Theresa Hitchens

Over the past decade, concerns about ensuring sustainability and security in outer space have led the international community to pursue a range of governance initiatives. Governance issues regarding the use of space are complicated because of the physical realities of the space environment and because of the legal status of space as a global resource. As the number of space users grows and the types of activities in space expand, competition for access to space will only continue to grow… Show more

Over the past decade, concerns about ensuring sustainability and security in outer space have led the international community to pursue a range of governance initiatives. Governance issues regarding the use of space are complicated because of the physical realities of the space environment and because of the legal status of space as a global resource. As the number of space users grows and the types of activities in space expand, competition for access to space will only continue to grow. Different space actors have different priorities and perceptions regarding space challenges. As more and more militaries around the world turn to space assets, the potential development of counterspace weapons also increases tensions.

Ongoing multilateral work on space governance has concentrated primarily on voluntary measures. There have been three major multilateral governance initiatives in the field. The three—the EU Code of Conduct, the COPUOS Working Group on the Long-term Sustainability of Outer Space Activities, and the UN Group of Governmental Experts (GGE) on transparency and confidence-building measures—were related to each other, but each aimed to address slightly different aspects of the governance problem. This paper reviews these initiatives and elucidates ways to forward their progress, for instance, by fully implementing the GGE recommendations, the establishment of national focal points for data exchange, and by fully implementing the UN Registry of Outer Space Objects. It also looks to identify additional steps beyond current activities at the multilateral level for establishing a foundational space governance framework, including institutionalizing the UN Space Debris Mitigation Guidelines; establishing a public space situational awareness database; and examining ways to move forward discussion on active debris removal, national legal obligations regarding military activities, and space traffic management. Show less

The central theme of the Star Wars saga posits war on a galactic scale and casts the conflict in a morality tale that when viewed strategically, pits centralized control against that of distributed power. The Empire seeks order through a top-down hierarchy, whereas the Rebellion functions as a bottom-up organization. The Empire has an overwhelming edge in both technology and force size, yet is repeatedly defeated by the Rebel forces and continues to fail in its end goal of an ordered Galactic… Show more

The central theme of the Star Wars saga posits war on a galactic scale and casts the conflict in a morality tale that when viewed strategically, pits centralized control against that of distributed power. The Empire seeks order through a top-down hierarchy, whereas the Rebellion functions as a bottom-up organization. The Empire has an overwhelming edge in both technology and force size, yet is repeatedly defeated by the Rebel forces and continues to fail in its end goal of an ordered Galactic system. This can be attributed to three elements of the Empire's leadership structure and strategy:
1. Its top-down decision-making process and leadership structure that features micromanagement and toxic leadership.
2. Its failure to see the value of diplomacy as a strategic tool.
3. Its reliance on technology, especially legacy technology, as a central pillar of its warfighting strategy. Show less

Cybersecurity transcends national boundaries in many ways: The internet’s technical infrastructure is global in scope; threat actors based in one country can disguise their identities by taking control of computers in other countries; global businesses sell software, hardware, and security services that may introduce or combat vulnerabilities; and the consequences from a disruptive attack can spread far beyond the initial victim. International cooperation to improve cybersecurity is a much more… Show more

Cybersecurity transcends national boundaries in many ways: The internet’s technical infrastructure is global in scope; threat actors based in one country can disguise their identities by taking control of computers in other countries; global businesses sell software, hardware, and security services that may introduce or combat vulnerabilities; and the consequences from a disruptive attack can spread far beyond the initial victim. International cooperation to improve cybersecurity is a much more realistic and viable path. Information sharing is the most commonly promoted type of international cooperation, but very little is known about what type of cybersecurity information is currently being shared with whom, for what purposes, and under what conditions.

The International Cybersecurity Information Sharing Project undertook to survey, catalog, and analyze publicly available government-to-government cybersecurity-related sharing agreements to determine what types of information various governments have committed to share, and to identify gaps in information sharing. The ultimate aim of the larger project is to assess how multilateral cybersecurity sharing practices can be encouraged and improved in order to strengthen global cybersecurity.

This research found that cybersecurity information agreements are more numerous, but less specific than anticipated. The project documented and analyzed 196 agreements involving 116 different countries and 2,349 signatures. Extensive signature of agreements and associated commentary shows widespread accord on the principle that information sharing is necessary. However, it is unclear how much and what type of information sharing occurs in practice. Few agreement texts are public, and those that are often use vague language. And, despite the potential benefits of sharing more cyber-security information, many disincentives and logistical barriers remain.

Show less

In the last two years, we’ve seen rising hysteria over a future war in space. Fanning the flames are not only dire assessments from the US military, but also breathless coverage from a cooperative and credulous press. This reporting doesn’t only muddy public debate over whether we really need expensive systems. It could also become a self-fulfilling prophecy. The irony is that nothing makes the currently slim possibility of war in space mor

Report on Space Traffic Management Assessments, Frameworks and
Recommendations
In reply to
Public Law No. 114-90, “U.S. Commercial Space Launch Competitiveness Act”
Title I, “Spurring Private Aerospace Competitiveness and Entrepreneurship”
Section 109, “Orbital Traffic Management”

There are growing risks and threats to US satellites, civilian and military alike, and challenges to stated US goals in space. The question for the new administration, however, is whether hegemonic means to address those challenges are likely to achieve US goals. It is this paper’s assertion that they are not. Instead, a rebalancing of means used to address US goals in space is now necessary, based on a comprehensive assessment of the strategic space environment through the next ten to twenty… Show more

There are growing risks and threats to US satellites, civilian and military alike, and challenges to stated US goals in space. The question for the new administration, however, is whether hegemonic means to address those challenges are likely to achieve US goals. It is this paper’s assertion that they are not. Instead, a rebalancing of means used to address US goals in space is now necessary, based on a comprehensive assessment of the strategic space environment through the next ten to twenty years, toward ensuring that the ways and means being pursued to address those goals are in alignment. This assessment must extend beyond the Pentagon as well, to include the rapidly expanding cast of governmental and nongovernmental space actors. In particular, industry representatives should be brought into a process of dialogue with the national space security community to discuss priorities and concerns.

In this Atlantic Council Strategy Paper, Theresa Hitchens and Joan Johnson-Freese offer a new, alternative approach to a national security space strategy called “proactive prevention”, based on goal achievement and viability. The authors offer it as a catalyst and starting point for grounded discussions on space security policy for the next administration.

A proactive preventative strategy—that is, a strategy aimed squarely at preventing a space conflict, while also preparing to win one if need be—presupposes establishing strategic restraint by all, and must be based upon a clear understanding of potential adversaries’ goals in space, not simply their capabilities.

Show less

Through much of Barack Obama’s presidency, strategic restraint was his administration’s approach to maintaining security in space. The U.S. would restrain itself from introducing offensive capabilities in hopes of moderating the behavior of others, whether friends or potential foes. Further, administration decided that a better approach would be to establish norms of behavior in space that discourage such tests. That, unfortunately, isn’t what unfolded. Since 2013, each of the leading space… Show more

Through much of Barack Obama’s presidency, strategic restraint was his administration’s approach to maintaining security in space. The U.S. would restrain itself from introducing offensive capabilities in hopes of moderating the behavior of others, whether friends or potential foes. Further, administration decided that a better approach would be to establish norms of behavior in space that discourage such tests. That, unfortunately, isn’t what unfolded. Since 2013, each of the leading space powers has conducted missions that the others consider provocative. Diplomatic efforts to rein in destabilizing conduct have foundered, the U.S. began pivoting away from strategic restraint. We are witnessing a drift toward the weaponization of space. If warfare were to break out in space, that would be uniquely dangerous because the environment of space is itself unique. Unlike ships on the high seas, another global commons, satellites when destroyed do not sink out of the way — instead they become uncontrolled and potentially lethal debris. Even tiny pieces of debris that cannot be detected with current space surveillance capabilities can kill an operational satellite because of the impact velocities. Further, because of the dual-use nature of space technologies, weapons placed in space would be difficult or impossible to differentiate from benign satellites, meaning everything would become a potential target. Civilians and the U.S. military each rely on commercially-operated communications satellites and the GPS constellation. Attacks on those spacecraft could cripple the global economy. Rather than being goaded toward weaponization of space, the U.S. national security space community needs to take a strategic pause to consider whether there are alternatives. Show less

Over the past decade, concerns about ensuring sustainability and security in outer space have led the international community to pursue a range of governance initiatives. Governance issues regarding the use of space are complicated because of the physical realities of the space environment and because of the legal status of space as a global resource. As the number of space users grows and the types of activities in space expand, competition for access to space will only continue to grow… Show more

Over the past decade, concerns about ensuring sustainability and security in outer space have led the international community to pursue a range of governance initiatives. Governance issues regarding the use of space are complicated because of the physical realities of the space environment and because of the legal status of space as a global resource. As the number of space users grows and the types of activities in space expand, competition for access to space will only continue to grow. Different space actors have different priorities and perceptions regarding space challenges. As more and more militaries around the world turn to space assets, the potential development of counterspace weapons also increases tensions. Ongoing multilateral work on space governance has concentrated primarily on voluntary measures. There are currently three major multilateral governance initiatives in the field. The three—the EU Code of Conduct, the COPUOS Working Group on the Long-term Sustainability of Outer Space Activities, and the Group of Governmental Experts (GGE) on transparency and confidence-building measures—are related to each other, but each aims to address slightly different aspects of the governance problem. This paper reviews these initiatives and elucidates ways to forward their progress, for instance, by fully implementing the GGE recommendations, including a review of implementation of the Outer Space Treaty, the establishment of national focal points for data exchange, and by fully implementing the UN Registry. It also looks to identify additional steps beyond current activities at the multilateral level for establishing a foundational space governance framework, including institutionalizing the UN Space Debris Mitigation Guidelines; establishing a public space situational awareness database; and examining ways to move forward discussion on active debris removal, national legal obligations regarding military activities, and space traffic management. Show less

Although concerns about the safety and
security of humankind’s operations in outer
space have been with us since the dawn of
the space age in 1957, the past decade has
seen a steady increase in attention to the
issue at the multilateral level.
This reflects the ever increasing importance
of space activities to life on Earth.
Satellites and spacecraft are critical to the
functioning of the global economy: including
enabling banking transfers, revolutionizing
the… Show more

Although concerns about the safety and
security of humankind’s operations in outer
space have been with us since the dawn of
the space age in 1957, the past decade has
seen a steady increase in attention to the
issue at the multilateral level.
This reflects the ever increasing importance
of space activities to life on Earth.
Satellites and spacecraft are critical to the
functioning of the global economy: including
enabling banking transfers, revolutionizing
the movement of goods and services,
underpinning the Internet, and predicting
weather and natural disasters and enabling
rapid response. Space operations are also
growing in importance for militaries world
wide for operations on the ground, and thus
the question of space security – and the
potential for satellites to become targets
during conflict -- impacts directly on national
and international security. Finally,
more and more nations are active in the
space arena: there are now some 1,100 active
spacecraft on orbit and more than 60
states and/or commercial entities owning
and/or operating satellites Show less

As use of the Internet has become critical to global economic development and international security, there is near-unanimous agreement on the need for more international cooperation to increase stability and security in cyberspace. Several multilateral initiatives over the last five years have begun to spell out cooperative measures, norms of behavior, and transparency and confidence-building measures (TCBMs) that could help improve mutual cybersecurity.

These efforts have been… Show more

As use of the Internet has become critical to global economic development and international security, there is near-unanimous agreement on the need for more international cooperation to increase stability and security in cyberspace. Several multilateral initiatives over the last five years have begun to spell out cooperative measures, norms of behavior, and transparency and confidence-building measures (TCBMs) that could help improve mutual cybersecurity.

These efforts have been painstakingly slow, and some have stalled due to competing interests. Nonetheless, a United Nations (UN) Group of Governmental Experts (GGE) and the Organization for Cooperation and Security in Europe (OSCE) have achieved some high-level agreement on principles, norms, and “rules of the road” for national Internet activities and transnational cyber interactions. Their agreements include commitments to share more information, improve national protective capacities, cooperate on incident response, and restrain certain destabilizing state practices.

This paper compares what the GGE and OSCE norm-building processes have achieved so far and what disagreements have impeded these efforts, and identifies several priorities for cooperation. It also proposes three practical projects that members of regional or global organizations might be able to work on together despite political tensions and philosophical disputes. The first would help state and non-state actors share information and communicate about various types of cybersecurity threats using a flexible and intuitive effects-based taxonomy to categorize cyber activity. The second would develop a more sophisticated way for state and non-state actors to assess the risks and the potential benefits of cooperation. The third would identify aspects of the Internet that might be considered the core of a public utility, worthy of special protection in their own right and for their support of trans-border critical infrastructure. Show less