The United Nations has been doing its two-penny bit on regulating the use and abuse of outer space ever since man-made objects started operating there. Unlike airspace, where the nations below exercise jurisdiction, outer space cannot be divided by man-made lines. Hence, the jurisprudence relating to outer space has to transcend nation-states; it will be either universal by consensus or it will be the law of the jungle, where power is the sole determinant of the outcome of disputes.The USSR had a lead in space activities for more than a decade with the first satellite in orbit in 1957, a dog sent in orbit in the same year, the first man-made object to impact the Moon in 1959, the first photos of the far side of the Moon in 1959, the first human in space in 1961, the first woman in space in 1963, the first multi-person space crew with three astronauts in the same vehicle in 1964, the first spacewalk in 1965, the first soft landing on the Moon in 1966 and the first space station in 1971. The US kept playing catch-up and finally surpassed the USSR with landing astronauts on the moon in 1969 and kept up the lead thereafter. It led to a period of cooperation between the two with American and Soviet spacecraft docking together in the Apollo-Soyuz project in 1975.

In 1963, the General Assembly adopted the “Declaration of Legal Principles Governing the Activities of States in the Exploration and Use of Outer Space.” Contained in the Resolution 1962 (XVIII), it recognized “the common interest of all mankind in the progress of the exploration and use of outer space for peaceful purposes… for the betterment of mankind and for the benefit of States irrespective of their degree of economic and scientific development.” It further stated that “Outer space and celestial bodies are free for exploration and use by all States on a basis of equality” and these are “not subject to national appropriation by claim of sovereignty, by means of use or occupation, or by any other means.” Like all declarations of the UN, these were lofty ideals that tried to brush under the carpet the underlying goal of nation-states - to increase their power in competition with others.

The need for cooperation between nations was visible in measures like the 1968 “Agreement on Rescue of Astronauts, the Return of Astronauts and the Return of Objects Launched into Outer Space,” the 1972 “Convention on International Liability for Damage Caused by Space Objects,” the 1976 “Convention on Registration of Objects launched into Outer Space,” the 1984 “Agreement Governing the Activities of States on the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies”, and many others. These cooperative endeavours notwithstanding, it was soon clear that the idea of “Space Wars” may soon move from the realm of fiction to that of harsh reality. This led to The Outer Space Treaty (OST) of 1967 which prohibited placing nuclear and other weapons of mass destruction (WMDs) in orbit, on celestial bodies, or anywhere else in space. This, however, did not completely obviate the possibility of “Space War” as neither this Treaty, nor any other, explicitly barred non-nuclear weapons in outer space that do not fall in the category of WMDs. The OST did, however, place strict limits on any non-peaceful activity on the Moon and other celestial bodies including bans on military bases, installation, fortifications, military manoeuvres, and on testing any type of weapons there.

Nuclear weapons have played a huge deterrent self-containment role through the evolution of Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD) capability and have held powerful hands back from pushing the proverbial nuclear button since its last use over Japan, even though there have been threats aplenty. What is worrying is that nuclear threats are only a small and unlikely part of the possible weaponisation of outer space. The development of space technologies has been inseparable from digitalisation of communications, commerce, transport, power and also, of wars. Drones, missiles, planes, ships and even surface transport have become meshed with space technologies. Laser and Microwave weapons have already become a reality with the only limitation in their deployment on earth or in space being the large amount of power required. With nuclear reactors becoming ever smaller, and with micro-nuclear reactors already feasible, that limitation is vanishing. With enough power on board, the limitations associated with solar panels will be a thing of the past. Another factor that limits the life of satellites is the amount of rocket fuel that can be placed on board for continuous course-correction. With new achievements in the field of ionic propulsion, this limitation will also go and weaponised satellites can stay in orbit for a much longer time.

The US, Russia, China and India have already demonstrated the capability of destroying satellites in orbit with kinetic anti-satellite (ASAT) missiles. The implications of such activity, in terms of spreading debris which is lethal for other space objects, are enormous. Now, the US has become the first country to officially confirm that it has “on-orbit space control weapons” deployed in space, though it has not disclosed the nature or number of such weapons. It has been known for quite some time that Russia and China have deployed capabilities to approach and interfere with operations of other nations’ orbiting systems. India and North Korea may also be in the league soon. The OST, in its present form, had to be a silent spectator to these developments.

The massive 140-paragraph declaration issued on day one of the BRICS Summit in New Delhi has been in the news for what it does not contain, for example any mention of the Ukraine War. Indians have also been jubilant that it specifically condemned, in paragraph 40, the atrocity at Pahalgam, thereby nailing Pakistan’s complicity in terrorism. What has been less talked about is that the declaration has devoted two large paragraphs, 45 and 46, to outer space. It emphasises on the prevention of an arms race and weaponisation in outer space (PAROS) and of the threats or use of force against objects in outer space. It expresses support for the updated “Draft Treaty on the Prevention of Placement of Weapons in Outer Space, the Threat or Use of Force against Outer Space Objects (PPWT).” If and when adopted, this will plug the loophole in the OST through which non-nuclear weapons are now being openly deployed in space.

With the entry of the private sector in satellite-launching in India, the role of civil society in space activities and its weaponisation will become increasingly important. Activist groups have been playing an important role in tracking space assets and debris, democratizing space data, advocacy for space-weapon-ban treaties, evolving space governance mechanisms, advocating protection of civilian infrastructure like GPS, electric grids, and fuel flows. Organisations like the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI) and the International Committee of the Red Cross are actively involved in these initiatives. Another kind of voluntary endeavour is Space Clubs, formed by activists, that act as a bridge between governments, private sector and institutions for sharing knowledge and flagging issues. The US National Space Club and the Foundation’s annual Goddard dinner, held since 1958, bring together 2,000 leaders from government, the military, industry and institutions to network the aerospace sector. The recently formed Space Club of India (spaceclubofindia.com), co-founded by Lt. Gen. P.J.S. Pannu (Retd) and Sandeep Unnithan, leading defence and aerospace journalist, of which the present writer is an Apex Body Member, is now India’s national platform to promote space awareness, scientific curiosity, innovation, research and entrepreneurship, for shaping the next generation of space leaders in the country.India wants peaceful space but rather than merely indulge in wishful thinking, we agree with the 4th century Roman military writer Publius Flavius Vegetius Renatus, who wrote in his treatise De Re Militari (On Military Matters), “Let him, who desires peace,prepare for war.” / DAILYWORLD /

( DAILYWORLD )