View From the Hill
VIEW FROM THE HILL:
Critical Decisions in Space Policy
The U.S. must remain the standard-bearer for developing, maintaining and investing in space technologies, but space policy issues are not being addressed to the degree they deserve.
By Senator Wayne Allard (R-CO)
Critical Decisions in Space Policy
The U.S. must remain the standard-bearer for developing, maintaining and investing in space technologies, but space policy issues are not being addressed to the degree they deserve.
By Senator Wayne Allard (R-CO)
Unquestionably, 2008 appears to be a landmark year in American history. We will be electing a president in the first true open-seat election in 80 years, as no incumbent candidate is running in the primaries. The inauguration of our 44th president in January 2009 will mark the culmination of over two years of media saturation on the presidential race and the future political landscape.
To this point, many important topics such as the global war on terror, the economy and health care have been focal points for the candidates and political pundits. However, I remain concerned that space policy issues are not being addressed to the degree that they deserve.
Internationally, a number of decisions will need to be made regarding a variety of space-related subjects, including weaponization of space, orbital debris and space “traffic control.” Domestically, we must address NASA’s gap in manned-space travel, our missile defense priorities, the increased influence of commercial space companies, and the interaction between geospatial data providers and the U.S. government. The decisions made by our government and the international community throughout the next several years will shape the course of the 21st century.
The Chinese ASAT (anti-satellite) test last year and the successful Navy shoot-down of a National Reconnaissance Office (NRO) satellite in February have provided a sneak-preview of similar issues we are certain to face again in coming years. The Navy shoot-down brought the issues of space-based assets and missile defense to the collective forefront of the public’s consciousness. For nearly two weeks the shoot-down generated discussion and dialogue outside of the industry on these issues, discussions that had never taken place before on such a broad scale. This event served to educate the public and spawned critical thinking about our space and missile systems and capabilities.
As space becomes an increasingly important strategic component for many competing nations, it is essential that the United States continues to be the standard-bearer for developing, maintaining and investing in space technologies. We must lead by example, as space policy decisions have a significant impact on the world’s population.
Security Issues
The shoot-down proved that America is a conscientious steward of space, and the decision to avert the potentially unsafe consequences demonstrated to the world that we take responsibility for the important assets we have deployed in space. It also shows that our investment—of dollars and time, energy and brainpower—in missile defense has been worthwhile. The United States has developed a new technology and now has new capabilities.
Through the years, space has continued to provide a distinct and unquestioned strategic advantage in ensuring our national security. Today’s world is no exception, and our military depends on space more than ever. Space assets are used for targeting, communications, weather, intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance, navigation and numerous other functions. There is no doubt the military space domain is here to stay, the only question remains is how a new administration, Congress and industry will best utilize this platform collectively.
Utilizing space for national security comes in many forms, including data imagery. The next administration will have to determine the appropriate role for commercial geo-spatial data providers and the government. Particularly, the NRO and National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency (NGA) voiced concerns recently about the relationship and reliance upon commercial-data providers and expressed a need for more “in house” imagery services.
With more commercial companies emerging with business cases for entering parts of space that were previously only in the government domain, the question will inevitably be raised as to what capabilities are vital and what capabilities can be effectively provided by the private sector. This addresses an inherent and ongoing debate over the usefulness of contractors, and whether a particular service should be considered inherently governmental.
President Bush’s commercial remote sensing policy, released in April 2003, states that the fundamental goals include “relying to the maximum practical extent on U.S. commercial remote sensing capabilities for filling imagery and geospatial needs.” However, an influential report released last fall recommended against the current NGA model of using multiyear contracts with commercial data providers to procure imagery, instead favoring a more traditional business model of government-owned and -operated satellites.
The administration will be confronted with decisions on how to regulate and manage the relationship between these apparent conflicting concerns. Industry is naturally concerned about this potential policy switch and contends that, if their business with the U.S. government is greatly reduced, the market could give rise to foreign companies filling that void—companies that the U.S. has no control over, which could produce yet another security concern.
Commercial Providers
In particular, over the last several years America’s commercial data providers (CDPs) have made growing and significant contributions to our national security capabilities. The partnership forged between the CDPs and the military and intelligence agencies has resulted in greater data and intelligence-gathering capabilities, cost-savings to the taxpayer, broader access to cutting-edge commercial technologies, and American commercial leadership in the international marketplace.
The government has much to gain from continuing to expand its partnership with CDPs and from acquiring additional data from a robust domestic commercial imagery industry. CDPs operate a larger constellation than what is needed to meet government requirements, thus providing military and intelligence agencies more redundancy and more frequent revisit.
By spreading the cost of an entire system (space, ground, launch, insurance, etc.) over multiple customers, CDPs are able to provide cost-efficiencies to the government, as opposed to forcing the taxpayers to bear the full cost of a system. Also, CDPs use proven end-to-end (space to ground) designs and infrastructure, resulting in lower design and implementation risk.
In addition to the benefits that CDPs provide to military and intelligence agencies, an expanded partnership between the government and CDPs would help the U.S. maintain international leadership in commercial space. We have a clear national security interest in maintaining this leadership role and staying far out front of foreign competition in the commercial data industry. It is my hope that these issues are expeditiously resolved as they have an important impact on our national security. ♦
Wayne Allard is a two-term Republican senator from Colorado.
