DRAFT Space Code of Conduct: Principles, Policies, Options A Presentation by the Fletcher School’s Space Policy Working Group Dr. William Martel, Principal Investigator Elisa Perry, Tim Ridout, Anthony Sung, Basak Sefii, Ches Thurber, Peshala Wimalasena December 2, 2010 Elisa

Outline Problem statement Case study: Chinese ASAT Interference possibilities Responding to interference in space Code of conduct Applying code to case studies Directions for future research Elisa

Problem Statement Goal: peaceful and efficient use of space However, rapid increases in space activity heighten risks Lack of norms and consequences encourages actors to test boundaries of permissible conduct Critical importance of space to national security, economic systems Significant concepts of transparency and deterrence Elisa Point 2 - available orbital space is becoming increasingly crowded. Point 3 - As crowding increases, so does the competition between nations, corporations, and individuals. Unregulated competition in orbital space will result in rising international tensions and an increase in both the number and consequences of unacceptable events

Transparency Definition: open interactions among actors in space to understand actions, intentions Transparency requires: Space situational awareness Clear rules of behavior Communication among actors Accountability for actions Elisa

Deterrence Definition: assure security through clear, credible threat of retaliation Deterrence requires: Clear rules of behavior Evident consequences, “red lines” Capability, will of actors to respond consistently To reduce risk of escalation: Mutually agreed-upon rules, clearly understood consequences Open channels of communication Elisa “red lines”- actions that will be unacceptable to the international community

Previous Attempts at Space Code Existing treaties, norms, proposed codes insufficient Stimson Center Code (2007) Share information on space activities Minimize debris Refrain from interference Implement domestic regulations EU Code (2010) Register, report, and share information Adopt Space Debris Mitigation Guidelines Minimize accidents Abide by ITU recommendations All express desire for peaceful use of space We need a code of conduct to guide behavior Elisa These codes do a good job outlining major issues, but are short on specifics. In particular they do not define interference (or its attributes)

Our Solution Code of Conduct Enhance transparency, predictability, security Specify, codify permitted, prohibited behavior in space Provide communication mechanisms for information sharing, dispute resolution Clarify principles for legitimate responses to interference Credibly signal consequences to would-be rule-breakers Encourage consistent policy responses from states Elisa

Research Process (2009-2010) Survey of space problem Demographics of space Policy challenges Analysis of potential models of governance Air and maritime analogies Other proposed space codes Existing regulatory and legal frameworks (ITU, OST) Study and brainstorm interference possibilities Assess actors’ likely responses Draft code of conduct Suggest modes of implementation Elisa Air and maritime analogies: Law of the Sea (both treaty and custom) Other proposed space codes: EU, Stimson

Outline Problem statement Case study: Chinese ASAT Interference possibilities Responding to interference in space Code of conduct Applying code to case studies Directions for future research Tim

Case Study: 2007 Chinese ASAT January 2007: China launches ground- based SC-19 missile that destroys own FY- 1 weather satellite in LEO Collision created considerable debris Diplomatic protests: Australia, Canada, EU, Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, UK, US International response stronger than China anticipated Tim - Diplomatic protests: (Congressional Research Service, 2007: RS22652) - International response stronger than anticipated (Joint Force Quarterly, July 2007) - “Considerable debris” : 300k pieces

Chinese ASAT Highlights Central Problem No laws or norms prohibit China’s action Inability to predict international response No agreed framework on deterrence Absent clear rules, consequences, China conducts ASAT Results in escalation, damage to space environment Tim Intro to the general problem – not a case for the code

Other Incidents of Concern Radio frequency Cuba jams uplink of US broadcast signal to Iran (2003) Proximity operations US, China test microsat proximity operations (2005, 2008) Laser dazzling US claims Chinese lasers dazzle US satellites (2006) Hacking satellite systems Hackers obtain control of British satellite (1999) Kinetic Chinese ASAT (2007), US ASAT (2008) Iridium/Cosmos accidental collision (2009) Tim

Outline Problem statement Case study: Chinese ASAT Interference possibilities Responding to interference in space Code of conduct Applying code to case studies Directions for future research Peshala

Types of Satellite Interference Radio frequency Proximity operations Directed energy (laser dazzling) Cyber (hacking) Kinetic (damage, degrade, destroy) Peshala: Introduction to concept/ spreadsheet We will bring up spreadsheet and hand out at this point for an extended discussion of our interference list Explain duration/ intensity, level of damage or level of proof. In order of excalatory potential Show dual projection spreadsheet sheet Radio frequency –Elisa Directed energy - Ches Cyber / hacking - Basak Proximity - Peshala Kinetic / physical / explosive – Tim DO NOT DISCUSS RESPONSES on this slide Go quickly through each sub-type and then bring attention to one specific example (5-10 minutes each person)

Satellite Interference Spreadsheet Columns Specific interference activity Duration/intensity of attack Level of damage caused Level of proof needed to identify source/intent The interference methods (rows) are ordered by level of escalatory potential Peshala: Introduction to concept/ spreadsheet We will bring up spreadsheet and hand out at this point for an extended discussion of our interference list Explain duration/ intensity, level of damage or level of proof. In order of excalatory potential Show dual projection spreadsheet sheet Radio frequency –Elisa Directed energy - Ches Cyber / hacking - Basak Proximity - Peshala Kinetic / physical / explosive – Tim DO NOT DISCUSS RESPONSES on this slide Go quickly through each sub-type and then bring attention to one specific example (5-10 minutes each person)

Outline Problem statement Case study: Chinese ASAT Interference possibilities Responding to interference in space Code of conduct Applying code to case studies Directions for future research Ches

Potential Responses 1) Absolutely nothing 2) Evasive, defensive action 3) Back-channel political communications 4) Public protest/shaming 5) Demand for compensation/ restitution 6) Official diplomatic responses 7) Economic sanctions 8) Selective retaliation, reversible consequences 9) Selective retaliation, irreversible consequences (satellites) 10) Selective retaliation, irreversible consequences (ground-based assets) 11) Outright war Ches We have put Evasive action at 2 because of its low consequences for escalation. Also, cyber patching, counter-jamming, moving optical lens, etc… may be responses of first resort. However, we understand that moving a satellite is highly costly and if it is the only defensive option, responses 3-6 may be attempted first.

Criteria for Effective Responses How should policymakers choose appropriate responses from range of options? Criteria: Protect national security Minimize impact, end interference event Deter future attempts Comply with international laws and norms Minimize risk of further escalation Ches

Factors Affecting Level of Response Nature, degree, and intent of interference Quality of information: Interfering actor? Intent? Function of “victim” satellite Clarity of rules Previous attempts to resolve conflict peacefully International context Ches

Interference Response: Purposes Clearly identify types of interference Categorize plausible responses Differentiate diplomatic to forceful responses Rationalize responses based on context Illustrate potential for escalation Anthony We see the current matrix as a the likely responses that policymakers will take. In providing this matrix, we hope that a future matrix, post a code of conduct will make it less likely situations become escalated.

Satellite Interference Responses Classifying potential for escalation: Low potential Medium potential High potential Anthony, as the matrix-master we will leave it to you to provide orally a more detailed explanation of how it works beyond what’s on this slide Green 1-3 Yellow 4-7 Red 8-10 White – not plausible, legal, or justifiable response Likely response in non-war situation that a rational actor will take

Satellite Interference Responses Radio Frequency Elisa Remove #10 sq under jamming broadcast signal at downlink Change downlink, uplink vocab

Satellite Interference Response Proximity Peshala

Satellite Interference Responses Directed Energy Ches

Satellite Interference Responses Cyber/Hacking Basak

Satellite Interference Responses Kinetic Tim

Outline Problem statement Case study: Chinese ASAT Interference possibilities Responding to interference in space Code of conduct Applying code to case studies Directions for future research Basak

Code of Conduct What It Should Do Enhance transparency, predictability, stability, and security Protect states’ capabilities Help distinguish between accidental and intentional actions Specifically prohibit or minimize certain provocative types of behavior in space Thus, provide written framework for avoidance, peaceful resolution of disputes Basak

Important Elements of the Code Positive Principles Promote peaceful and efficient use of space Protect equal access to space Satellites protected as sovereign property of state Basak Basak and Peshala: I’ve laid out a new way of presenting the code in slides along with our paper code. You guys should let me know what you think. From Anthony = do we need the words ‘positive’ and ‘negative’? Better word?

Important Elements of the Code Negative Principles Prohibit dangerous, provocative acts in space: Radio frequency jamming Proximity operations Cyber hacking Directed energy attacks Kinetic attacks Unnecessary creation of debris Peshala

Important Elements of the Code Dispute Resolution Mechanisms Joint efforts to improve space situational awareness Protocols for information sharing Protocols for communication in event of interference Forums for discussion of space disputes Possible mechanisms for arbitration, adjudication of disputes Peshala

Important Elements of the Code Principles to Guide Responses Right to self-defense applies in space Critical concept for state Limitations on self-defense also apply Peaceful means should be exhausted first, when possible Responses must be proportional to level of interference Responses must be discriminate Actors may wish to declare more specific response policies Unilaterally or through bilateral agreements Peshala

Outline Problem statement Case study: Chinese ASAT Interference possibilities Responding to interference in space Code of conduct Applying code to case studies Directions for future research Tim

2007 China ASAT Revisited Code of conduct explicitly prohibits such action Rule against unnecessary debris creation Potential rule prohibiting ASAT first-use Code narrows range of responses Clear violation of established rule makes lowest-level responses more likely Tim Code helps to avoid policy gridlock, galvanize the international community to rally around certain universally acceptable responses. (Change the second set of points)

Impact of Code on China ASAT China likely expected “Green” response Code would make clear that “Yellow” response more likely By making consequences transparent, consistent, code enhances deterrence Uncertainty: With code in place, would China have been deterred from conducting ASAT? Tim From Anthony, We believe that the with the code in place, China may not have conducted ASAT. However, since history has occurred, we can take this opportunity to use what happened w/ the ASAT and international responses plus a code would strongly solidify deterrence mechanisms.

Microsatellite Case Study Chinese microsatellite approaches US imaging satellite Given unknown Chinese intentions, national security mission of US satellite creates dangerous situation Current legal regime provides no basis for determining who has right of way, how to respond Lack of clarity increases risk of escalation Ches

Microsatellite Case Study Potential Application of Code Code clearly prohibits Chinese action Satellite maintaining orbit has right-of-way “Keep-out box” encircling US satellite establishes protected “zone” Code clarifies possible responses Clear violation makes lowest-level responses unlikely Clear violation has implications for higher-level responses Mechanisms for communication, dispute resolution make higher-level responses less likely, unnecessary, provocative Ches

Microsatellite Case Study Impact of Code Code establishes which satellite has right of way Imposes obligation on microsatellite to move away Communication and crisis resolution mechanisms increase likelihood of de- escalation Cold War examples Clarity of rule, consequences may deter microsatellite approach to begin with Ches

Outline Problem statement Case study: Chinese ASAT Interference possibilities Responding to interference in space Code of conduct Applying code to case studies Directions for future research Anthony

Further Steps to Implementing the Code Unilateral policy declaration National Space Policy Bilateral treaty US-Soviet agreements Multilateral convention Outer Space Treaty Customary international law Maritime rights-of-way, rules of engagement Regulatory regime ITU regulations for GEO ICAO system for airspace Anthony Area for future research We have discussed today the Code in terms of a multilateral treaty. But it may be that some elements that we described may be better codified in a different way. One direction for possible future research is to explore in greater detail the substantive and political implications of different methods for codifying/institutionalizing different elements of the Code.

Directions for Future Research Study responses based on satellite type and function Further development, analysis of code of conduct Create “model” bilateral, multilateral scenarios Study institutions to enforce code of conduct Analysis of forceful responses (Red Zone) Incorporate “traffic management” and other non- deliberate interference issues Anthony More?? Escalation scenarios

Questions and Extended Discussion Anthony