Safety,Security,and Society in the New Space Age: Exploring the Enforcement Structures and Concerns of Postplanetary Humanity

Abstract

With a seemingly resurgent public interest in the exploration and utilization of space (and its many recent successes), the increasing likelihood of regular manned spaceflight, the general commercialization of space, the privatization of spaceflight, a reformed curiosity in planetary defense, and the nascent militarization of space, the issues of operations, exploration, and safety in space—particularly in the various Earth orbits—are now more pressing than ever before. How space is used, by whom, and in accordance with what conventions, treaties, or pragmatic considerations are now very important topics for consideration, particularly as orbital debris now poses a very serious threat to satellites and space-faring humans alike. Although often considered a fanciful notion without merit and well within the realm of science fiction, the time has come to seriously consider addressing a growing need of modernity: safety, security, and society in the new space age.

Introduction

With a seemingly resurgent public interest^a in the exploration and utilization of space (and its many recent successes),^b the increasing likelihood of regular manned spaceflight,^c the general commercialization of space,^d the privatization of spaceflight,^e a reformed curiosity in planetary defense,^f and the nascent militarization of space,^g the issues of operations, exploration, and safety in space—particularly in the various Earth orbits—are now more pressing than ever before. How space is used, by whom, and in accordance with what conventions, treaties, or pragmatic considerations are now very important topics for consideration, particularly as orbital debris now poses a very serious threat to satellites and space-faring humans alike.^h Although often considered a fanciful notion without merit and well within the realm of science fiction, the time has come to seriously consider addressing a growing need of modernity: safety, security, and society in the new space age.

Framing the Use of Space

With the historical and legal background of outer space and its use already established elsewhere—particularly in terms of Earth-based orbits—the first and most pressing question is one of framing. Until only recently, space—both its exploration and exploitation—had been a strictly governmental enterprise, as only well-funded and well-resourced governments had the financial and technical ability to pursue efforts beyond terrestrial boundaries. This period was noteworthy for the efforts of government agencies,ⁱ the military,^j and government contractors,^k all of which were for explicitly governmental purposes. Even the International Space Station was a strictly governmental effort, although inherently international in nature.

Not until after the dawn of the third millennium were nongovernmental organizations used for anything related to space beyond the prelaunch phase.^l However, with the arrival of SpaceX, Blue Origin, and Virgin Galactic—the three largest and, currently, most promising private space efforts, each with a somewhat different mission—the nature of humanity's interactions with space has changed. Private corporations are now operating their own separate missions at and beyond the edge of Earth's atmosphere, with stated intentions to go far beyond anything as comparatively the lower Earth orbits.^m

In this new era of mixed-use orbits, the way in which space is framed becomes inevitably important. As space is no longer strictly the domain of governments, or even the military, those entities who choose to explore and exploit its vast expanse must be bound by more than international treaties between governments with inherently questionable enforceability.ⁿ Space is no longer simply a playground for scientists, astronauts, and deep thinkers, it now includes organizations driven by a very real motive of profit.

Whether private organizations or their agents, employees, contractors, and subcontractors are bound by the various international treaties addressing the use of space is a question for legal scholars. However, it would seem exceedingly clear that there currently exists no feasible way in which to oversee the behavior of these organizations and their representatives in space, much less ensure relevant law—where applicable—is being followed. Moreover, after noting the serious consequences of having a similarly haphazard and open approach to planetary waters,^o it must be concluded that a form of enforcement must exist in space, if only to avoid the destruction of property, the disregard of legal strictures, and further damaging planet Earth. What form this enforcement takes plays a fundamental role in securing humanity's future by setting the appropriate tone.

Military, Civilian, or Mixed-Use Enforcement

In choosing the way in which to enforce space treaties and future law, humanity will set a course for all future developments. The three choices—military, civilian, or mixed use—present starkly different possible outcomes, each with benefits and consequences. One, however, must be intentionally chosen and pursued, to avoid unnecessary confusion, conflict, and warfare.

Military

A future that employs the military as the enforcers of law would undoubtedly be one of strict procedure and policy; however, it is also one with a great potential for conflict. Since Earth's orbit is currently not divided into state-specific sectors, there exists no boundaries for states to defend or protect—as a terrestrial military would—creating an international environment for flagged militaries to roam. It is not difficult to imagine the problems this would cause, particularly when each state develops different concepts of permissible activities within and beyond orbit. It is also not difficult to imagine how such differences may quickly devolve into open warfare. Moreover, should a state declare terrestrial war on another state, the conflict would likely seamlessly transition to space, threatening all of humanity in the process.

Any military enforcement structure would likely be an attempt to translate the lessons of the species’ military efforts into a new environment, thereby requiring space-oriented equivalencies to bases, borders, and checkpoints. Space itself—including any civilians found within it—would be subject to military rules, regulations, and oversight. Most worryingly, however, military enforcement operations would follow typical rules of engagement and a military code of justice—as defined by the state sponsoring any given military force—that seems unlikely to produce anything other than intermilitary conflict, with the distinct possibility of civilians (and the planet itself) being caught between opposing forces.

Civilian

Any consideration of military space enforcement disregards a fundamental fact: civilians are an increasingly large part of space-based efforts. With the very real potential for civilian space travel, civilian space stations, or even commercial mining and construction operations, a civilian authority would seem necessary. However, with the same problems of nationality, citizenship, and flagged property, any space-oriented civilian law enforcement agency cannot be a state-directed effort—it must be a supra-state effort. By forming an internationally recognized and resourced civilian law enforcement agency for space, perhaps under the United Nations, legitimacy and objectivity can be provided to any such enforcement efforts. The existence of an international law enforcement agency would require the development of an international body of law governing the use of orbital and extraorbital space, instead of the present and confused mixture of international treaties, state-based laws, and vague assumptions. Finally, an international courts system, including prisons, would have to be established to provide all appropriate due processes to those charged with violating this international body of law.

The most pressing concerns of a civilian enforcement structure would be the rule of law; however, the civilian-enforced rule of law could quickly and easily be disrupted by any military force electing to do so, as has often occurred planet-side. Even if the rule of law were able to be enforced in a strictly civilian manner, protecting the planet and its people from space-based attacks—either intentional or the result of negligence—would prove exceedingly difficult: a justice-oriented system does not easily undertake preventative measures.

Mixed Use

Mixed-use enforcement—after briefly considering solely military or civilian options—would, then, appear to be the ideal choice.^p By acknowledging the presence of state militaries and their interests, in parallel to the more functional and economic realities of the civilian world, mixed-use enforcement would suitably address the needs of each, very different, space consumer. An international civilian law enforcement agency would still need to be created, as would a more robust body of internationally recognized space law, but additional regulations regarding the behaviors, permissions, and activities of governments and their militaries, during both peace and war, would also need to be created. All of the benefits of civilian enforcement would exist in a mixed-use environment, although with similar restrictions to freedoms as currently found and applied in relation to present military efforts. Mixed-use enforcement would satisfy the needs of the public and private sectors, simultaneously, producing what would hopefully be a collaborative, safe, and somewhat predictable environment for any lawful operation humanity wishes to undertake.

Principles, Considerations, and Concerns of Law Enforcement in Space

There are a number of principles, considerations, and concerns of law enforcement in space that must be considered in advance, if the effort is to be successful as a mixed-use enforcement structure.

Sovereign Territory

The concept of a state's sovereign territory has been an important aspect in developing a relatively stable international order. In modern times, flagged vessels—such as airplanes and ships—and diplomatic properties—such as embassies and consulates—have extended the concept of sovereign territory beyond the physical borders of a state, enabling its emissaries and people to operate under a familiar rule of law and provide protections when in very specific and well-defined circumstances. This identification paradigm would have to be extended to space, for both military and civilian purposes, allowing ships, stations, and other property to carry the flag of a particular nation so that it may be associable and identifiable. Although any flagged nonmilitary vessel or station would still be subject to civilian law enforcement regulations and any flagged military vessel or station would be similarly subject to applicable international regulations, understanding what constitutes sovereign territory or simply state-affiliated properties will become extraordinarily important in maintaining peaceable relations in and beyond orbit.

Operations and Traffic Control

Any mixed-use enforcement structure must consider a dual-nature principle of operations and traffic control. A series of regulations and control mechanisms must be established for civilian vessels and stations, so that they may freely but safely navigate, bound by clearly defined expectations and requirements.^q Similarly, a version of this must be developed for the purposes of the various militaries, so that they can operate unrestricted but avoid both conflict and catastrophe in their regular duties. As space becomes more populated with both devices and people, a more serious effort must be made to control, organize, and orchestrate their movements within this increasingly cluttered and complicated environment.

Destruction of Property

More so than on the planet's surface, destruction of property in any form of orbit is about safety and security, as the damage of any object can result in a terrifying field of debris capable of causing further damage. This damage could be caused by accident, collision, or be intentionally initiated from nearly anywhere, even remotely. The destruction of property, therefore, becomes one of the primary concerns of mixed-use enforcement—regardless of the property type or owner—to protect the overall space environment, minimize unnecessary threats to life, and ensure that the cost to design, field, launch, and operate space missions is not overshadowed by increased loss potential. This can be undertaken by tracking and removing debris fields,^r instantiating object proximity and operations regulations, and quickly containing, through immediate cleanup, new debris fields.

Utilitarian Freedoms

The rights, freedoms, and liberties of humanity are an important point of consideration when extending the habitable sphere into space. Although no undue or additional burdens should be placed on those who choose to operate above the planet's surface, it must be understood that any freedoms in such an environment are strictly utilitarian in nature, rather than individualist: the needs of the many must inherently outweigh the needs of the few.^s This environment cannot tolerate dangerous activity, questionable displays of independence, or a disregard for authority, so a mixed-use enforcement structure must consider how to best balance freedoms with safety, liberties with security, and rights with needs.

Orbital Attacks

Space-based attacks—on both other space objects and the planet itself—are relatively simple, as an object with mass merely has to collide into another object with sufficient velocity to create a noteworthy level of damage. There are no inherent requirements for internal propulsion systems, explosives, or expensive weapons platforms: in space, a rock can constitute a deadly weapon. Consequently, mixed-use enforcement structures must prepare for attacks on, within, and from orbital platforms that may threaten a wide variety of actors, up to and including the planet. Although intraspace attacks would be difficult to prevent or interdict, a tracking and early warning system can be developed to detect projectiles targeted from the planet to orbit or from orbit to the planet. Once such a system—comparable, in principle, with debris tracking—is established, measures must be put in place to create interdiction options, so as to prevent mass atrocities from occurring.^t

Militarization/Weaponization of Space

The militarization of space—or, perhaps, the weaponization of space—has been a concern because space exploration began and it will only grow as this new frontier continues to develop. As previously noted, it seems nearly impossible to prevent the insertion of weapons into space or the use of space as a new battleground; however, any mixed-use enforcement must acknowledge the proper place of weapons in space. Such an acknowledgement would necessarily include permissible types of weapons, targeting and operations restrictions, consequences for improper use, and, most importantly, an ability to neutralize weapons, particularly projectiles, and their users. Given humanity's proclivity for violence, attention is better paid to control and defense than attempting to prevent the inevitable.

Use of Force (Civilian) and Rules of Engagement (Military)

In any conflict, having and understanding the rules by which good faith actors operate are essential to positive or best-case outcomes. For a mixed-use space environment, there would inevitably be two rule sets: those set by the international governing bodies, including use of force policies, for civilian law enforcement and the regulations covering space-based military action, including their rules of engagement. Both must work effectively in concert with each other, to avoid deadly confusion regarding primacy of authority or operational rights; therefore, it must be developed in the early stages of humanity's new space age. With established and understood rules, all actors—private, governmental, and military—can effectively execute their missions without any extraordinary concerns regarding the potential for undue violence operating under the pretense of authority.

Piracy

As was once a main concern for those able to afford travel by sea, and increasingly so in the modern era, piracy will become an important factor of consideration for any mixed-use enforcement environment in space. Whether ships, stations, platforms, resources, intellectual property, or persons are the target, space-based piracy—like many other aspects of humanity—seems inevitable and it should be addressed before its arrival as a black market industry. A planned and prepared response that includes efforts to prevent the creation and growth of a pirate market—particularly one that learns from the centuries of sea-based antipiracy efforts—would be largely preferable to a reactive response. Such an effort would inevitably be collaborative between civilian law enforcement, the various militaries, and the governments to which the military forces belong.

Criticisms

For any forward-thinking effort—particularly one that employs a thought experiment as a means to develop more concrete and applicable action items—there are inevitably harsh criticisms. Any effort involving the human use, exploration, and exploitation of space is, perhaps, even more of a target. However, in considering the safety, security, and society of humanity in the new space age, only three factors have been at play: current events, pragmatic projections based on current events, and the extrapolation of known, historical problems of humanity from one theater into another. There has been no fanciful depiction of humanity in space, no description of far-off and improbable space technologies, and absolutely no suggestion that humans should yet dare to range very far from their planetary home.

Therefore, any criticisms of the exploration of enforcement structures and concerns in a postplanetary humanity must remain staunchly within the confines of the initial argument itself. Moreover, since the argument is merely applying historical problems and concerns to a new realm of operations, it would be exceedingly difficult to take issue with any considerations proposed: doing so would imply a disagreement with identified and documented history. This is not to say that there are not valid criticisms or further arguments to be made—as, indeed, there are in the finer details or in arenas not yet identified—but rather that out-of-hand dismissals, argumentative generalizations, and scoffing critiques have no place in the discussion of humanity's inevitable space-based future.

Conclusion

If humanity is to cease destroying the Earth for profit and gain, expand common awareness beyond the mere individual, and even seek to survive coming disasters,^u the better and more organized utilization of space is required. The various orbits, extractable resources, and exploratory potential must be accessed by more than a small handful of states and without replicating the typical problems of humanity. To ensure the safe allocation of space and its resources to the species, the problems of the near-future need to be addressed before their arrival: a reactionary posture is unfailingly less effective than a proactive one. By addressing these problems and needs through the creation of a mixed-use environment involving a new international civilian body, the militaries of the world, and the governments to which they belong, space may continue to be a safe operational environment. In fact, space may become far more safe than at present, as actions will be planned and intentional, rather than individualized, localized, and often incidental. However, one major lesson of a previous international effort of similarly large scale must be learned and applied: regulations and regulatory bodies have no true authority without proper, actual, and effective enforcement. The lessons of the past and the needs of the future can, therefore, be combined into the early stages of serious conversations regarding safety, security, and society in the new space age.

Footnotes

Author Disclosure Statement

Any opinions expressed are directly and expressly the author's own; they do not represent – unless stated – his employers (past, present, or future) or associated/affiliated institutions.

References

Interstellar. 2014. In IMDB. www.imdb.com/title/tt0816692 (last accessed August 23, 2016).

The Martian. 2015. In IMDB. www.imdb.com/title/tt3659388 (last accessed August 23, 2016).

The Expanse. 2015. In IMDB. Retrieved from www.imdb.com/title/tt3230854 (last accessed August 23, 2016).

Sample I. 2015. The year of the outer solar system: How space exploration reached new heights in 2015. The Guardian. www.theguardian.com/science/2015/dec/25/2015-big-year-space-exploration-major-tim-peake-pluto (last accessed August 23, 2016).

NASA. 2015. Journey to Mars. https://www.nasa.gov/topics/journeytomars/index.html (last accessed August 23, 2016).

Burgess

. 2016. Europe will send humans back to the moon by 2030, ESA says. WIRED. www.wired.co.uk/news/archive/2016-01/08/europe-space-agency-moon (last accessed August 23, 2016).

Obama

. 2016. Barack Obama: America will take the giant leap to Mars. CNN. www.cnn.com/2016/10/11/opinions/america-will-take-giant-leap-to-mars-barack-obama/ (last accessed August 22, 2016).

Office of Space Commerce. n.d. Mission. www.space.commerce.gov/about/mission (last accessed August 23, 2016).

Stockton

. 2015. Congress Says Yes to Space Mining, No to Rocket Regulations. WIRED. www.wired.com/2015/11/congress-says-yes-to-space-mining-no-to-rocketregulations (last accessed August 23, 2016).

10.

Berger

. 2015. With a historic landing, SpaceX launches newage of spaceflight. Ars Technica. http://arstechnica.com/science/2015/12/by-making-a-historic-landingspacex-launches-new-age-of-spaceflight (last accessed August 23, 2016).

11.

Fernholz

. 2016. Three private space companies just landed massive NASA contracts to haul cargo. Quartz. http://qz.com/595034/three-private-spacecompanies-just-landed-massive-nasa-contracts-to-haul-cargo (last accessed August 23, 2016).

12.

Basulto

. 2016. How NASA's planetary defense officer will protect Earth from asteroids. The Washington Post. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/innovations/wp/2016/01/13/how-nasas-planetary-defense-officer-will-protectearth-from-asteroids (last accessed August 23, 2016).

13.

U.S. Air Force. 2015. X-37B Orbital test vehicle. www.af.mil/AboutUs/FactSheets/Display/tabid/224/Article/104539/x-37b-orbital-test-vehicle.aspx (last accessed August 23, 2016).

14.

BBC News. 2007. Concern over China's missile test. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/6276543.stm (last accessed August 23, 2016).

15.

Martin

. 2015. The battle above. CBS News. www.cbsnews.com/news/rarelook-at-space-command-satellite-defense-60-minutes (last accessed August 23, 2016).

16.

Lamothe

. 2016. Space warfare with Russia and China? Pentagon urged to prepare for it. The Washington Post. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/checkpoint/wp/2016/01/27/space-warfare-with-russia-and-china-pentagonurged-to-prepare-for-it (last accessed August 23, 2016).

17.

Tucker

. 2016. USAF Stands Up Space Mission Force to Counter Russia, China. Defense One. www.defenseone.com/technology/2016/02/usaf-stands-spacemission-force-counter-russia-china/125568 (last accessed August 23, 2016).

18.

NASA. 2013. Space debris and human spacecraft. https://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/station/news/orbital_debris.html (last accessed August 23, 2016).

19.

Foust

. 2016. Musk plans human Mars missions as soon as 2024. SpaceNews. http://spacenews.com/musk-plans-human-mars-missions-as-soon-as-2024 (last accessed August 23, 2016).

20.

Cronin

, Krejsa

. 2016. How will China react to the gavel coming down in the South China sea? War on the rocks. http://warontherocks.com/2016/06/howwill-china-react-to-the-gavel-coming-down-in-the-south-china-sea (last accessed August 23, 2016).

21.

Weisgerber

. 2016. It's Time to start creating “Air Traffic Controllers” for space. DefenseOne. www.defenseone.com/technology/2016/04/space-air-traffic-controllers/127479 (last accessed August 23, 2016).

22.

Conference Report. 2016. Orbital Debris Quarterly News 20(1&2): 10. http://orbitaldebris.jsc.nasa.gov/quarterly-news/pdfs/odqnv20i1-2.pdf (last accessed August 23, 2016).

23.

Erlanger

. 2016. NATO Ratchets up missile defense despite Russian criticism. New York Times. www.nytimes.com/2016/05/06/world/europe/nato-russia-poland.html (last accessed August 23, 2016).

24.

Kershner

. 2015. Israel Hails “Successful” Test of Antiballistic Missile System. New York Times. www.nytimes.com/2015/12/11/world/middleeast/israel-hailssuccessful-test-of-antiballistic-missile-system.html (last accessed August 23, 2016).

25.

Rathi

. 2016. Why the discovery of Earth-like planets could spell doom for humanity. Quartz. http://qz.com/681059/why-the-discovery-of-earth-like-planetscould-spell-doom-for-humanity (last accessed August 23, 2016).