The tone of the NSP is “unilateralist” in terms of the approach
The U.S. National Space Policy
(NSP) was authorised by
President Bush on August 31,
2006. This NSP establishes
an overarching national policy that
governs the conduct of U.S. space
activities and supersedes the 1996 NSP.
The unclassified ten-page summary of
the NSP consists of 13 self-contained
sections including the principles, goals,
guidelines (both general and specific to
national security space, civil space and
commercial space), international space
cooperation, space nuclear power,
radio frequency spectrum, orbital
debris, effective export policies and
space-related security classification.
The first part of this review focuses
on the principles and goals of U.S.
2006 space policy as these provide
the overall rationale to the policy.
The second part of this review of the
2006 NSP highlights the context of the
policy, a comparison with the previous
policy, commentaries of the policy by
others and some final observations.
Principles of the 2006 NSP
The seven principles of the NSP include:
1. "The U.S. is committed to the
exploration and use of outer
space by all nations for peaceful
purposes and for the benefit of all
humanity. "Peaceful purposes"
allow the U.S. to undertake defence
and intelligent-related activities
in pursuit of national interests;
2. The U.S. rejects any claims
to sovereignty by any nation
over outer space or celestial
bodies, . and rejects any
limitations on the fundamental
right of the U.S. to operate in
an acquire data from space;
3. The U.S. will seek to cooperate
with other nations in the peaceful use of outer space to extend the
benefits of space, enhance space
exploration, and to protect and
promote freedom around the world;
4. The U.S. considers space systems
to have the rights of passage
through and operations in space
without interference . purposeful
interference with its space systems
[is] an infringement on its rights;
5. The U.S. considers space
capabilities . vital to its national
interests. . The U.S. will: preserve
its rights, capabilities, and freedom
of action in space; dissuade or deter
others from either impeding those
rights or developing capabilities
intended to do so; take those actions
necessary to protect its space
capabilities; respond to interference;
and deny, if necessary, adversaries
the use of space capabilities
hostile to U.S. national interests;
6. The U.S. will oppose the
development of new legal regimes
or other restrictions that seek to
prohibit or limit U.S. access to or
use of space. Proposed arms control
agreements or restrictions must
not impair the right of the U.S. to
conduct research, development,
testing, and operations or
other activities in space for
U.S. national interests; and
7. The U.S. is committed to
encouraging and facilitating a
growing and entrepreneurial U.S.
commercial space sector . to
the maximum practical extent,
consistent with national security."
U.S. 2006 NSP Goals
“The fundamental goals
of the NSP are to:
Strengthen the nation’s space
leadership and ensure that space
capabilities are available in
time to further U.S. national security, homeland security, and
foreign policy objectives;
Enable unhindered U.S.
operations in and through space
to defend our interests there;
Implement and sustain an
innovative human and robotic
exploration program with the
objective of extending human
presence across the solar system;
Increase the benefits of civil
exploration, scientific discovery,
and environmental activities;
Enable a dynamic, globally
competitive domestic commercial
space sector in order to promote
innovation, strengthen U.S.
leadership, and protect national,
homeland, and economic security;
Enable a robust science and
technology base supporting national
security, homeland security,
and civil space activities; and
Encourage international cooperation
with foreign nations and/or
consortia on space activities that are
of mutual benefit and that further
the peaceful exploration and use
of space, as well as to advance
national security, homeland security,
and foreign policy objectives.”
The Context of the 2006 NSP
This 2006 NSP completes President
Bush's review of all U.S. space
policies since 2003. The other
four in the series include:
U.S. Commercial Remote Sensing
Policy, April 2003 that provides
guidance for, among other things,
licensing and operating commercial
remote sensing space systems, and
foreign access to such systems;
Vision for Space Exploration,
January 2004 that advances
scientific, ecurity and economic
interests through a robust
space exploration program;
U.S. Space Transportation Policy,
December 2004 establishes
national policy, guidelines, and
implementation actions for space
transportation programs; and,
U.S. Space-based Positioning,
Navigation, and Timing Policy,
December 2004 that establishes
guidance and actions for spacebased
positioning, navigation
and timing programs.
It is evident that such policies are and
should be of interest and concern to the
geospatial community in general and
to precision navigation and coordinates
in particular. But, before delving
into details, it is also imperative to
know what has gone before the NSP
to further enhance understanding
of the context and background.
Comparisons with
the 1996 Policy
The tone of the NSP is "unilateralist"
in terms of the approach in regard
to access to space and the rejection
of new treaties or other limitations
on U.S. By comparison, the 1996
policy uses language that is both
cooperative and collaborative such as
in the words "enhance the security of
the U.S. and our allies". Such a tone
is evident in a close reading of the
"principles" section of both policies.
In regard to arms control, the 1996
document emphasises a "considering"
of arms control whereas the NSP
makes it clear that the administration
is wary of arms control and views it
as a possible threat to American space
operations. Such an attitude is probably
informed by the preoccupation with
national security space issues in the
new century. Whereas national security
was mentioned in two of the five goals
in 1996, the same is mentioned in four
of the six goals. In the new policy it
is clear that international cooperation
and arms control are of lesser priority.
The changing emphasis may also be a
reflection of a different environment
compared to those kinds of issues
facing the U.S. space program in 1996. Hence, it is not surprising that
national security in space are high on
the agenda given that it is now more
troubling than before while civilian
use of space is in need of greater
direction from the U.S. government.
The NSP includes a new section on
access to the frequency spectrum,
orbit management and interference
protection. For instance, the frequency
spectrum is now more crowded
than it was a decade ago because
of greater civilian use. In defence
terms there is a greater demand for
access, given that there are now more
commercial satellites that compete for
the use of the spectrum such as the
extremely high frequency Ka-band.
The NSP extends the goals of the 2004
Vision for Space Exploration and
NASA's new focus on exploration.
But, space is not the sole goal of
the Agency. The 1996 policy was
quite explicit and expansive in
regards to statements concerning
the enhancement of knowledge of
the solar system, and fundamental
natural and physical sciences. The
statements also included issues such
as an understanding of global change
and the effect of natural and human
influences on the environment;
human space flight activities; and
space technology development in
support of U.S. government needs
and economic competitiveness.
Curiously, the NSP however omits
to mention the International Space
Station nor the Space Shuttle which
is the current focus of NASA.
Furthermore, the new policy lists
only two civil areas of cooperation
- exploration programs and Earth
observation with the omission of
other space science opportunities.
In 1996 Earth science and Earth
observation is mentioned over 20
times with an entire section devoted
to the subject. In contrast the 2006
NSP mentions this subject only six
times. Probably this is a reflection
of the growing commercial remote
sensing field at that time but which has
now matured and no longer requires that degree of attention. However,
what remains unexplained is the lack
of attention to the study of global
change in the NSP. Again, this may
be because the subject-matter is no
longer the passion nor the portfolio
of the Vice President's Office.
The NSP will again be in limbo when
a new President is elected in 2009
since there will probably then be
another new set of policy objectives.