, as Americans watched the Soviet Sputnik satellite orbiting Earth, concerns over space-based weapons, particularly nuclear ones, emerged. This anxiety led to significant agreements in the 1960s aimed at preventing the militarization of space.
Today, satellites are crucial for global communications and infrastructure, yet little progress has been made in regulating space warfare. The United States, Russia, China, and India have all advanced their ASAT capabilities, but international agreements lag behind. As a new era of geopolitical tensions arises, achieving consensus on space warfare regulations appears unlikely. Despite technological advancements, the same old fears about civilian harm and unintended consequences persist.
Efforts to extend International Humanitarian Law (IHL) to space have made some headway, but many questions remain unanswered. Dr. O’Meara has turned to jus ad bellum (JAB), the legal framework governing the justification for war, to explore how existing laws might apply to ASAT weapons, aiming to fill this regulatory gap.
Applying Necessity and Proportionality in Space
The principles of necessity and proportionality in JAB are applicable to ASAT warfare. NATO already considers space as another operational domain alongside air, land, sea, and cyberspace. The principle of necessity dictates that the use of force is only permissible when no peaceful alternatives exist for self-defense. However, identifying military targets in space is complex due to the dual-use nature of many satellites, which serve both civilian and military functions. For instance, Starlink satellites, although civilian, play a crucial role in military communications in the Ukraine conflict. This dual-use complicates the application of necessity and makes distinguishing military targets challenging.
Once necessity is established, proportionality must be considered. This principle requires that the benefits of a military strike be weighed against the potential harm to civilians and other states. In our interconnected world, any disruption to satellite communications can have cascading effects. With nearly 9,900 satellites currently in orbit, a number expected to grow to 24,500 by 2031, ensuring civilian satellites are not affected becomes a significant challenge. O’Meara points out that the dense population of satellites exacerbates the difficulty of avoiding civilian impacts, highlighting the integral role of satellite communications in modern life.
Potential for Catastrophic Disruption
Disruptions to satellite services can have far-reaching consequences beyond the inability to make phone calls or send messages. Position, navigation, and timing (PNT) systems, which underpin GPS and Coordinated Universal Time (UTC), are critical to numerous sectors, including financial markets, banking, power grids, and emergency services. O’Meara stresses that the repercussions of ASAT attacks on these systems are too varied and significant to justify their use for defensive purposes, except in extreme cases where national survival is at stake.
In his conclusion, O’Meara advocates for peace and cooperation in space. He argues that, in the absence of specific agreements limiting ASAT weapons, international norms should suffice to render these weapons off-limits in most conflicts. He emphasizes the importance of peaceful space exploration and the collective benefits of satellites, suggesting that reinterpreting old laws in the context of new challenges could be the key to maintaining peace in space.
