[ad_1]
While international experts gathered in Geneva are arguing over ways to prevent an arms race in outer space, Europe hopes that efforts to replace an old Cold War treaty will help effectively fight against the pollution of the space.
Twenty-five countries have sent experts to in camera talks – which will continue until next Wednesday – in an effort to find a way out of the long-standing tensions between the United States, China and Russia over the security of space.
The "Big Three" seem to want to "arm" space on their own terms, and as technology has come a long way since the signing of the Outer Space Treaty (OST) in 1967, the last frontier remains to be won.
While the United States, China and Russia are fighting over the development of anti-satellite missiles and sophisticated lasers, as well as the launch of weapons in outer space, the European Union says that the very real threat of space debris is ignored.
"Europe pointed out that none of the advanced proposals covered space debris – and this is one of the most dangerous aspects for satellites at the moment", said Dr. Sarah Lieberman, Senior Lecturer at Canterbury Christchurch University, whose work focuses on European regulation and the policy of outer space.
"The United States, China and Russia are creating more and more space debris as they argue for the deposit of weapons. We think the space is absolutely huge, but of course that is not the case. The little usable space where we can place our satellites is actually very small and becomes very crowded. "
Countless garbage debris
Space debris can be debris left by space missions to thousands of missing satellites stuck in an endless orbit, forming a huge galactic traffic jam. (A US military program called Space Surveillance Network monitors some 20,000 objects larger than a softball.)
China added to the debris in 2007 the success with which it had destroyed an old weather satellite, breaking it into 3,000 shrapnel bursts that threatened other satellites in its path.
"Anyone who saw the movie Gravity will have seen satellites and space stations completely destroyed by very small debris, "said Lieberman. "Europe wants a treaty that deals with what we should do with the pollution of space and how to get rid of satellites once they have reached the end of their useful time in space."
Rhetoric more and more aggressive
On Wednesday, Beijing denied US allegations that China and Russia would raise the risk of a space conflict, and insisted that Washington was to blame for fueling the space wars.
"While continuing its military reinforcement in space, the United States is preparing the so-called threat of China and Russia in space, seeking pretexts to seek a unilateral military advantage and develop weapons advanced, "said the Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Spokesman Geng Shuang said at a press conference.
Although the goal of multilateral discussions such as those taking place in Geneva is to prevent the militarization of space, many argue that this happened long ago. It's partly because these days, it's unclear what a weapon looks like – and it's this ambiguity that's at the heart of the decades-old stalemate between the US and the United States. United and their rivals in the east.
"Since the Cold War, we have seen the United States, Russia and China explore anti-satellite missiles," said Alexandra Stickings, who works on space policy and security at the Royal United Services Institute in Britain. "We have also seen a shift towards non-kinetic threats on satellites. These are things like lasers that can be used to dazzle optical sensors; micro-frequencies that can interfere with the electronics and disable or disrupt the satellites without necessarily destroying them.
"The problem is that it's very difficult to define what a weapon is in space – and that's why the current treaties do not cover any of this."
1967 Outer Space Treaty Expired
Previously, the focus was on weapons that can be fired from space on Earth, but this notion is very outdated, Leiberman adds. "Weapons of mbad destruction are only one aspect of the security of space. The old treaties dealt with nuclear weapons that can be fired at Earth by any celestial body – the Moon.
"Since 2008, Russia and China have been trying to define a WMD, while everyone has evolved and is considering what we will do about lasers and jammers." Lieberman also pointed out that, these days, satellites can be completely disabled. a ground laser, while satellite signals can be disabled by a cell phone-sized scrambler.
"The problem is that the United States wants a treaty that determines what behavior is acceptable in space … a treaty that prohibits the blowing up or destroying of satellites, and not interfering with satellite broadcasts," Lieberman explains. "China and Russia are much more focused on not having weapons in space – and they would like it to be clearly stated in a treaty what constitutes a weapon and what does not." Is not. "
Since technology often plays a dual civilian and military role, almost everything in space can be considered as a potential weapon. "One example is the development of maneuvering satellites that can approach other satellites," explains Stickings. "This technology can be used to remove debris or for maintenance in orbit, but it can also be used for conflicting purposes."
Agreeing a new treaty is a difficult task
It will be difficult to find a language on which all parties can agree. Since satellites are essential for civilian use – television signals, in-flight telephone communications, GPS navigation, climate monitoring – how much do we have to lose if negotiations fail?
Kostas Tigkos, Senior Analyst at Jane's Military Weekly, considers no immediate or catastrophic impact of unsuccessful talks and says that it is unlikely that mbadive weapons infrastructures will soon be put into orbit. The ongoing fighting may, however, disrupt the peace process in outer space.
"The continued lack of progress will generally erode the foundations of the non-proliferation regime and may result in the Outer Space Treaty becoming less and less relevant as technology advances," says Tigkos. "This would allow non-WMDs to become a viable and affordable alternative space weapon in the future."
[ad_2]
Source link
