24 August 2022
Keynote
Chirag Parikh, Executive Secretary, National Space Council
-VP said rules and norms are shared principles that guide our behavior. These are common understandings of what is right, wrong, and acceptable. It all matters. Rules and norms provide a sense of order.
-Not only is the environment changing but it’s accelerating. We also need to evolve as well. Space Priorities Framework talks about this. This has been in space policy since the dawn of space policy.
-Without clear norms we face risk and uncertainty. We’re engaging with the international community.
-We need to make sure we have partnerships with commercial as well in developing these norms.
-Space is sometimes called the Wild West. That’s not true. There is a rules-based international order in space. We’re here today to talk about how we strengthen them.
-Desire for international behavior sets us apart from our competitors. With China, have not ratified PTBT to prohibit or carry out nuclear explosion in atmosphere or beyond its limits. Should be an easy win. There are those that are behaving irresponsibly in space while pushing for rules. There is some hypocrisy here.
-As we consider mechanisms, policy tools we’re drawing upon… arms control… intended to manage strategic competition and mitigate misconceptions… These could include legally binding treaties. There’s also more like transparency and confidence building measures. There are also norms, political commitments. Arms control tools tend to be top down driven. Such a political commitment of constraint is a major theme we’re talking about here.
-What the VP has already said, we’re looking to establish this as a new international norm. We’ve received a lot of positive feedback and two nations who have said they will do the same, New Zealand and Canada.
-Importance of this norm, while we attempted this in Obama Administration, what’s useful, creating debris risks all systems and national security. With this norm, you can attribute…. We think this was a good move for US and it does show positive movement, not just a conversation but a commitment.
-Principles and rules, Artemis Accords… as we start thinking about the cislunar economy, commercial investments to the moon, how do we develop a rules-based element? Artemis Accords is a good first step. As of today, 21 nations have signed up. It’s a remarkable group including aspiring and already space faring nations. It promotes a responsible use of space and further develops the economy.
-Space Priority Frameworks notes we will work with commercial and international partners. I know the importance of engagement. This is bottom up. We need to come together because it’s in our shared best interest including SATCOM, SDA…
-Rules are made by people who show up. We’re showing up. I think that’s a form of leadership. All of our Artemis partners are showing up.
-Multilateral forums are only one part of the equations. QUAD, US, India, Australia, and Japan, last year the President agreed to a space working group. One of those efforts is to consult on norms, guidelines, to ensure long term sustainability. Space is a very important element of the QUAD.
-State Department, DoD, NSC they’re evaluating proposals and are looking for new ideas. Efforts on norms go beyond national security systems. US regulations must provide clarity and continue supervision of non-government space activities. On-orbit servicing, orbital debris removal, etc. VP announced we are partnering with interagency to begin this process and will reach out to private sector as well. DOC, FCC, FAA thinking about this. On Sept 9 we will have next NSC meeting. We’ll be talking about this more in depth.
-Space flight safety and space sustainability, one area, uncontrolled reentry, the Chinese have conducted reentries… NASA Admin said PRC did not share trajectory information. All space faring nations should perform best practices. My team is working on how we can improve guidelines.
-Area of space sustainability, US is a leader in standards with orbital debris mitigation practices. We continue to want to maintain that leadership. OSTP, we said there’s a need for reevaluation. NASA will be leading this effort. This will impact deorbit guidelines. I look forward to seeing the study and what we can do to make the space environment more sustainable.
-We can talk about this a lot. What’s awesome is the moment we live in right now. We have people coming into government who are helping. We also have so many international partners. SDA, STM, space flight safety, we’re getting after it.
-This is a really timely topic for everyone to discuss.
(end)
Panel: A Whole of Government Approach to Space Norms of Behavior
Scott Pace, Space Policy Institute (Moderator)
Travis Langster - Principal Director of Space Policy, DOD
Eric Desautels - Acting Dept. Assist Secretary for Arms Control, Verification & Compliance, Dept of State
Tom Colvin - Office of Technology, Policy, & Strategy, NASA
Richard DalBello - Director, Office of Space Commerce, DOC
Opening Comments:
Desautels:
- Upcoming OEWG (open ended working group) meeting will address current and future threats. Will shift into what countries see as threats. Setting up OEWG Jan 3rd meeting to talk about norms of behavior in space.
- ASAT threats don't cover all threats.
- Enhance communications b/w int'l operators of sats. Safe operation in space. Preventing interference b/w sats. Preventing ASAT tests.
- Creating non-binding norms of int'l behaviors.
DalBello:
- Was out at the 18th recently. They are under a lot of pressure and stress. And looking at DOC to go faster. Space has become complicated place. Part of DOD needs to do is offload some of those responsibilities.
- This year we will be starting to buy commercial data, UFC pilot programs, establishing a baseline, replicating what 18th can do. These are '22 and '23 activities.
- We're hiring and trying to scale up.
- Left me with the name OADR - can someone come up with a better name?
- Goal is to start offloading pieces of DOD's responsibility as soon as we can. Will start with easy stuff - GEO and hard stuff is LEO.
- I think DOC will have a role in norms of behavior, because your knowledge to make good decisions.
- Need norms of behavior, and those will be established, and that will lead to standards. Which will create ability to communicate, and build knowledge.
- We are at the standards setting / rulemaking part of it and look to State Dept to develop broader aspects of it.
- DOD role of SSA will continue because they have need for exquisite SSA. DOC needs to put in place a free product that allows people to operate safely.
Q&A
Q - Do we hold norms to greater or lesser criteria compared to arms control?
Desautels:
A lot of work we do with arms control is on verification. Long way away from that in space. But non-legally binding, we don't talk about verification, but about ability to observe and communicate. Norms have a potential upgrade path. So ASAT test is first step. These are slow, painful processes, potentially through UN. And some day down the road do legally-binding space treaties.
Q - Is FCC going to beat you to the punch?
DalBello:
They are pretty fast, those guys. FCC has amazing process...the rest of us were talking about space debris but FCC stepped forward and made some rules. That said, how do we want to do this going forward. Useful to take time to do it right. FAA has some responsibilities for launch and re-entry, and we have responsibilities on earth imaging but doesn't cover things like RF. So we already have gaps around our authorities. So FCC has looked at manufacturing in space, asking about operator responsibilities. They have been helpful in intellectual way. A decision will have to be made by POTUS and Congress on how we divide these authorities going forward. People will be doing RF on the moon. Who will be regulating that? No right or wrong answer. We know issues we will face...how do we want to do it?
Q - (Brian Weedon) What is plan on mission authorization?
DalBello:
Chirag has initiated an inter-agency review.
Q -What about space weapons?
Desautels:
Weapon in space is object that can damage, destroy, or disrupt object in space. That could include OSAM. How do you not constrain commercial capabilities? May be areas we can reach an agreement, and sometimes not. Maybe norms of behavior will be appropriate.
Q - If I'm a space faring nation in AOR against another nation that has capability, how do I sign up to it if it's part of my deterrence strategy?
Langster:
This is about safe behavior but does not preclude other nations to defend themselves and their assets.
Q - What is your thinking on collaboration?
Langster:
Trip to 18th was joint trip I took with DOC. We've stayed in close contact. We want to collaborate with other allies and partners.
DalBello:
Tremendous amount of collab with DOD. Same with State Dept and NASA. Expect commercial will play large, if not dominate role, as we stand up SSA system. I see that being a commercially-run system. And will need to oversee that and have int'l collab on SSA. Latter piece will become increasingly important. If we do global SSA system, everyone has to participate.
Q - Will norms likely to be more global, or regional? Like NATO?
Desautels:
Depends. Incidents at sea is a bi-lateral agreement. Some norms may be better as US policy, some as arms control agreement, others as non-binding.
(end)
Panel: The Role of the Private Sector in Space Norms of BehaviorJoe Anderson, Vice President for Business Development and Operations, Space LogisticsRobin Dickey, Space Policy and Strategy Analyst, Aerospace CorporationDan Oltrogge, Director, Integrated Operations and Research, COMSPOCCharity Weeden, Vice President, Global Space Policy and Government Relations, AstroscaleModerator: Jamie Morin, Aerospace Center for Space Policy and Strategy
Opening Comments:
Dickey-Players engaged safety but sustainability harder to get engaged. -Three questions in paper-What are security related of consequence to commercial?-Becoming collateral damage (kinetic ASAT testing); anti-personnel landmines a parallel-What Norms could mitigate threats and where commercial actors would be engaged?-Norms as a general agreement, unilateral statements to formal agreements-Do we have common understandings?
-How could commercial engage?Oltrogge
-Spread of debris after an event needs to be monitored-Space Data Association Data Center effort with COMSPOC-Conjunction squalls, dramatic increase in number of conjunctions — IAA SSA conference presentation-Lack of U.S. government participation in standards gives an advantage to other countries whose governments are joining the conversation-They have worked on common terminology side of discussion. Also data standardization important and characteristics standards. -Compliance with what people say they will do, operators knowing the locations of their vehicles.Anderson-RPO in graveyard orbit as an example of setting a norm of behavior
Weeden-Public and industry need stable space
-We will speak up when we see dangerous behavior-Private operators can engage most on information sharing through conflict- Seeking solutions from different stakeholders groups — great resources in NGOs and industry- Sometimes hard to get all operators to respond when you’re trying to notify them of your actions and intent.Discussion points- Violent events are bad, but the debris from normal breakups is also bad. Anything that will impact humans in space. Cost/complexity is a challenge.- What can industry do for security in space, and how should industry consider dual-use capabilities when we are looking into an era of strategic conflict? ⁃ discrepancy between levels of comfort between countries ⁃ Language challenges and words being interpreted in not the correct way ⁃ Are comms open? ⁃ Commercial has transparency ⁃ Is the operator proactively transparent? Is there predictability in operator behavior? Cybersecurity standards are also best practices. Liability? Economic incentives?- U.S. Government open to dialogue with industry. Formal and informal ways, like regulatory and other postings, advisory groups, etc.- Government has been very supportive of new licensing within current regulatory regime, but new ecosystem requires new regulatory regime. - U.S. government is nuanced, not one monolith
(end)
