Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Increasing Militarization of Space and Normative Responses

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Recent Developments in Space Law

Abstract

It is becoming abundantly clear that the militarization of space is occurring. New capabilities and weapons systems are being developed that will apply to Outer Space operations. Military doctrine is simultaneously being developed that will shape the manner in which such military operations will occur. Despite these developments, there is no clarity regarding how and in what manner International Law might apply in those attenuated circumstances to constrain and regulate any developing tension, hostilities or even outright armed conflict. The global community is currently in a precarious place regarding this emerging reality, and it is time that full attention is developed to understanding a normative framework that will inform international decision-making in this realm. This chapter will examine the growing phenomenon of the increasing use of space for military activity and will canvass how International Law may apply to condition behaviour. It will also provide a brief review of informal lawmaking processes that are underway to influence thinking in this area. Such informal lawmaking is principally manifested in the development of an international Manual headed by McGill University and the University of Adelaide to bring together International Government, Military and Humanitarian legal experts to develop a framework on International Law Applicable to Military Uses of Outer Space. Such a Manual will take its place alongside with others that have been developed in associated theatres of military legal endeavour (naval war, air and missile war and cyber war) and will hopefully shape and condition thinking and decision-making in this emerging and critical field of military operations.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Treaty on the Prevention of the Placement of Weapons in Outer Space, the Threat or Use of Force against Outer Space Objects (PPWT). See Michael Listner and Rajeswari Rajagopalan, “The 2014 PPWT: A New Draft but with The Same and Different Problems,” The Space Review (11 August 2014) www.thespacereview.com/article/2575/1.

  2. 2.

    See, e.g., U.S. Joint Publication 3-14: Space Operations (29 May 2013) Defense Technical Information Center www.dtic.mil/doctrine/new_pubs/jp3_14.pdf; United Kingdom Ministry of Defence, Joint Doctrine Publication 0-30: UK Air and Space Doctrine (July 2013) Government of the United Kingdom www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/223495/jdp_0_30_uk_air_and_space_doctrine.pdf.

  3. 3.

    Manual on International Law Applicable to Military Uses of Outer Space (2016) McGill University www.mcgill.ca/milamos/home.

  4. 4.

    Louise Doswald-Beck, San Remo Manual on International Law Applicable to Armed Conflicts at Sea (Cambridge University Press, 1994) (‘San Remo Manual’).

  5. 5.

    HPCR Manual on International Law Applicable to Air and Missile Warfare (Program on Humanitarian Policy and Conflict Research at Harvard University, 2013) (‘AMW Manual’).

  6. 6.

    Michael N. Schmitt, Tallinn Manual On The International Law Applicable To Cyber Warfare (Cambridge University Press, 2013) (‘Tallinn Manual’).

  7. 7.

    Jackson Maogoto and Steven Freeland, ‘The Final Frontier: The Laws Of Armed Conflict And Space Warfare’ 23(1): 165, 182 Connecticut Journal of International Law (2007).

  8. 8.

    See “Air Force Space Command Factsheet,” Air Force Space Command (29 April 2013) www.afspc.af.mil/About-Us/Fact-Sheets/Article/249014/air-force-space-command.

  9. 9.

    General Lance Lord, “Space Superiority,” High Frontier (2015).

  10. 10.

    Michael Haas, “Vulnerable Frontier: Militarized Competition in Outer Space” in Oliver Thränert and Martin Zapfe (Eds), Strategic Trends 2015: Key Developments in Global Affairs (Center for Security Studies 2015) 63–64.

  11. 11.

    Brian Chow, “China’s new space threat and the justification of US pre-emptive self-defense,” The Space Review (18 January 2016) www.thespacereview.com/article/2903/.

  12. 12.

    See Chris Bowlby, “Could a War In Space Really Happen,” BBC News (19 December 2015) www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-35130478.

  13. 13.

    Treaty on Principles Governing the Activities of States in the Exploration and Use of Outer Space, including the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies, opened for signature 27 January 1967, 610 UNTS 205 (entered into force 10 October 1967) (‘Outer Space Treaty’).

  14. 14.

    Department of Defense Law of War Manual (June 2015) United States of America Department of Defense 926 [14.10.3.1] www.archive.defense.gov/pubs/law-of-war-manual-june-2015.pdf.

  15. 15.

    Opened for signature 23 May 1969, 1155 UNTS 331 (entered into force 27 January 1980).

  16. 16.

    Charter of the United Nations (‘UN Charter’).

  17. 17.

    Carl Christol, The Modern International Law Of Outer Space (Pergamon Press, 1982) 22.

  18. 18.

    United States of America Department of Defense, above n 14, 926–927 [14.10.4].

  19. 19.

    United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, opened for signature 10 December 1982, 1833 UNTS 3 (entered into force 16 November 1994) (‘Law of the Sea Convention’).

  20. 20.

    Convention on International Civil Aviation, opened for signature 7 December 1944, 15 UNTS 295 (entered into force 4 April 1947) (‘Chicago Air Convention’).

  21. 21.

    Law of the Sea Convention, above n 18, Articles 2, 3.

  22. 22.

    Chicago Air Convention, above n 19, Articles 1, 2.

  23. 23.

    Case Concerning Military and Paramilitary Activities In and Against Nicaragua (Nicaragua v. United States of America) [1986] ICJ Rep 14 (‘Nicaragua case’).

  24. 24.

    Law of the Sea Convention, above n 18, Article 25.

  25. 25.

    AMW Manual, above n 5, r 1(a).

  26. 26.

    See U.S. State Department Narrative, ‘Treaty Between The U.S. and the USSR on the Limitation of Strategic Offensive Arms (SALT II)’ at http://www.state.gov/t/isn/5195.htm.

  27. 27.

    Nicaragua case, above n 23, 108[205].

  28. 28.

    Ibid.

  29. 29.

    Nicaragua case, above n 23, 93[195].

  30. 30.

    International Law Commission, Responsibility of States for Internationally Wrongful Acts, UNGA, 55th sess, Supp No 10, UN Doc A/56/10 (‘Articles on State Responsibility’).

  31. 31.

    Ibid, Article 25(1)(a).

  32. 32.

    Convention on the Prohibition of Military or Any Hostile Use of Environmental Modification Techniques, opened for signature 18 May 1977, 1108 UNTS 151 (entered into force 05 October 1978).

  33. 33.

    Geneva Convention for the Amelioration of the Condition of the Wounded and Sick in Armed Forces in the Field, opened for signature 12 August 1949, 75 UNTS 31 (entered into force 21 October 1950); Geneva Convention for the Amelioration of the Condition of Wounded, Sick and Shipwrecked Members of Armed Forces at Sea, opened for signature 12 August 1949, 75 UNTS 85 (entered into force 21 October 1950); Geneva Convention relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War, opened for signature 12 August 1949, 75 UNTS 135 (entered into force 21 October 1950) (‘Third Geneva Convention’); Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War, opened for signature 12 August 1949, 75 UNTS 287 (entered into force 21 October 1950) (collectively ‘Geneva Conventions’).

  34. 34.

    Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions, and relating to the Protection of Victims of International Armed Conflicts, opened for signature 8 June 1977, 1125 UNTS 3 (entered into force 7 December 1978) (‘Additional Protocol I’); Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions, and relating to the Protection of Victims of Non-International Armed Conflicts, opened for signature 8 June 1977, 1125 UNTS 609 (entered into force 7 December 1978) (collectively ‘Additional Protocols’).

  35. 35.

    Legality Of The Threat Or Use Of Nuclear Weapons (Advisory Opinion) [1996] ICJ Rep 226, 259[86] (‘Nuclear Weapons advisory opinion’).

  36. 36.

    Additional Protocol I, above n 36, Article 57(2)(ii).

  37. 37.

    Convention on the Registration of Objects Launched into Outer Space, opened for signature 12 November 1974, 1023 UNTS (entered into force 15 September 1976).

  38. 38.

    Outer Space Treaty, above n 13, Article V.

  39. 39.

    The Agreement on the Rescue and Return of Astronauts and Objects Launched into Space, opened for signature19 December 1967, 672 UNTS 119 (entered into force 3 December 1968).

  40. 40.

    Meghan Plantz, “Orbital Debris: Out of Space,” 40(2) Georgia Journal of International and Comparative Law 585, 596–597 (2012).

  41. 41.

    “Global Navigational Space Systems: Reliance and Vulnerabilities” (March 2011) The Royal Academy of Engineering, 3 www.raeng.org.uk/publications/reports/global-navigation-space-systems.

  42. 42.

    Nuclear Weapons advisory opinion, above n 37, 263[97].

  43. 43.

    Duncan Hollis, “IHL’s Era of Application,” Opinio Juris (22 August 2014) www.opiniojuris.org/2014/08/22/ihls-era-application.

  44. 44.

    Martti Koskenniemi, Report of the Study Group of the International Law Commission: Fragmentation Of International Law: Difficulties Arising From The Diversification And Expansion Of International Law, UN GAOR, 58th sess, UN Doc A/CN.4/L.682 (13 April 2006) [40] (‘ILC Fragmentation Study’).

  45. 45.

    Claude Bruderlein, ‘Introduction’ (2012) 47(2) Texas International Law Journal 261, 262.

  46. 46.

    Ian Henderson, “Manual on International Law Applicable to Air and Missile Warfare: A Review” 49:1–2 Military Law and the Law of War Review (2010) 169, 170.

  47. 47.

    Ibid.

  48. 48.

    Ibid.

  49. 49.

    Lauri Mälksoo, The Tallinn Manual as an international event (August 2013) Diplomaatia www.diplomaatia.ee/en/article/the-tallinn-manual-as-an-international-event.

  50. 50.

    Ibid.

  51. 51.

    Oliver Kessler and Wouter Werner, “Expertise, Uncertainty, and International Law: A study of the Tallinn Manual on Cyberwarfare” 26(4) Leiden Journal of International Law (2013) 793, 800.

  52. 52.

    Ian Henderson, “Manual on International Law Applicable to Air and Missile Warfare: A Review” (2010) 49(1–2) Military Law and the Law of War Review 169, 180.

  53. 53.

    Nuclear Weapons advisory opinion, above n 37.

  54. 54.

    The San Remo Manual has been repeated verbatim in parts of the UK Law of Armed Conflict Manual. The Joint Service Manual Of The Law Of Armed Conflict: Joint Service Publication 383 (2004) United Kingdom Ministry of Defence, vii www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/27874/JSP3832004Edition.pdf.

  55. 55.

    Cited in Situation on Registered Vessels of Comoros, Greece and Cambodia (Article 53(1) Report) (6 November 2014) International Criminal Court, 18 [31] www.icc-cpi.int/iccdocs/otp/OTP-COM-Article_53(1)-Report-06Nov2014Eng.pdf; Prosecutor v Mile Mrkšić et al. (Judgment) (International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia, Trial Chamber II, Case No IT-95-13/1-T, 27 September 2007) 192 [457]; Human Rights Council, Report of the International Fact-Finding Mission To Investigate Violations of International Law, Including International Humanitarian and Human Rights Law, Resulting From The Israeli Attacks On The Flotilla Of Ships Carrying Humanitarian Assistance, A/HRC/15/21, 27 September 2010, 50; The Public Commission To Examine the Maritime Incident of 31 May 2010, The Turkel Commission Report: Part 1 (January 2011), 33 www.turkel-Committee.com/files/wordocs//8707200211english.pdf; Turkish National Commission of Inquiry, Report On The Israeli Attack On The Humanitarian Aid Convoy To Gaza on 31 May 2010 (February 2011), 61 www.mfa.gov.tr/data/Turkish%20Report%20Final%20-%20UN%20Copy.pdf.

Acknowledgements

The author would like to acknowledge the invaluable research support provided by Mr Thomas Wooden in the preparation of this chapter. Any errors are solely those of the author.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Adelaide, Adelaide, Australia

    Dale Stephens

Authors
  1. Dale Stephens
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Dale Stephens .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. National Law School of India University, Bengaluru, Karnataka, India

    R. Venkata Rao

  2. Indian Space Research Organisation, Bengaluru, Karnataka, India

    V. Gopalakrishnan

  3. National Law School of India University, Bengaluru, Karnataka, India

    Kumar Abhijeet

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2017 Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Stephens, D. (2017). Increasing Militarization of Space and Normative Responses. In: Rao, R., Gopalakrishnan, V., Abhijeet, K. (eds) Recent Developments in Space Law. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-4926-2_7

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-4926-2_7

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore

  • Print ISBN: 978-981-10-4925-5

  • Online ISBN: 978-981-10-4926-2

  • eBook Packages: Law and CriminologyLaw and Criminology (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation