The Weaponization of Outer Space
I. PERSONAL NOTE
Hi, my name is Marie Cheng, and I am one of the co-chairs for this committee. As a
senior, this is my fourth year in the Model United Nations program here at Edison. In addition to
M.U.N., I’m also Co-Editor-in-Chief of the Yearbook and A.S.B. Student Body Secretary. Over
the years, M.U.N. and other extracurricular activities have taught me much about the world
around me, the problems we face today, and the solutions to change the face of our society. I
hope that each and every one of the delegates participating in this committee leave the room with
a better knowledge of the worldwide economic situation as well as improved problem-solving
and public speaking skills. I know that all the participants will give their best effort and bring
excellent proposals to the table. I look forward to meeting you all at the conference. Good luck!
II. BACKGROUND
The weaponization of space has been a topic of concern since the start of the Space Race
during the Cold War. Since this time, numerous nations, including the United States of America,
Russia, and China, have attempted to place weapons in space. The weaponization of space is a
serious problem because it affects the security of all nations. If a nation launched a missile into
orbit, that nation would have the power to attack nearly any nation on the earth below. Moreover,
the weaponization of space leads to a question of territorial ownership in space. For smaller
nations incapable of developing space programs, it is an unfair situation. Defenseless, they are at
the mercy of more developed nations with materials in space. If war were to break out in space,
mass destruction would be inevitable.
Other key issues spark from the debate over the militarization of space. The lives of every
human on earth is at threat due to the militarization of space, thus making it one of the most
prominent issues of the world today. Although there are currently no missiles orbiting in space,
many nations posses technology in space that can be seen as primitive forms of militarization.
For instance, the United States currently operates several types of spy satellites, including the
Vela, Quasar, Samos, and others. Likewise, the United Kingdom, France, Germany, Italy, China,
and India all posses satellites in space that have the capability to develop into military tools. One
of the reasons why this problem has not been solved in the past is due to the lack of cooperation
from developed nations, such as those listed above. In the past, specifically under the Bush
administration, the United States has taken a policy of using military technology in space in
order to defend itself. The U.S. also maintains a Global Position System that uses 23 satellites
orbiting in 4 different orbits to locate the position of an object on earth in real time. Russia has a
similar system that operates in 3 different orbits. The GPS system cost $12 billion dollars to
initially develop and produce. This proves a huge financial burden on economically
disadvantaged nations wishing to attain similar technology.
In addition to the U.S., China has showed a lack of transparency in discussions regarding
the militarization of outer space. Even though it advocates a ban on arms in space, it recently
destroyed an obsolete satellite using a missile, causing mild uproar with many of the Big Five
nations. Such actions show China’s inconsistencies with policies in outer space. Countries such
as the United States and China express a continual desire to weaponize space, thus challenging
other nations to do so as well and making it difficult to solve the problem. Prior attempts to solve
this problem have come in the form of the Open Space Treaty, which has been ratified by 98
states. It discourages the launching of spy satellites into space and declares it a peaceful zone.
However, it is difficult to prevent signatories from disregarding the regulations held in place by
this treaty because there are no real incentives for the larger nations to comply with the treaty.
There are currently 923 operating satellites orbiting in space, 437 from the United States, 95
from Russia, and 58 from China. Of the 437 satellites operated by the United States, 114 have
been declared “military” satellites. Although there are no missiles orbiting space or other
weapons of that nature, there have been times during the Cold War in which the neutrality of
space was threatened. Another point that has shaped the situation is the International Space
Station, which is the largest orbiting object in space. Although it presently is not used for
military development, it may arise to be a possibility in the future. Clearly, space is dangerously
close to becoming a fully weaponized area.
III. UN INVOLVEMENT
The United Nations has played an active role in the weaponization of space. In December
2000, the U.N. voted on a resolution known as “The Prevention of Arms Race in Space,” which
was passed with 163 in favor and 3 abstentions from the United States, Micronesia, and Israel.
Then, in January 2001, the United Nations passed A/RES/55/32, which states that “The
exploration and use of outer space … shall be for peaceful purposes and shall be carried out for
the benefit and in the interest of all countries.” The United Nations has also initiated the Outer
Space Treaty that came into effect October 1967. It provides a general guideline to nations
wishing to operate in space, specifically regarding the fact that nations must not place nuclear
weapons in space. However, these attempts have not been altogether successful, which was
reported in A/58/20, a document that stated nations were violating their mandates by placing
military satellites in space.
IV. SOLUTIONS
One solution to consider is using incentives to diplomatically encourage nations to abide
by the guidelines stated in the Outer Space Treaty. This would, however, require that nations
would be willing to ratify the treaty in the first place. Another solution is to eliminate all military
related materials in space altogether, including the military satellites possessed by the United
States and other developed nations. This would be the safest solution but would be the most
difficult to enact due to the lack of cooperation from nations with large funds in their space
programs. A third solution could consist of a United Nations moderated body to regulate and
discipline nations that do not obey the international space laws agreed upon by the United
Nations. Since all nations of the U.N. would have a part in this discussion, this may be the most
diplomatic approach. However, there have many instances in history where diplomacy has failed
and this solution would require cooperation by all the states in the U.N.
V. QUESTIONS TO CONSIDER
1. How many satellites should a nation be allowed to have in space?
2. Is your nation interested in weaponizing space?
3. Does your nation currently have “military” satellites or other objects orbiting in space that can
be considered military material?
4. Has your nation signed the Outer Space Peace Treaty?
5. Should any nation have the ability to place objects in space at all?
6. Should consequences be put in place for nations who choose to disobey international
agreements regarding outer space?
VI. BIBLIOGRAPHY
http://www.ucsusa.org/nuclear_weapons_and_global_security/space_weapons/technical_iss
ues/ucs-satellite-database.html
http://www.globalissues.org/article/69/militarization-and-weaponization-of-outer-space
http://www.space.com/businesstechnology/technology/satcom_gps_overview_031105.html
http://peaceinspace.blogs.com/peaceinspaceorg/2007/04/solutions_the_s.html