27 August 2004
Rhianna Tyson, Reaching Critical Will
This week, the CD focused almost entirely on the Prevention of an Arms Race in Outer Space (PAROS). Russia and China tabled two non-papers while Canada, France, Sri Lanka, Sweden and the UK reiterated their countries' positions on the issue. The Secretariat also released the draft report of the CD's 2004 session.
Ambassador Leonid Skotnikov provided an overview of the threats facing outer space, as perceived by the Russian Federation. He described the increasing dependence on space technologies by an increasing number of States, to illustrate the "tangle of serious complications and dangers" posed by the emergence of weapons in outer space. In addition to disastrous effects on the Earth's biosphere, "the placement of weapons in outer space could undermine existing arms control agreements, first and foremost those related to nuclear weapons and missiles, and provoke a new spiral of an arms race," he warned.
To Russia, the loss of "strategic stability" is one of the greatest threats posed by the militarization of outer space. And while he underlined "that today and for the near future the Russian Federation has no plans to" place weapons in space, the "emergence" of other States' weapons in outer space could "drastically change" Russia's current plans for "further deep reductions in nuclear and missile weapons."
Ambassador Skotnikov also referenced CD/1679, the working paper on PAROS that was revised last year. Intended as "an invitation to dialogue and collective creativity," the working paper seeks a Treaty that would:
- expand the Outer Space Treaty's prohibition to include a ban on all weapons placed in Earth's orbit;
- expand States' obligations, under the UN Charter, to refrain from the use or threat of use of force to include threats against outer space objects;
- ensure that States Parties do not assist or encourage non-parties to participate in activities prohibited by the Treaty.
China's Ambassador Hu Xiaodi noted that "various delegations" have offered suggestions to "further develop and improve CD/1679," including questions on the definition of terms and the verification of a PAROS treaty. In response, China and Russia prepared two non-papers that address these concerns. In addition to the two papers presented by Ambassador Hu this week, "Verification Aspects of PAROS" and "Existing International Legal Instruments and the Prevention of the Weaponization of Outer Space" the two countries also plan on preparing one other non-paper on "Definitions in the Legal Instrument of PAROS."
The non-paper on "existing international legal instruments" explores the benefits and limitations of existing measures such as the Limited Test Ban Treaty, the Outer Space Treaty, the Agreement Governing the Activities of States on the Moon, the Convention on the Prohibition of Military or Any other Hostile Use of Environmental Modification Techniques and others.
The verification non-paper looks at the "highly complicated and difficult" technological and financial verification measures that the treaty would require, and "considers that for the time being, a future outer space legal instrument can be formulated without a verification mechanism." Ambassador Hu points out that the 1967 Outer Space Treaty, while lacking a verification mechanism, "plays an important role" in international security.
Canada, however, is of the firm belief "that the strategic importance of space requires adequate verification measures" in any legally binding PAROS agreement. Postponing the development of verification measures until after the treaty is negotiated would, Ambassador Meyer alluded, undermine the efficacy of the treaty in the long run. "Witness," said the ambassador, "the sad experience of the proposed Verification Protocol to the BTWC in this context."
Ambassador Meyer also urged the importance of clear definitions in a potential legally binding instrument, including those of "space object" and "space weapon," suggesting that the latter be categorized according to: "i) a description of the device; ii) its intended effects and iii) the method by which the effect is to be achieved."
In addition, he briefly discussed some of the ideas that surfaced at the March 25-26 workshop on "Safeguarding Space for All," including a possible model Code of Conduct in space activity and unilateral declarations of no first deployment of space-based weapons.
Mr. Jean-Michel Despax of France reiterated the "three essential principles" of France's position on PAROS:
"- the free access for all to the peaceful applications of space
- the preservation of the security and integrity of satellites in orbit
- taking into account the legitimate interests of the defense of States."
Sri Lanka, one of the primary sponsors of the First Committee draft resolution on PAROS, noted that last year's resolution garnered "an unprecedented number of co-sponsors...enabling it to be adopted by 160 votes in favour with none against and three abstentions."
Sri Lanka also noted satisfaction with the support to re-establish an Ad Hoc Committee on PAROS, and regarded China and Russia's working paper and non-papers as "positive contribution(s) towards our efforts to elaborate an agreed mandate for a re-established Ad Hoc Committee." Sri Lanka also "see(s) merit therefore in recent calls for a series of independent declarations from major space faring nations that they would not be the first to deploy weapons in space, which would provide considerable protection to existing space assets until a treaty could be negotiated."
Sweden also voiced its support for the establishment of an Ad Hoc Committee and suggested the convening of technical meetings with a wide range of participants from international organizations, space agencies, space law and the private sector.
The UK, acknowledging the need to address the situation in outer space, suggested that a Fissile Material Cut-Off Treaty (FMCT) would be a good first step in addressing the problems we already face on the ground.
************************************************