Three Scenarios For Space Exploration

      

                        By Vincent Sabathier

      There are three possible scenarios for space exploration in the coming 50 years, each connected to a different geo-strategic evolution.

      The first one assumes that civil space exploration will develop swiftly in the near term, with broad international cooperation bringing the Solar System into our economic sphere.

      The second assumes that space exploration will expand significantly but will be driven mainly by national or regional goals. There are many of these, including national prestige and image and the acquisition of security assets and technology. Interoperability among nations can exist, but the synergies will be limited and the overall progress slow.

      The third one assumes that budgetary constraints worldwide and the perceived threat from and in space are so great that the world’s nations will favor militarization of space and will postpone exploration.

      To elaborate, the first scenario can be thought of as the system of systems. This scenario represents the most international integration, the most robustness and the most synergy. It is likely to provide for both long term and global space exploration that will make the Moon our seventh continent. It will provide for interoperable space transportation systems to go back and forth to our natural satellite. It will utilize private capabilities that will seek funding in the global marketplace. An early prototype could be the Global Earth Observation System of System (GEOSS) promoted with success by the U.S. in 2004.

      The advantage of this approach for exploration is that humankind is not really advanced yet in its plan to settle on the Moon. Since there are no firm plans for lunar settlement yet, the resulting flexibility should make the long-term outcome easier to implement.

      To jump-start this scenario and prepare the future, the Human Space Exploration Initiative at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington is about to launch an international network of graduate students that will design a lunar base on a voluntary basis. The only constraint they will face in the exercise will be a requirement to use only systems not controlled by U.S. International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR). The exercise will also promote a global forum that operates above, but includes, the space agencies, focusing on broader governance for space exploration.

      It is important to stress one possible variation of this scenario. The Indianapolis Colts are “world champions” in “football.” However, the real world champion in football is Italy. There is indeed a small but real chance or risk that sort of confused scenario would develop for space exploration as well.

      On one hand, the U.S. appears to have the general perception that it does not need anyone’s help to go back to the Moon. It believes that its technology and industrial base are far superior to anyone else’s, and is stressing the strategic aspect of a national infrastructure for a lunar return.

      On the other hand, the reality that in the rest of the world - the ITAR-free zone, or the metric-system world - people know that their limited resources force them to cooperate. This divergence could very well lead to two different games, with their respective definitions, goals and constraints.

      The isolationist scenario that some in the U.S. still confuse with leadership was nearly realized when the International Charter for disaster management was created in the field of remote sensing. In this case the U.S. is taking part through NOAA, but is not a signatory of the Charter. Another example is the Global Positioning System/Galileo competition.

      The second scenario could be considered the program of programs. This scenario is the one promoted for some time by the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics (AIAA). It assumes space exploration will go on at a slow pace and will remain fragmented. It can be considered, unfortunately, as realistic, and admits from the onset that integration will be very limited and that national/regional agendas will prevail worldwide.

      Each nation/region will pursue its own program for its own national reasons. This will provide for a lot of redundancy and few synergies. A good example to illustrate this scenario is the fleet of lunar remote sensing missions that are going to be launched in the next two years. Smart-1 for Europe as already been launched. Next comes the Selene from Japan, then Chang ER-1 from China, followed by Chandrayaan from India, and then a NASA orbiter. Of course you will find those who will tell you that these orbiters include international cooperation since they carry foreign payloads, but no one can deny the waste of resources and time overall. That is the program of programs. Interoperability can exist through data treatment and sharing, but that is indeed a very primitive collaboration.

      National security spaces typify the final scenario. It assumes that space exploration will slow down to benefit low-Earth orbit space activity focused on security. The proliferation of both missile and nuclear technologies that soon will be available in North Korea and Iran; the instability of Pakistan, and the development of anti-satellite satellites and other measures to deny space capabilities all will tend to push for more spending in missile defense and to some extent space surveillance and space defense.

      This trend already exists in Japan, where the Diet is currently reviewing its space policy with the idea of allowing military space activities. No attention is currently given to human space exploration at the political level. In Europe, the budgetary issues on Galileo and Global Monitoring for Environment and Security (GMES) might attract additional spending that will not be available for exploration.

      In conclusion, there is hope that we are entering the second space age – when global space exploration will develop and the Moon will become our seventh continent. A lot of progress has been made in this direction over the past three years. However, neither international cooperation nor space exploration should be taken for granted. If global paranoia continues to spread, and without a clear global dialogue on space exploration, space surveillance and space debris, the world could decide to focus its space efforts on low Earth orbit for security.

Vincent Sabathier is director of the Human Space Exploration Initiatives at the Center for Strategic and International Studies.