Challenges to International Space Governance

Living reference work entry


Space is now a congested, contested, and competitive domain. Space technologies and programs have become vital ingredients of major spacefaring nations’ national power. In the past three decades, space has gained importance for security and socioeconomic development of spacefaring nations. However, most of the activities in this domain are unchecked primarily due to lack of an internationally agreed treaty in space. In addition, the challenges to international space governance in ensuring space as a safer and more secure environment are enormous. These include the increasing pool of actors, growing commercialization, expanding military space programs, the proliferation of anti-satellite weapons, and lack of consensus among states on a conclusive and universally negotiated treaty to prohibit an arms race in space. The expanding number of spacefaring actors and dual-use technologies have made the skies and space more competitive. On top of that, the competing states are following a path from space militarization to weaponization which has aggravated the threat of space war.


  1. Apollo-Soyuz Test Project. National Aeronautics and Space Administration. Accessed 28 Mar 2019
  2. Barnes E, William J (2019) Russia has restarted low-yield nuclear tests, U.S. believes. New York Times, 29 May. Accessed 30 July 2019
  3. Booth K, Wheeler J (2008) The security dilemma: fear, cooperation and trust in world politics. Palgrave Macmillan, Basingstoke, p 43Google Scholar
  4. Buchan A (1965) The dilemma of India’s security. Survival 7(5):204–207CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Challenges to Security in Space (2019) U.S. Defence Intelligence Agency, Washington, DC, pp 7, 33Google Scholar
  6. Defrieze C (2014) Defining and regulating the weaponization of space. Joint Force Q 74:110–115. Accessed 10 July 2019
  7. Gallagher N, Steinbruner D (2008) Reconsidering the rules for space security. American Academy of Arts and Sciences, Cambridge, p 33Google Scholar
  8. Herz H (1950) Idealist internationalism and the security dilemma. World Polit 2(2):157CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. International Space Station. National Aeronautics and Space Administration. Accessed 28 Mar 2019
  10. Jervis R (1978) Cooperation under the security dilemma. World Polit 30(2):169CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Johnson-Freese J (2007) Space as a strategic asset. Columbia University Press, New York, p 107CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Khan Z, Khan A (2019) Space security trilemma in South Asia. Astropolitics 17(1):4MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Krepon M (2013) Space and nuclear deterrence. In: Krepon M, Thompson J (eds) Anti-satellite weapons, deterrence and Sino-American space relations. Stimson Center, Washington, DC, p 33Google Scholar
  14. Larsen JA (2002) An introduction to arms control. In: Larsen JA (ed) Arms control: cooperative security in changing environment. Lynne Reinner Publishers, Boulder, p 2Google Scholar
  15. Lele A (2019) The implications of India’s ASAT test. The Space Review, 1 April. Accessed 15 Apr 2019
  16. Mearsheimer J (2013) Structural realism. In: Dunne T, Kurki M, Smith S (eds) International relations theories: discipline and diversity, 3rd edn. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  17. Mission Shakti Successful, Announces PM Modi. Know All About It (2019) NDTV, 27 March. Accessed 31 Apr 2019
  18. Mowthorpe M (2004) The militarization and weaponization of space. Lexington Books, Lanham, p 110Google Scholar
  19. Ohlandt R (2014) Competition and collaboration in space between the U.S., China, and Australia: Woomera to WGS and the impact of changing U.S. national space security policy. Asian Surv 54(2):399CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Outer Space and Global Security (2003) United Nations Publications, Geneva, p viiGoogle Scholar
  21. Outer Space Increasingly ‘Congested, Contested and Competitive’, First Committee Told, As Speakers Urge Legally Binding Document to Prevent Its Militarization (2012) Press release no. GA/DIS/3464, October 23. Accessed 20 Apr 2019
  22. Oznobishchec S (1989) Vulnerability of satellites and ASAT weapons. In: Hassard J et al (eds) Ways out of the arms race: from the nuclear threat to mutual security – proceedings of the second international scientists’ congress. World Scientific, London, p 143Google Scholar
  23. Report of the Commission to Assess United States National Security Space Management and Organization (2001) Committee on armed services of the U.S. House of representatives, January 11, p 13. Accessed 2 Apr 2019
  24. Sadeh E (2015) Obstacles in international space governance. In: Schrogl K et al (eds) Handbook of space security: policies, applications and program. Springer, New York, p 25Google Scholar
  25. Sheehan M (2010) Rising powers: competition and cooperation in the New Asian space race. RUSI J 155(60):44CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Space Policy Directive-3, National Space Traffic Management Policy (2019) White House. Accessed 10 Apr 2019
  27. The U.S. Anti-Satellite (ASAT) Program (1987) The U.S. Anti-Satellite (ASAT) program: a key element in the national strategy of deterrence. The White House, May 11. Accessed 1 Apr 2019
  28. Treaty on Principles Governing the Activities of States in the Exploration and Use of Outer Space, Including the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies (1967) Opened for signature January 27. Accessed 1 Apr 2019
  29. Ullah S, Imam I (2019) What to make of India’s ASAT test. South Asian Voices, April 1. Accessed 2 Apr 2019
  30. Zervos V (2011) Conflict in space. In: Braddon L, Hartley K (eds) Handbook on the economics of conflict. Edward Elgar Publishing Limited, Northampton, p 215Google Scholar
  31. Zhang H (2008) Chinese perspectives on space weapons. In: Russian and Chinese responses to U.S. military plans in space. American Academy of Arts and Sciences, Cambridge, MA, p 31Google Scholar

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Strategic StudiesNational Defence UniversityIslamabadPakistan
  2. 2.Department of Defence and Strategic StudiesQuaid-i-Azam UniversityIslamabadPakistan

Section editors and affiliations

  • Peter L. Hays
    • 1
  1. 1.Space Policy InstituteGeorge Washington UniversityWashingtonUSA

Personalised recommendations