Can China destroy unwanted satellites above its territory?

Introduction

I

n early 2022, Chinese military researchers published a paper calling for the development of a weapon designed to destroy SpaceX’s growing Starlink satellite system. The paper states that Starlink has huge potential for military application and that it has already forced China’s space station to perform emergency maneuvers to avoid collisions [1]. China has been developing anti-satellite weaponry for years and appears willing to destroy1 objects in space that it views as a threat to its national security [2]. This dramatic statement by China forces the international community to consider several important questions that have remained unanswered for decades. Does China have a sovereign right as a nation to regulate and/or destroy unwanted objects in space above its territory?

Since the pioneering of spacecraft during the Cold War, important questions of sovereign borders in the context of space have been debated internationally. International law states that nearly all space exploration and exploitation is permissible so long as it is done peacefully. Starlink is apparently a peaceful system providing internet accessibility, yet China claims that it should not be allowed. If Starlink follows the guidelines of established international law regarding space exploration, is China prevented from having a say in the matter even though the system directly effects Chinese citizens?

Questions such as these become increasingly more relevant with every year that passes. Nearly every day more satellites are launched into orbit. Several nations and private companies plan to establish permanent bases on the Moon within a decade, and on Mars soon after [3]. These issues of sovereignty must be addressed.

International law

International law governing space exploration and satellites has been established for decades. The UN decided nearly all the major rules regulating international space exploration during the Cold War and they have remained essentially unchanged. Two primary establishments govern space conduct: the UN Committee on the Peaceful uses of Outer Space (COPUOS) of 1958, and the Outer Space Treaty (OST) of 1967. The UN Committee meets regularly to maintain the peace and security of space exploration. COPUOS operates with the goal of upholding the peaceful use of space in the international realm [4]. The guidelines for peaceful use are largely derived from the Outer Space Treaty of 1967. All major world powers ratified the OST, which establishes a basis for the prohibition of space-based weaponry and prevention of state-territorial expansion onto celestial bodies [5].

Despite these established laws, countries have debated delimitation of sovereignty in comparison to the airspace/space boundary for nearly a century. There has been no universal agreement on the limits of state sovereignty above its territory. Three primary schools of thought surround the issue. Each argument has its logical merits and drawbacks, and no single definition is agreed upon internationally.

1. Extend state-sovereignty to the point where space “begins.” If there is an established boundary between Earth’s atmosphere and “space,” then sovereign borders can simply align with those natural ones. The main issue with this platform is that there is no international agreement on where “airspace” ends, and “space” begins. Over the past seventy years that border has been established by various nations as between 18km and 110km above sea level [6].
2. Extend sovereignty to the highest altitude at which an aircraft can fly. National sovereignty ought to extend only as far as the nation can reasonably enforce its borders. A height limit of aircraft occupation at first seems reasonable, but that definition continues to change as aircraft technology improves. Additionally does aerial sovereignty not exist if a country does not possess aircraft that can fly at an altitude capable of enforcing the border?
3. A state is sovereign over its territory up to the height at which, according to the existing technical capabilities, any human-directed activity can take place [7]. This school of thought effectively extends borders infinitely over the nation’s territory. Certainly, a nation ought to have some control over who can fly above and surveil its land, but how can an infinitely tall, invisible border reconcile with international law that allows all to explore to explore space peacefully?

“Since the pioneering of spacecraft during the Cold War, important questions of sovereign borders in the context of space have been debated”

China

China has a history of striving to expand its international power, and space is no exception. With the recent completion of its own space station, increasing satellite presence, and plans for exploring the moon, China is a primary actor in the future of space exploration. China has also been developing earth-to-space weaponry capable of destroying near-earth objects [8]. Threats against Starlink are the most recent of these growing military programs. China has been advancing its counter space capabilities since at least 2007. It has amassed an arsenal of kinetic weapons, such as missiles, and non-kinetic weapons like ground-based lasers [9]. These weapons give China the capability to disable or destroy most earth satellites.

Starlink is a satellite system under construction by Elon Musk’s company SpaceX. These satellites are designed to provide internet access to customers anywhere in the world. Since 2019, SpaceX has put more than 2,300 Starlink satellites into low-Earth orbit, and the company intends to eventually send up to 42,000 satellites into space to form a “megaconstellation” [10]

In its recent paper, the Chinese military called out Starlink for interfering with established satellites, forcing a space station to take emergency action to avoid collisions. They also claim that Starlink satellites could potentially be used by the U.S. government to track hyper-sonic missiles, dramatically boost the data transmission speeds of U.S. drones and stealth fighter jets, and even ram into and destroy Chinese satellites [11]. Despite Elon Musk being a private entity, China views the Starlink system as a potential U.S. infringement on Chinese sovereign control of its borders.

Additionally, because Starlink offers unrestricted internet access, China views it as an attack on its authority over Chinese citizens. China is known to systemically censor and restrict access to portions of the internet, and Starlink has the potential to circumvent that censorship. The Chinese government has already rejected contracts with SpaceX and is actively developing its own satellite internet system [12].

U.S. Response

As space exploration continues to grow, questions regarding sovereignty and other critical issues will only grow more complex and difficult to resolve. Author Spencer Beresford wrote in 1960 about national sovereignty in relation to surveillance from outer space. “The dangers of delay in resolving the problem are clear: events may get out of control; claims and interests may crystallize through custom, making international agreement more difficult. On the other hand, every nation with a stake in outer space will be loath to forgo advantages it may have or can acquire [13].” When this was written, the U.S. and USSR were the only countries who had made it to space. Today numerous other nations are invested, each with their own goals for space exploration.

In terms of potential military action from China against U.S.-affiliated satellites, the United States ought to continue developing its own Earth-to-space capabilities to match those of other world powers. China has been developing its space-military capabilities for several years to protect itself from potential space-threats. In contrast, America only recently began developing its own space military programs.

In the realm of international relations, the U.S. ought to push for clear definitions regarding sovereignty of borders between airspace and space. The debate must be ended to help minimize conflict and frustration as space exploration and exploitation moves forward. During the Cold War, Russia only pushed for its right to regulate airspace when it captured an American U2 in its territory during an intelligence-gathering flyover [14]. Similarly, China only protests Starlink now that it apparently interferes with Chinese interests in space. These claims and controversial arguments will not go away unless international definitions and guidelines are agreed upon.

Sources Cited

[1] Ben Turner, “Chinese scientists call for plan to destroy Elon Musk’s Starlink satellites,” Live Science, May 2022, https://www.livescience.com/china-plans-ways-destroy-starlink

[2] Sandra Erwin, “Pentagon report: China amassing arsenal of anti-satellite weapons,” Space News, September 2020, https://spacenews.com/pentagon-report-china-amassing-arsenal-of-anti-satellite-weapons/

[3] Jaela Bernstien, “Humans want to mine the moon. Here’s what space law experts say the rules are,” CBC News, September 2022, https://www.cbc.ca/news/science/moon-mining-outer-space-treaty-1.6568648

[4] Małgorzata Polkowska, “Limitations in the airspace sovereignty of states in connection with space activity,” Security & Defence Quarterly, March 2018, https://securityanddefence.pl/Limitations-in-the-airspace-sovereignty-of-states-in-connection-with-space-activity,103329,0,2.html#S3

[5] UNOOSA, “Treaty on Principles Governing the Activities of States in the Exploration and use of Outer Space, including the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies,” United Nations Office for Outer Space Affairs, 1966, https://www.unoosa.org/oosa/en/ourwork/spacelaw/treaties/introouterspacetreaty.html

[6] Małgorzata Polkowska, “Limitations in the airspace sovereignty of states in connection with space activity,” Security & Defence Quarterly, March 2018, https://securityanddefence.pl/Limitations-in-the-airspace-sovereignty-of-states-in-connection-with-space-activity,103329,0,2.html#S3

[7] Małgorzata Polkowska, “Limitations in the airspace sovereignty of states in connection with space activity,” Security & Defence Quarterly, March 2018, https://securityanddefence.pl/Limitations-in-the-airspace-sovereignty-of-states-in-connection-with-space-activity,103329,0,2.html#S3

[8] Sandra Erwin, “Pentagon report: China amassing arsenal of anti-satellite weapons,” Space News, September 2020, https://spacenews.com/pentagon-report-china-amassing-arsenal-of-anti-satellite-weapons/

[9] Sandra Erwin, “Pentagon report: China amassing arsenal of anti-satellite weapons,” Space News, September 2020, https://spacenews.com/pentagon-report-china-amassing-arsenal-of-anti-satellite-weapons

[10] Ben Turner, “Chinese scientists call for plan to destroy Elon Musk’s Starlink satellites,” Live Science, May 2022, https://www.livescience.com/china-plans-ways-destroy-starlink

[11] Ben Turner, “Chinese scientists call for plan to destroy Elon Musk’s Starlink satellites,” Live Science, May 2022, https://www.livescience.com/china-plans-ways-destroy-starlink

[12] Sissi Cao, “Musk’s Starlink Has New Chinese Rivals As the Satellite Internet Race Heats Up,” Observer, June 2022, https://observer.com/2022/06/spacex-starlink-satellite-internet-chinese-space-geely/

[13] Spencer Beresford, “Surveillance Aircraft and Satellites: A Problem of International Law,” Journal of Air Law and Commerce, 1961, https://scholar.smu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3108&context=jalc

[14] Spencer Beresford, “Surveillance Aircraft and Satellites: A Problem of International Law,” Journal of Air Law and Commerce, 1961, https://scholar.smu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3108&context=jalc