|
By Rhianna Tyson
October, 2007
 |
|
|
October 15 UN panelists (front to back): Mr. Valery Semin (Russia), Dr. Patricia Lewis (UNIDIR), Chairman Jonathan Granoff (GSI), Mr. Li Yang (China), Amb. Thomas Graham (BSG)
|
|
Ambassador Paul Meyers from Canada once referred to the First Committee of the UN General Assembly as the international community’s “arms control and disarmament bazaar,” where diplomats with new ideas can “peddle their wares” and measure the degree of support for their initiatives relating to peace and security, before passing them on to the General Assembly for adoption.(1)
However, with the end of the Cold War and the growth of the role of civil society in international affairs, something very new has been happening. Very much as in the fields of human rights, the environment and development, civil society experts are being heard and being effective. At this year’s First Committee, governments weren’t the only actors promoting new ideas and building support for a strengthened cooperative regime in outer space. The Global Security Institute (GSI), working directly with governments, intergovernmental agencies and other non-governmental organizations, effectively enhanced the debate by convening several events on this issue throughout the month of October.
With the co-sponsorship of the Secure World Foundation (SWF), the UN Institute for Disarmament Research (UNIDIR) and the Governments of Russia and China, GSI hosted a major panel event in Conference Room 4, the same venue where the GA First Committee debates scores of resolutions on disarmament and international security. Several dozen delegations were represented in this informal session, many at the high-level ambassadorial level, despite concurrent events in other rooms of the UN, including a US-sponsored event on Article VI compliance and a Non-Aligned Movement informal strategy session.
Representing the Russian Federation, Counselor Valery Semin framed his remarks around the need for a new treaty to cover the “gaps” in existing international law regarding outer space. While other measures are useful, he said, a treaty is the “stronger, more focused and detailed” option better “tailored for realities of today.” He then discussed at length elements of a draft treaty that Russia will soon publicly release, the Prevention of Placement of Weapons in Outer Space Treaty (OST), which is based on previous working papers tabled at the Conference on Disarmament (CD). The draft treaty aims to prevent deploying weapons in space or earth-based weapons aimed at space-based objects. Objects travelling through space, he said, such as missiles, will not be included in the prohibition, nor will earth-based weapons aimed at such objects. In this manner, they believe, the treaty is more likely to win US support, as it will exempt missile defense systems such as those already deployed by the US.
According to Counselor Semin, the Republic of China will be a co-sponsor of the PPWT when it is ready to be tabled. Representing this emerging space power was Counselor Li Yang, an expert on the subject and China’s representative to the CD. Mr. Li asserted that the conclusion of “a new international legal instrument… is the only effective way to meet the challenges in outer space.” He noted his country’s full support of the principles embodied in the Russia-sponsored resolution on “Transparency and Confidence-Building Measures in Outer Space,” noting that such measures are “conducive to reduce the potential misunderstanding and tensions (that might) occur in outer space activities.” Though such measures are useful in this regard, they “can neither fundamentally solve the practical issues of outer space security nor replace an international legal instrument in preventing weaponization of and an arms race in outer space.” Therefore, China supports a draft treaty based on the working paper they, along with Russia, tabled in the CD, entitled “Possible Elements for A Future International Legal Agreement on the Prevention of the Deployment of Weapons in Outer Space, the Threat or Use of Force against Outer Space Objects”.
Ambassador (Ret.) Thomas Graham, Chairman of GSI’s Bipartisan Security Group, likened the debate on the future of outer space to the debate preceding the negotiation of the Antarctic Treaty, signed 48 years ago. Both realms held “scientific, economic and military interests”, and eventually “twelve states (with others joining afterward) decided that the greater interests of all… would be best served if the continent could be preserved for peaceful uses, and that these interests could best be protected through a legal regime rather than through the use or deployment of military forces.” With a view to outer space, he said, the stakes are higher, with even graver security implications.
Using the evaluation of the Canadian-initiated Space Security Index, which evaluates “the status of security in space… as an environment that can be used by all,” Ambassador Graham asserted that “without question, technological developments are outstripping the existing governance framework for outer space. Something must be done.” He acknowledged the merits of expanding the OST, though acknowledged the complications and problems associated with opening any of its “painstakingly negotiated” provisions. He stressed the importance of including a “prohibition on all weapons in space, both offensive and defensive”. He offered definitional and verification suggestions, the latter based on principles similar to the “managed access” principle found in the Chemical Weapons Convention. Whichever route is pursued, he argued, “it must be done early before the programs become entrenched.”
Dr. Patricia Lewis of UNIDIR highlighted the connection of outer space security to nuclear disarmament and non-proliferation, asserting that “space insecurity leads to increased uncertainties and fears and therefore increases reliance on nuclear weapons as a counter balance.” She offered a very comprehensive overview of several paths forward, including a confidence-building measure approach, a new treaty, an Outer Space Treaty approach, and “using and building on other international instruments,” what she called “the matrix or patchwork quilt approach.” This latter approach, she said, “allows interested states to build a patchwork of existing and new measures around the gaps and the needs…allow(ing) a more effective use of the materials we already have.”
The following week, the sponsors of the panel event hosted an informal workshop in the GSI office, in order to facilitate more in-depth discussion on the possible ways forward. With introductory remarks from Dr. Craig Eisendrath, co-author of the recent book, War in Heaven: The arms race in outer space, delegates from over a dozen countries discussed the pros and cons of the various proposals on the table.The debate was vociferous and robust, with high-level participants from the Netherlands, the US, China, New Zealand, Canada, Germany, Italy, Netherlands, Egypt and others.
In addition to the PPWT, the rules of the road approach and an OST protocol, participants also discussed the merits of a High Level Panel, which could be convened by Secretary-General Ban ki-Moon, to assess outer space security in all its aspects. This proposal has been suggested by the Secretary-General’s Advisory Board on Disarmament Matters. This proposal was first advanced by GSI President Jonathan Granoff when he testified before the Secretary General’s Advisory Board and was further advanced by Ms. Rhianna Tyson, GSI Senior Officer, on behalf of the civil society organizations which were privileged to formally address the First Committee on October 26th.
The mandate for such a panel could include analyzing the present uses, threats, risks and opportunities presented by humanity’s proliferating space capabilities, both military and civilian. Panelists would take into account space-related developments, achievements and challenges that have arisen since the OST’s inception, and make recommendations regarding the most effective way forward. Drawing from expert scientific, political, military and legal analyses, the panel would contribute immensely toward facilitating a global consensus on the sticky issues such as definitions and verifiability, laying the necessary foundation for real movement when the political climate is ripe, thereby possibly expediting the lengthy negotiation process of a new treaty.
In the personification of Dr. Lewis’s appeal, two young filmmakers screened their film, “Final Frontier: Explorers or Warriors?” in Conference Room 4 on Tuesday, October 22nd, at an event co-sponsored by GSI, SWF and the UN Office for Disarmament Affairs. This inspiring project looked insightfully and humorously into the issues of space security, highlighting the danger of space junk and the folly of the weaponization of space. Following the film, delegates to the First Committee and representatives from the NGO community held an interactive exchange with the two extraordinarily articulate young filmmakers, who continue to screen their film at film festivals and other venues across the country.
Thus, by bringing together diplomats, young people, and experts, GSI’s efforts to enhance our security in outer space is exemplary of the type of broad, constituent-based discussions that must take place in order to prevent space weaponization and intensify the benefits derived from its peaceful uses.
– Rhianna Tyson, Global Security Institute
|
 |
